Showing posts with label AFRICOM. Show all posts
Showing posts with label AFRICOM. Show all posts

March 16, 2012

Secrets KONY 2012 Is Desperate to Hide

*Source: Info Wars

Kony 2012, hyped on the backs of celebrities and do-gooders, is revealed for what it is– a propaganda salvo for a continent wide invasion of Africa. Yes, the mantra War is Peace is once again drumming U.S. soldiers into further conflict.

Research makes clear that KONY is a sophisticated psy-op to muster popular support for what is, in reality, nothing more than a geostrategic positioning vis-a-vis China for oil and mineral resources, as well as an effort to legitimize the U.S. military’s AFRICOM unit in the region through newly-branded “humanitarian” interventions.

It is not only War in the name of “Peace,” but an attempt to empower the International Criminal Court under the influence of NGOs and other related globalist corporate interests.

Nobel Peace Prize “winner” Barack Obama has already deployed 100 special forces troops to the central African region back in October 2011, and a resolution in Congress– on the heels of KONY 2012′s viral views of at lest 80 million– seeks to send more forces there for an all out invasion on the pretext of hunting down a shadowy warlord with less blood on his hands than an average African despot.

Top celebrities vying for greater power including CFR member and UN goodwill ambassador Angelina Jolie, actor George Clooney, media baroness Oprah Winfrey, as well as Africa-obsessed Bill Gates and Bono, have all come out in front of this issue.

Soros International Crisis Group Samantha Power Angelina Jolie KONY

But behind KONY’s apparent urgency are the usual suspects, the hidden hands behind uprisings and color revolutions including the Arab Spring and Libyan invasion. A key World Net Daily investigation makes clear that George Soros and his International Crisis Group, headed by former National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski, and the likes of Samantha Power, a key member of Obama’s National Security Council advancing “humanitarian” causes, have significantly framed and shaped the manufactured crisis surrounding the now-famous head of the Lord’s Resistance Army. Like Libya, the Responsibility to Protect doctrine– created and advanced by Soros, Samantha Power and other power players– gives the impetus for intervention in the conflict. Groups like Invisible Children, who produced KONY 2012, are pawns in their game.

March 15, 2012

AGREED!

KONY 2012, Invisible Children's Pro-AFRICOM and Museveni Propaganda

*Source: Black Listed News

Invisible Children’s goals initially may have been to publicize the plight of children caught in Uganda’s decades-long conflicts; lately, IC has been acting as apologists for General Yoweri K. Museveni’s dictatorship and the U.S. goal to impose AFRICOM (the U.S. Africa Military Command) on Africa.

IC has produced a brilliant film that’s making the global rounds onFacebook

It’s a classic as propaganda pieces come. The short but overwhelmingly powerful film uses all the best tear-jerk techniques. In the end, the film denounces Joseph Kony, the leader of the brutal Lord’s Resistance Army, while giving the impression that Museveni’s dictatorship and his brutal military, which was found liable for war crimes in Democratic Republic of Congo by the International Court of Justice, has nothing to do with the atrocities committed against children in Uganda. It also doesn’t inform viewers that Museveni abducted thousands of child soldiers to win his insurgency in Uganda in 1986, launching the pattern of child soldier recruitment all over Africa.

In fact, Kony’s insurgency against Museveni was launched later, meaning he too learned child soldier-abductions from Museveni.

Look at the way Invisible Children exploits American children in the beginning of their documentary; they then transplant the audience to Uganda, where again they take advantage of Ugandan children, who are the victims of both the LRA and the Ugandan government’s army.

The imagery are powerful. Dr. Joseph Goebbels’ and Leni Riefenstahl would have been proud of this cinematic coup by Invisible Children.

If Invisible Children was in fact a serious organization that has not been co-opted by the Museveni regime and the U.S. foreign policy agenda, the organization would inform the world that General Museveni, who has now stolen three elections in a row in Uganda is the first person who deserves to be arrested.

This Ugandan and East African nightmare gets a blank check from Washington simply because he has deployed Ugandan soldiers to Somalia at the behest of the United States. So democracy, human rights abuses, and genocide, become minor nuisances as far as U.S. foreign policy goes and as far as Invisible Children cares. This is beyond hypocrisy. Those members of Invisible Children who may have supported this misguided project to send more U.S. troops to Africa because they were unwittingly deceived, should do some serious soul searching.

Museveni does not care for the plight of children in Uganda’s Acholi region. How else would he have herded 2 million Acholis in concentration camps for 20 years where, according to the United Nations’ World Health Organization (WHO), more than 1,000 children, women and men died of planned neglect–lack of medical facilities; lack of adequate food; dehydration, and; lack of sanitation and toilet facilities. Does this sound like a person who cares about children?

His colleagues have denounced Acholis as “backwards” and as “biological substances.” General Museveni himself revealed an interesting pathology, as a first class racist African when he toldAtlantic Monthly Magazine, in September 1994: “I have never blamed the whites for colonizing Africa: I have never blamed these whites for taking slaves. If you are stupid, you should be taken a slave.” Ironically –or perhaps not– the general was even more embraced by Washington after those remarks. Gen. Museveni has been a U.S. ally since the days of Ronald Reagan.

So why does Invisible Children only go after Kony while leaving Museveni alone when in fact they are two sides of the same coin?

These young folks who run Invisible Children are extremely dangerous to the welfare of Ugandans and other Africans should they succeed in broadening U.S. military presence in Africa. If the United States were truly interested purely in eliminating Kony why deploy now when Kony abandoned Uganda in 2006 when he was negotiating a peace deal that ultimately collapsed, with Museveni.

While Kony and his fighters were camped at Garamba in Congo, as agreed upon during peace negotiations, who was it that launched a military attack with planes and helicopters in December 2008? It was Gen. Museveni, with U.S. assistance. The peace negotiations, which had been embraced by traditional and religious leaders in Acholi region, collapsed. According to Jan Egeland, the former U.N Under-Secretary General for humanitarian affairs, Museveni also wanted to pursue a military approach and even ridiculed his own attempts to negotiate peace.

Immediately more killings ensued –this time in Congo; and since Museveni and Kony are two sides of the same coin, it’s unclear who committed the atrocities in Garamba after the abortive attack.

After the attacks the LRA scattered into the Central African Republic. One would imagine that if the U.S. and Invisible Children were really interested in Kony, the deployment would have been to Central African Republic.

The young folks behind Invisible Children don’t understand the conflict in Uganda; yet they have made themselves the spokespersons. They have campaigned and convinced some celebrities, including Rihana and P. Diddy, to tweet their half-truth propaganda film. This is a way to have one-sided or impartial information become the “dominant truth” globally, and drown out critical analyses.

It’s like a group of impressionable White youngsters coming to Harlem and saying: we see you have major crises, let us tell you what’s the solution. Who would accept such misguided and destructive arrogance? If it’s unacceptable in Harlem, it must also be rejected in Uganda’s Acholi region.

Acholi traditional leaders, religious leaders, and members of Parliament in Uganda, have all opposed further militarization. But they are not in a position to express their views on CNN or in The New York Times, or to make a slick documentary, such as Invisible Children’s. What’s more, they’re not accorded the presumptive credibility that are often bestowed to White analysts when compared to native Ugandans.

Yet, rather than listen to the cries of Uganda’s traditional and religious leaders who live in the war-devastated regions, Invisible Children has decided to produce a beautiful documentary with an ugly agenda that only escalates conflict and endorses Gen. Museveni. Who really believes it’s a good thing for the United States to be sending troops to Uganda or anywhere in Africa? Why would these troops act any differently than those sent to Iraq and Afghanistan?

The U.S. government and Invisible Children are using the brutal Joseph Kony as a bogeyman to justify the U.S. long-term plan, which is to impose AFRICOM on Africa. Since everyone knows about Kony’s atrocities, who would object if the U.S. sends 100 U.S. “advisers” to help Uganda, after all? Brilliantly devious. Of course it never stops at 100 “advisers.” That was the announced deployment; there are probably more U.S. troops in the region. Even before the deployment some had already been training Museveni’s soldiers. And more will come; unannounced.

AFRICOM, the ultimate objective, would allow the U.S. to be able to counter resource-hungry China by having boots on the ground near the oil-rich northern part of Uganda, South Sudan, Congo’s region bordering Lake Albert, and the Central African Republic. The troops would also be near by in case a decision is made to support regime-change in Khartoum, Sudan. After all, the U.S. foreign policy reasoning is that since Sudan’s president Omar Hassan al-Bashir and his defense minister have both been indicted by the International Criminal Court (ICC), few would shed tears for them.

The U.S. is aware that African countries oppose AFRICOM. So what does the U.S. do? Go after a “devil” and in this case it’s Kony. Tell the world –with the help of Invisible Children–that our mission is to help rid Uganda of this “devil”; who by the way is hiding somewhere in Central African Republic, while the dictator who most recently stole elections last February, sits in Kampala and meets with U.S. officials and leaders of Invisible Children.

If the real target was simply Joseph Kony, the U.S. would have used an armed predator drone; this is how the U.S. has eliminated several suspected leaders of Al-qaeda and the Taleban, after all.

It doesn’t seem that Invisible Children is an independent do-good save-the-children outfit. They are paving the way –with Kony, brutal as he is, as the bogeyman– for AFRICOM.

Kony is a nightmare, but Museveni has caused the deaths of millions of people in Rwanda, Uganda and Congo. In 2005 the International Court of Justice found Uganda liable for what amounts to war crimes in Congo: mass rapes of both women and men; disemboweling pregnant women; burning people inside their homes alive; massacres and; plunder of resources. Congo lost six million people after Uganda’s occupation of parts of Congo. The Court awarded Congo $10 billion in reparations; not a dime has been paid.

Congo then referred the same crimes to the International Criminal Court (ICC) in the Hague for war crimes charges. On June 8, 2006, The Wall Street Journal reported that Gen. Museveni personally contacted Kofi Annan, then UN Secretary General and asked him to block the criminal investigation.

It seems that the U.S. and ICC Prosecutor Moreno Ocampo might have indeed obliged. Gen. Museveni and senior Ugandan military commanders remain un-indicted for the alleged crimes that the ICJ already found Uganda liable; only one side of the same coin, Kony was indicted. Prosecutor Ocampo is also totally discredited; readers should Google “Ocampo and South African journalist case.”

There is another documentary that tries to explain the Ugandantragedy, in a more sober manner, unlike Invisible Children’s slick propaganda piece.

Hopefully this commentary will motivate people to do their research and demand that the international community deal with both Kony and Museveni.

Hopefully more people will also do their own research and not be vulnerable to slick propaganda such as Invisible Children’s.

For example, readers can Google terms such as “Yoweri Museveni and Congo genocide,” “Museveni and Kony,” “Museveni and and Rwanda genocide,” “Museveni and Acholi genocide,” and “U.S. support for dictator Museveni

March 13, 2012

Rap News 12: Yes We Kony?



http://thejuicemedia.com‬ Rap News Episode 12: YES WE KONY. It's March, and the Internet delivers 2012's first globe-consuming meme: the unstoppable, Stop-Kony 2012 video, which has highlighted the plight of African child soldiering like never before. But is it really good? Is it really bad? Or is the world really more complex than 'good guys' and 'bad guys'? Whatevers; one thing's for sure, this is momentous: never had a 27-minute video devoid of both cats and boobs ever achieved such virality. Is this a demonstration of the internet's ability to instantly inform and engage tens of millions; and a hopeful sign that there is a willingness among those millions, to engage passionately with something more meaningful? Or does Kony2012 just mark the dawn of a rapacious new era of viral humanitarian marketing? Join your charitable host Robert Foster - and our special guest, General Baxter, direct from AFRICOM - as we delve into the dark heart of the matter.

Juice Rap News: written by Giordano Nanni; lyrics and performance by Hugo Farrant. Produced by Farrant & Nanni in a back-yard studio in suburban Melbourne.

CONNECT with Juice Media through:
Our website: ‪http://thejuicemedia.com‬ 

Twitter: ‪http://twitter.com/juicerapnews‬

Farcebook: ‪https://www.facebook.com/rapnews‬ 

YouTube:http://www.youtube.com/user/thejuicemedia
Free MP3 download: ‪http://www.reverbnation.com/rapnews‬

Lyrics available here: ‪http://thejuicemedia.com/video/lyrics

SUPPORT JuiceRapNews to create new episodes: ‪http://thejuicemedia.com/donate

ARTWORK by Zoe Tame
http://visualtonic.com.au

BEAT: "After The Rain Has Gone" - by The GOAT, ILL Beat Constructor: http://www.thegoatbeats.com

Special thanks go out to Matthieu Lay for acting the role of 'Gavin'; Lucy for awesome shoot assistance and Gavin voice-over; Nick & Trav for technical assistance; Koolfy & Siltaar for creating English captions

.

TRANSLATIONS: Please contact us through our website if you would like to provide a translation of this episode into your language. http://thejuicemedia.com/contact

October 23, 2011

Obama’s Great African Military Safari

Source: InfoWars




In 2008, Barack Obama made history as the first black President in the United States of America. Three years later, he has made history again, this time as the first US President to establish a permanent US military presence on the African continent.

Obama announced late last week, “I believe that deploying these U.S. armed forces furthers U.S. national security interests and foreign policy and will be a significant contribution toward counter-LRA efforts in central Africa.”

It is ironic that America’s first black President would be the one to establish a permanent US military beach head in Africa, but one only has to read the numerous strategic briefings available from U.S. AFRICOM to reveal a long-range Anglo-American agenda for the Dark Continent.

When the US formed AFRICOM in 2007 under President George W. Bush, 49 different countries signed on to the US military imperial charter for Africa. AFICOM is a colonial subsidary of Neoconservative pièce de résistance known as the Project for a New American Century (PNAC). In sporting terms, you could say that Bush Jr kicked the ball down the field in 2007, but it is Barack Obama who has carried the ball over the goal line in 2011.

Last Friday, Obama extended his bold new military safari tour of Africa, ordering the deployment of 100 special forces US troops to the central Africa country of Uganda, allegedly to support local forces in battling the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA). Formed in 1987, they have been engaged in an armed rebellion against the ruling Ugandan government.

Interestingly, LRA’s leader is the infamous Joseph Kony, who also has all the makings of a bin-Ladenesque comic book villain. Should that conflict escalate, tales of Kony will provide a ready, out-of-the-box meal for a US mainstream media machine who are forever gagging for a new world public enemy number one.

Uganda looks to have brokered an initial deal here as a US local partner in Africa, a relationship which was formalized following Uganda’s key role (allegedly) in battling Muslim extremists in Somalia. Whatever Uganda’s actual role was, their rewards have been substantial. Obama recently sent them around $45 million in military equipment, and this will certainly be topped up annually if Uganda continues to host US troops there.

From an AFRICOM standpoint, this latest deal with Uganda is a major step forward in militarily colonizing the continent. What Obama did not highlight in his announcement last week is that a small force is already present in Uganda, and that the new attachment of US special forces who are arriving shortly will be dispatched to perform various ops in the surrounding South Sudan, Somalia, Central African Republic and the Democratic Republic of Congo. Add to this an extensive laundry list of US State Department and ‘national security’ objectives, and you have a fully baked recipe for a permanent US military presence in Africa.

To achieve this, the US will also require numerous black ops, backed by a large supporting cast of CIA field workers, agents, US military administrators and paid contractors. This will enable the US, with all the elements necessary for the overthrow of any African country south of the Sahara desert.

If recent events in North Africa are any indication, the US will often back and support a military dictatorship, rather than allow for a country’s own self-determination. Egypt is the best example of this. After all the fanfare surround the Arab Spring, few have bothered to pay attention to who and what actually replaced Egypt’s overthrown regime there. Now Egypt’s ‘temporary’ military government does not want to relinguish the reins of power.

Interestingly, only one country refused to sign on to AFRICOM’s neocolonial charter. That country was Libya.

If you have any doubts as to what a country can expect if it falls foul of the America’s AFRICOM dictates, look no further than Libya and its leader Moummar Qaddafi. Following UN’s flimsy resolution 1973, Libya was pulverized by a full-blown NATO military air assault. Following the destruction of most of its cities and their infrastructures, Libya is currently in the process of being carved by selected US and European corporations. It’s doubtful that Libya will ever see half the stability or prosperity it had achieved under Qaddafi.

Libya was a hot run, and a subsequent Beta test on the part of NATO and AFRICOM. First on AFRICOM’s menu is UN sanctions, then arming a local faction and fomenting civil unrest, then regime change, followed by the privatization and auctioning off of any valuable state assets to US and European companies, and eventually – a long, hard session of neoliberal IMF economic shock therapy.

Note that the US military or NATO will always be on call if local rebels need their revolution advanced down field. If this process cannot be initiated via the UN, the US will also be very well-placed to run a clandestine operation anywhere on the continent.

In Uganda’s case, it may work as a reverse of NATO’s Libyan-style intervention, whereby US troops will crush, not assist Ugandan rebels rising up against a corrupt and despotic government.

On the very long-range end of the agenda will be to unify Africa into an EU-type superstate, the African Union, and with a single African currency. For Wall Street and the City of London, this is a relatively untapped opportunity to plunder, and then re-plunder a number of otherwise emerging growth economies.

Proponents of AFRICOM seem confident, and with good reason. The US has always been successful at achieving a high level of destabilization in any country it interacts with militarily. This special brand of “engineered chaos” then needs to be managed by a strong military presence in the region.

Globalist elites and transnational corporations could not be more thrilled- hundreds of no-bid contracts, opening up new markets, new monopolies, and extremely cheap labor for globalist industries… in Africa.

In terms of the global geopolitical chessboard, AFRICOM’s most significant objective for America and Europe will be to confront, minimize, sabotage, and where possible- completely destroy China’s economic interests in Africa. Evicting the Chinese from their hundreds of economic interests and political partnerships in Africa amounts to a new Cold War between the Anglo-American Empire and China.

Unfortunately for Africa, USA Inc has become one giant corporation, and certainly behaves like one. Its current CEO, Barack Obama, has one of the hardest hitting velvet gloves in history. He has already demonstrated that he can, and will, bomb a nation into compliance with the globalist plan to completely re-colonize and re-corporatize Africa.

The process will take time, and will no doubt cost many billions of dollars, and thousands of innocent lives will be lost at the hands of CIA-sponsored civil and guerrilla wars. One AFRICOM study believes that China would eventually send its troops to Africa, to defend its economic interests there. The study warns:

“Now China has achieved a stage of economic development which requires endless supplies of African raw materials and has started to develop the capacity to exercise influence in most corners of the globe. The extrapolation of history predicts that distrust and uncertainty will inevitably lead the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) to Africa in staggering number.”

AFRICOM, in its own words, is almost expecting a military confrontation with China over its interests in Africa, and with the new US practice of ‘pre-emptive foreign policy’, it serves as an almost perfect storm for a new not-so-cold war there.

China will not just react, as the US might do, if its interests and investment have been threatened in Africa. This is partly because unlike USA Inc, China is still a functioning nation state and Chinese leaders are not being constantly pressured by its corporations to act over-aggressively to protect Chinese interests.

In the twilight days of every US administration, an American President is defined by his all-important legacy.

Whether Obama becomes either a one term or two term President- after it’s all said and done, he will be remembered as Kenya’s only begotten son, who sold out Africans to his globalist overlords- the man who eventually broke the back of Africa.

Ironic, as we still remember how much hope some people had of him, way back then.