Hand in the fire

Filler post, since iv got nothing to write about, and less time to write anyway. This was written some time ago. But i feel it is still largely relevant.

The concept of an American empire (or any other sort of empire e.g. the Chinese empire) really shouldn’t shock anyone. Sure, it may cause outrage and anger but what the outraged and the angry have to remember is that given the chance to be the most powerful country in the world, any nation would try and expand their locus of control and secure themeselves even greater power. So if you must blame anything, blame uncontrolled human nature.

Getting to the point, i was thinking of two recent turmoils in the global political arena;

Much has been discussed about Iran already, whether the widespread civil unrest was actually caused by activities of external agents or not is a debatable fact, but judging along the lines of who stood to benefit had this ‘revolution’ been successful, some could be led to assume that in fact, it was an attempt by Western interests to destabilise Iran.

Moving on to Honduras, the next suspiciously ‘administered’ looking political uprising, we notice that this smacks to being almost identical to Hugo Chavez’s coup that took place somewhere in the beginning of this century. What is different is the reactions of the US presidents who were in office during those periods; while George Bush openly rejoiced in the removal of Chavez, Barrack Obama called the overthrowing of Manuel Zelaya a coup.

But he also followed it up with a cryptic “We stand on the side of democracy, sovereignty and self-determination” which can be taken any which way. Either in the favor of Zelaya or in the favor of the judicial system which stood against him.

Similar comments were coming in from the White House during the Iranian situation. Obama at one point even indicated that Ahmedinejad may even be the legitimate winner of the election.

The coup in Honduras was no doubt orchestrated by the industrialists; it was very much an elitist uprising. The people as a whole are generally on Manuel Zelaya’s side as far as i can discern. So i it was corporate interest that was driving the unrest then whose support did they have from outside? They had to have somebody!

It’s possible that there is some new interest group. Maybe another country or even a Multinational, that was driving this (Manuel Zelaya was somewhat pro US, although he may have been getting too cosy with Chavez of late). The same may be said about the Iran situation for various other reasons though its somewhat shaken leadership there seem to have already reached their own conclusions.

Or maybe i’m just being paranoid and seeing smoke where there isnt even a caveman with a flint in sight.

But the facts remain, and they don’t appear to be too coclusive. Was there any external influence in any of these two events? or did everything happen in a non-orchestrated manner? But if so then why did the judicial system of Honduras so obviously go against public opinion? and why didn’t the protests in Iran ever spread beyond Tehran? Maybe these events have explanations that do nothave to include external interference, but somehow i find that hard to believe.

Here’s a video on the Honduras issue, from when it happened.


1 comment
  1. Chavie said:

    good post, but I highly doubt that the events in Iran were orchestrated by the west… supported morally no doubt, but I think the initiative was taken locally…

    as for Honduras, I’m not sure, but Zelaya was pretty much pro-worker, so I’m guessing that corporations had a hand in that and not the CIA… 😐

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: