There Have to Be Consequences For Advocating Illegal Wars
The @newyorktimes and its Bert Stevens are abetting war crimes. War crimes aren't just willynilly murders under the patently false guise of a pretext for plunder. Which is what the attempted conquest of Venezuela is.
Three of the CIA's imperialist-colonialist hegemony targets now are all oil exporters — Venezuela in addition to Nigeria & Iran, the latter being a slowburn lead-up, for which all of Gaza and much of Western Asia has already paid an atrocious price. These attempted overthrows have nothing whatever to do with Tren del Aragua or M13 or 9thOctober or fentanyl or yellow cake or Hormuz or the Tonkin or Lusitania.
A free, open, working press would be calling bullshit, and be explicit about the plundering spooks having no evidence for claims intended as pretexts to provide cover and legitimacy for awful crimes.
A larger point is that these criminal wars do almost nobody any good besides the missilemakers and petrospeculators. For the rest of us, the degrading of #nationalSecurity, #globalSecurity, and #humanSecurity puts every one of us in existential peril, and it impoverishes us all.
https://www.currentaffairs.org/news/there-have-to-be-consequences-for-advocating-illegal-wars
> Yet again, the New York Times’ Bret Stephens advocates the overthrow of a sovereign government. Why do the readers of the “paper of record” tolerate this dangerous propaganda?
