This was posted at https://play.google.com/store/books/details?id=iAdFAAAAIAAJ&rdid=book-iAdFAAAAIAAJ&rdot=1  for the Review of 

MY REVIEW

This book is a book of lies, deceit, fraud filled, False Flag operations, malicious set up against a neutral, friendly, non-violent nation with a determination to break down one of the many Monarchy/ Constitutional Monarchy governments in existence.  Kamehameha was recognized as the King in 1810, recognized as a Monarchy government.  He died in 1819, and the American mercenaries /missionaries arrived.  In 1822, a Secret Treaty of Verona was signed by Austria, France, Prussia, Russia, England, the United States and the Vatican.  They all agreed to break down Monarchical governments and form a One World Order/New World Order.  Kamehameha II - Liholiho and his party left for England and died in England - year 1824.  Kalanimoku and one of Kamehameha's widows named Kaahumanu governed the Hawaiian archipelago till Kamehameha III - Kauikeaouli came of age.  He passed the Constitution of 1840, 1852 which included the anti- slavery law.  The U. S. passed an anti-slavery law with almost the same wording 13 years later.  Alodio titles were given to his people and to aliens/foreigners fee simple or less than alodio...or 30 years lease.  aliens could not own alodio.  The government is made up of 3 parts - 2 parts permanent and were heirs and successors of Kamehameha, part 1:  Sovereign, his heirs and successors; part 2:  House of Nobles, their heirs and successors, and the 3rd part was a voted in, temporary part made up of subjects and non Hawaiians/whites/aliens.  It was this part that conspired against the Royal Families.  The Royal Families are all those descendants and heirs of Kamehameha, which included Kamehameha II, Kamehameha III, Kamehameha IV, Kamehameha V, King Lunalilo, King Kalakaua, and Queen Liliuokalani....they were ALL part of the Kamehameha Dynasty as discovered through intense genealogy research now documented.  History uncovered shows Premeditation to dethrone the Queen was made by U.S. President Benjamin Harrison, and the Pirates of the Pacific named Charles Reed Bishop, et. als.  U.S. President Grover Cleveland refused the annexation of Hawaii and is on record as Giving Hawaii Back to Queen Liliuokalani before President McKinley was in office.  McKinley assumed Hawaii based on a Proclamation, without legal authority and was shot shortly after, died later of gangrene.  The permanent treaty of friendship and amity was signed in 1849/1850 by Kamehameha III - Kauikeaouli and U.S., President Zachary Taylor before the U.S.A. went bankrupt.  Treaties are the Supreme Law of the Land due to the application of the U.S. Constitution.  The Secret U.S. Constitution signed in behalf of the bankers in 1871 does not apply to the contractual agreements made in 1849/1850.  See more at http://iolani-theroyalhawk.blogspot.com/2016/12/vol-vi-no-630-part-1a.html showing the illegal moves by the U.S. Presidents also read theiolani.blogspot.com http://iolani-theroyalhawk.blogspot.com and http://myweb.ecomplanet.com/GORA8037 for the Truth  Know that the U.S.A. became 2 Nations and documented after the criminal dethronement of Queen Liliuokalani in 1893.  It was in a 1899 court case that shows the U.S.A. became the United States and the American Empire.  The U.S. has 800 bases in the World compared to Russia's 2 bases.  The U.S. was involved in overthrowing, etc.: https://williamblum.org/essays/read/overthrowing-other-peoples-governments-the-master-list  https://www.democracynow.org/2006/4/21/overthrow_americas_century_of_regime_change  and the U.S. was involved in 53 False Flag Operations:  http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2015/02/x-admitted-false-flag-attacks.html  aloha, Amelia Gora, one of the descendants and heirs of Kamehameha and his Dynasty which includes King Lunalilo, King Kalakaua, and Queen Liliuokalani

*******************

Kinzer's book: 

Overthrow: America’s Century of Regime Change from Hawaii to Iraq.

TRANSCRIPT
This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.

AMY GOODMAN: Stephen Kinzer joins us today in Chicago. He is a veteran New York Times foreign correspondent, author of several books, including All the Shah’s Men and Bitter Fruit. He has just recently left the New York Times. We welcome you to Democracy Now!

STEPHEN KINZER: It’s great to be with you, Amy.

AMY GOODMAN: It’s good to be in your city, Stephen.

STEPHEN KINZER: Love it!

AMY GOODMAN: Well, you are looking at 14 coups that the U.S. was involved with. What was the primary reason for the U.S. government’s involvement in overthrowing other countries’ governments?

STEPHEN KINZER: A lot of these coups have been studied individually, but what I’m trying to do in my book is see them not as a series of isolated incidents, but rather as one long continuum. And by looking at them that way, I am able to tease out certain patterns that recur over and over again. They don’t all fit the same pattern, but it’s amazing how many of them do.

You ask about the motivations, and that is one of the patterns that comes through when you look at these things all together. There’s really a three-stage motivation that I can see when I watch so many of the developments of these coups. The first thing that happens is that the regime in question starts bothering some American company. They start demanding that the company pay taxes or that it observe labor laws or environmental laws. Sometimes that company is nationalized or is somehow required to sell some of its land or its assets. So the first thing that happens is that an American or a foreign corporation is active in another country, and the government of that country starts to restrict it in some way or give it some trouble, restrict its ability to operate freely.

Then, the leaders of that company come to the political leadership of the United States to complain about the regime in that country. In the political process, in the White House, the motivation morphs a little bit. The U.S. government does not intervene directly to defend the rights of a company, but they transform the motivation from an economic one into a political or geo-strategic one. They make the assumption that any regime that would bother an American company or harass an American company must be anti-American, repressive, dictatorial, and probably the tool of some foreign power or interest that wants to undermine the United States. So the motivation transforms from an economic to a political one, although the actual basis for it never changes.

Then, it morphs one more time when the U.S. leaders have to explain the motivation for this operation to the American people. Then they do not use either the economic or the political motivation usually, but they portray these interventions as liberation operations, just a chance to free a poor oppressed nation from the brutality of a regime that we assume is a dictatorship, because what other kind of a regime would be bothering an American company?

AMY GOODMAN: Stephen Kinzer, I want to begin where you do in the book, and that is, with Hawaii.

STEPHEN KINZER: Many Americans I don’t think realize that Hawaii was an independent country before it was brought into the United States. In brief, this is the story. In the early part of the 19th century, several hundred American missionaries, most of them from New England, sailed off to what were then called the Sandwich Islands to devote their lives to, as they would have put it, raising up the heathen savages and teaching them the blessings of Christian civilization.

It wasn’t long before many of these missionaries and their sons began to realize that there was a lot of money to be made in Hawaii. The natives had been growing sugar for a long time, but they had never refined it and had never exported it. By dispossessing the natives of most of their land, a group that came from what was then called this missionary planter elite sort of left the path of God, went onto the path of Mammon and established a series of giant sugar plantations in Hawaii, and they became very rich from exporting sugar into the United States.

In the early 1890s, the U.S. passed a tariff that made it impossible for the Hawaiian sugar growers to sell their sugar in the U.S. So they were in a panic. They were about to lose their fortunes. And they asked themselves what they could do to somehow continue to sell their sugar in the U.S.

They came up with a perfect answer: We’ll get into the U.S. How will we do this? Well, the leader of the Hawaiian revolutionaries, if you want to call them that, who were mostly of American origin, actually went to Washington. He met with the Secretary of the Navy. He presented his case directly to the President of the United States, Benjamin Harrison. And he received assurances that the U.S. would support a rebellion against the Hawaiian monarchy.

So he went back to Hawaii and became part of a triumvirate, which essentially carried out the Hawaiian revolution. He was one part of the triumvirate. The second part was the American ambassador, who was himself an annexationist and had been instructed by the State Department to do whatever he could to aid this revolution. And the third figure was the commander of the U.S. naval vessel, which was conveniently anchored right off the shores of Honolulu.

This revolution was carried out with amazing ease. The leader of the Hawaiian revolutionaries, this missionary planter elite, simply announced at a meeting one day, "We have overthrown the government of Hawaii, and we are now the new government." And before the queen was able to respond, the U.S. ambassador had 250 Marines called to shore from the ship that was conveniently off the coast of Honolulu and announced that since there had been some instability and there seemed to be a change of government, the Marines were going to land to protect the new regime and the lives and property of all Hawaiians. So that meant that there was nothing the queen could do. The regime was immediately recognized by the United States, and with that simple process, the monarchy of Hawaii came to an end, and then ultimately Hawaii joined the U.S.

AMY GOODMAN: The queen called in ambassadors from other countries for help?

STEPHEN KINZER: The queen was a little bit shocked by all this, as were her cabinet ministers. In fact, they appealed to the United States and asked, "What instability is there? Who’s in danger? Tell us, and we’ll protect them." The queen had about 600 troops at her disposal. That was the whole Hawaiian military force. And her cabinet ministers actually called the ambassadors from foreign countries in Honolulu — there were about a dozen of them then — and said, "What should we do? Do you think we should fight the Marines?" And the ambassadors quite prudently told her that that would be foolish. "You should just accept it and then try to regain your throne by some other means." That never proved possible. But even then, it was clear to the ruler of this small, weak country that there was no hope in resisting U.S. military intervention.

AMY GOODMAN: It still took a few years before Hawaii was ultimately annexed.

STEPHEN KINZER: It’s a very interesting story. Immediately after the revolution, the revolutionaries went back to Washington and, sure enough, President Harrison, as he promised, submitted to the U.S. Congress a law to bring Hawaii into the U.S., but there was a great resistance to this when it was understood how the coup was organized and on whose behalf it was organized, so the Congress did not immediately approve the annexation of Hawaii.

And right at that time, the presidency changed. The Republican, Benjamin Harrison, was out of office, and the new president, a Democrat, Grover Cleveland, came in. He was against annexation. He was an anti-imperialist. He withdrew the treaty. And that meant that Hawaii had to become an independent country for a few years, until the next Republican president came into office, McKinley. And then, at the height of the Spanish-American War, when the U.S. was taking the Philippines, Hawaii was presented to the U.S. as a vital midway station between California and the Philippines. And it was at that time, five years after the revolution, that Hawaii was actually brought into the United States.

AMY GOODMAN: We’re talking to Stephen Kinzer. So, first came the missionaries, then came the Marines.

STEPHEN KINZER: Yeah, exactly. Sometimes we hear the phrase "Business follows the flag." But in my research, I found that it’s actually the opposite. First comes the business operations, then comes the flag. It’s the flag that follows business.

AMY GOODMAN: We’re going to take a break, and then we’re going to come back to this discussion about, well, the title of his book is Overthrow: America’s Century of Regime Change from Hawaii to Iraq.

*********************

53 ADMITTED False Flag Attacks

Not Theory … Admitted Fact

There are many documented false flag attacks, where a government carries out a terror attack … and then falsely blames its enemy for political purposes.

In the following 53 instances, officials in the government which carried out the attack (or seriously proposed an attack) admits to it, either orally or in writing:

(1) Japanese troops set off a small explosion on a train track in 1931, and falsely blamed it on China in order to justify an invasion of Manchuria. This is known as the “Mukden Incident” or the “Manchurian Incident”. The Tokyo International Military Tribunal found: “Several of the participators in the plan, including Hashimoto [a high-ranking Japanese army officer], have on various occasions admitted their part in the plot and have stated that the object of the ‘Incident’ was to afford an excuse for the occupation of Manchuria by the Kwantung Army ….” And see this.

(2) A major with the Nazi SS admitted at the Nuremberg trials that – under orders from the chief of the Gestapo – he and some other Nazi operatives faked attacks on their own people and resources which they blamed on the Poles, to justify the invasion of Poland.

(3) Nazi general Franz Halder also testified at the Nuremberg trials that Nazi leader Hermann Goering admitted to setting fire to the German parliament building in 1933, and then falsely blaming the communists for the arson.

(4) Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev admitted in writing that the Soviet Union’s Red Army shelled the Russian village of Mainila in 1939 – while blaming the attack on Finland – as a basis for launching the “Winter War” against Finland. Russian president Boris Yeltsin agreed that Russia had been the aggressor in the Winter War.

(5) The Russian Parliament, current Russian president Putin and former Soviet leader Gorbachev all admit that Soviet leader Joseph Stalin ordered his secret police to execute 22,000 Polish army officers and civilians in 1940, and falsely blame it on the Nazis.

(6) The British government admits that – between 1946 and 1948 – it bombed 5 ships carrying Jews attempting to flee the Holocaust to seek safety in Palestine, set up a fake group called “Defenders of Arab Palestine”, and then had the psuedo-group falsely claim responsibility for the bombings (and see thisthis and this).

(7) Israel admits that in 1954, an Israeli terrorist cell operating in Egypt planted bombs in several buildings, including U.S. diplomatic facilities, then left behind “evidence” implicating the Arabs as the culprits (one of the bombs detonated prematurely, allowing the Egyptians to identify the bombers, and several of the Israelis later confessed) (and see this and this).

(8) The CIA admits that it hired Iranians in the 1950′s to pose as Communists and stage bombings in Iran in order to turn the country against its democratically-elected prime minister.

(9) The Turkish Prime Minister admitted that the Turkish government carried out the 1955 bombing on a Turkish consulate in Greece – also damaging the nearby birthplace of the founder of modern Turkey – and blamed it on Greece, for the purpose of inciting and justifying anti-Greek violence.

(10) The British Prime Minister admitted to his defense secretary that he and American president Dwight Eisenhower approved a plan in 1957 to carry out attacks in Syria and blame it on the Syrian government as a way to effect regime change.

(11-21) The former Italian Prime Minister, an Italian judge, and the former head of Italian counterintelligence admit that NATO, with the help of the Pentagon and CIA, carried out terror bombings in Italy and other European countries in the 1950s and blamed the communists, in order to rally people’s support for their governments in Europe in their fight against communism. As one participant in this formerly-secret program stated: “You had to attack civilians, people, women, children, innocent people, unknown people far removed from any political game. The reason was quite simple. They were supposed to force these people, the Italian public, to turn to the state to ask for greater security” (and see this) (Italy and other European countries subject to the terror campaign had joined NATO before the bombings occurred). And watch this BBC special. They also allegedly carried out terror attacks in France, Belgium, Denmark, Germany, Greece, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, the UK, and other countries.  False flag attacks carried out pursuant tho this program include – by way of example only – the murder of the Turkish Prime Minister (1960), bombings in Portugal (1966), the Piazza Fontana massacre in Italy (1969), terror attacks in Turkey (1971), the Peteano bombing in Italy (1972), shootings in Brescia, Italy and a bombing on an Italian train (1974), shootings in Istanbul, Turkey (1977), the Atocha massacre in Madrid, Spain (1977), the abduction and murder of the Italian Prime Minister (1978), the bombing of the Bologna railway station in Italy (1980), and shooting and killing 28 shoppers in Brabant county, Belgium (1985).

(22) In 1960, American Senator George Smathers suggested that the U.S. launch “a false attack made on Guantanamo Bay which would give us the excuse of actually fomenting a fight which would then give us the excuse to go in and [overthrow Castro]“.

(23) Official State Department documents show that, in 1961, the head of the Joint Chiefs and other high-level officials discussed blowing up a consulate in the Dominican Republic in order to justify an invasion of that country. The plans were not carried out, but they were all discussed as serious proposals.

(24) As admitted by the U.S. government, recently declassified documents show that in 1962, the American Joint Chiefs of Staff signed off on a plan to blow up AMERICAN airplanes (using an elaborate plan involving the switching of airplanes), and also to commit terrorist acts on American soil, and then to blame it on the Cubans in order to justify an invasion of Cuba. See the following ABC news reportthe official documents; and watch this interview with the former Washington Investigative Producer for ABC’s World News Tonight with Peter Jennings.

(25) In 1963, the U.S. Department of Defense wrote a paper promoting attacks on nations within the Organization of American States – such as Trinidad-Tobago or Jamaica – and then falsely blaming them on Cuba.

(26) The U.S. Department of Defense even suggested covertly paying a person in the Castro government to attack the United States: “The only area remaining for consideration then would be to bribe one of Castro’s subordinate commanders to initiate an attack on Guantanamo.”

(27) The NSA admits that it lied about what really happened in the Gulf of Tonkin incident in 1964 … manipulating data to make it look like North Vietnamese boats fired on a U.S. ship so as to create a false justification for the Vietnam war.

(28) A U.S. Congressional committee admitted that – as part of its “Cointelpro” campaign – the FBI had used many provocateurs in the 1950s through 1970s to carry out violent acts and falsely blame them on political activists.

(29) A top Turkish general admitted that Turkish forces burned down a mosque on Cyprus in the 1970s and blamed it on their enemy. He explained: “In Special War, certain acts of sabotage are staged and blamed on the enemy to increase public resistance. We did this on Cyprus; we even burnt down a mosque.” In response to the surprised correspondent’s incredulous look the general said, “I am giving an example”.

(30) The German government admitted (and see this) that, in 1978, the German secret service detonated a bomb in the outer wall of a prison and planted “escape tools” on a prisoner – a member of the Red Army Faction – which the secret service wished to frame the bombing on.

(31) A Mossad agent admits that, in 1984, Mossad planted a radio transmitter in Gaddaffi’s compound in Tripoli, Libya which broadcast fake terrorist trasmissions recorded by Mossad, in order to frame Gaddaffi as a terrorist supporter. Ronald Reagan bombed Libya immediately thereafter.

(32) The South African Truth and Reconciliation Council found that, in 1989, the Civil Cooperation Bureau (a covert branch of the South African Defense Force) approached an explosives expert and asked him “to participate in an operation aimed at discrediting the ANC [the African National Congress] by bombing the police vehicle of the investigating officer into the murder incident”, thus framing the ANC for the bombing.

(33) An Algerian diplomat and several officers in the Algerian army admit that, in the 1990s, the Algerian army frequently massacred Algerian civilians and then blamed Islamic militants for the killings (and see this video; and Agence France-Presse, 9/27/2002, French Court Dismisses Algerian Defamation Suit Against Author).

(34)    The United States Army’s 1994 publication Special Forces Foreign Internal Defense Tactics Techniques and Procedures for Special Forces – updated in 2004 – recommends employing terrorists and using false flag operations to destabilize leftist regimes in Latin America.   False flag terrorist attacks were carried out in Latin America and other regions as part of the CIA’s “Dirty Wars“. And see this.

(35) An Indonesian fact-finding team investigated violent riots which occurred in 1998, and determined that “elements of the military had been involved in the riots, some of which were deliberately provoked”.

(36) Senior Russian Senior military and intelligence officers admit that the KGB blew up Russian apartment buildings in 1999 and falsely blamed it on Chechens, in order to justify an invasion of Chechnya (and see this report and this discussion).

(37) According to the Washington Post, Indonesian police admit that the Indonesian military killed American teachers in Papua in 2002 and blamed the murders on a Papuan separatist group in order to get that group listed as a terrorist organization.

(38) The well-respected former Indonesian president also admits that the government probably had a role in the Bali bombings.

(39) As reported by BBC, the New York Times, and Associated Press, Macedonian officials admit that the government murdered 7 innocent immigrants in cold blood and pretended that they were Al Qaeda soldiers attempting to assassinate Macedonian police, in order to join the “war on terror”.

(40) Senior police officials in Genoa, Italy admitted that – in July 2001, at the G8 summit in Genoa – planted two Molotov cocktails and faked the stabbing of a police officer, in order to justify a violent crackdown against protesters.

(41) The U.S. falsely blamed Iraq for playing a role in the 9/11 attacks – as shown by a memo from the defense secretary – as one of the main justifications for launching the Iraq war. Even after the 9/11 Commission admitted that there was no connection, Dick Cheney said that the evidence is “overwhelming” that al Qaeda had a relationship with Saddam Hussein’s regime, that Cheney “probably” had information unavailable to the Commission, and that the media was not ‘doing their homework’ in reporting such ties. Top U.S. government officials now admit that the Iraq war was really launched for oil … not 9/11 or weapons of mass destruction.  Despite previous “lone wolf” claims, many U.S. government officials now say that 9/11 was state-sponsored terror; but Iraq was not the state which backed the hijackers.  (Many U.S. officials have alleged that 9/11 was a false flag operation by rogue elements of the U.S. government.).   

(42) Although the FBI now admits that the 2001 anthrax attacks were carried out by one or more U.S. government scientists, a senior FBI official says that the FBI was actually told to blame the Anthrax attacks on Al Qaeda by White House officials (remember what the anthrax letters looked like). Government officials also confirm that the white House tried to link the anthrax to Iraq as a justification for regime change in that country.

(43) Former Department of Justice lawyer John Yoo suggested in 2005 that the US should go on the offensive against al-Qaeda, having “our intelligence agencies create a false terrorist organization. It could have its own websites, recruitment centers, training camps, and fundraising operations. It could launch fake terrorist operations and claim credit for real terrorist strikes, helping to sow confusion within al-Qaeda’s ranks, causing operatives to doubt others’ identities and to question the validity of communications.”

(44) United Press International reported in June 2005:

U.S. intelligence officers are reporting that some of the insurgents in Iraq are using recent-model Beretta 92 pistols, but the pistols seem to have had their serial numbers erased. The numbers do not appear to have been physically removed; the pistols seem to have come off a production line without any serial numbers. Analysts suggest the lack of serial numbers indicates that the weapons were intended for intelligence operations or terrorist cells with substantial government backing. Analysts speculate that these guns are probably from either Mossad or the CIA. Analysts speculate that agent provocateurs may be using the untraceable weapons even as U.S. authorities use insurgent attacks against civilians as evidence of the illegitimacy of the resistance.

(45) Undercover Israeli soldiers admitted in 2005 to throwing stones at other Israeli soldiers so they could blame it on Palestinians, as an excuse to crack down on peaceful protests by the Palestinians.

(46) Quebec police admitted that, in 2007, thugs carrying rocks to a peaceful protest were actually undercover Quebec police officers (and see this).

(47) At the G20 protests in London in 2009, a British member of parliament saw plain clothes police officers attempting to incite the crowd to violence.

(48) Egyptian politicians admitted (and see this) that government employees looted priceless museum artifacts in 2011 to try to discredit the protesters.

(49) A Colombian army colonel has admitted that his unit murdered 57 civilians, then dressed them in uniforms and claimed they were rebels killed in combat.

(50) The highly-respected writer for the Telegraph Ambrose Evans-Pritchard says that the head of Saudi intelligence – Prince Bandar – recently admitted that the Saudi government controls “Chechen” terrorists.

(51) High-level American sources admitted that the Turkish government – a fellow NATO country – carried out the chemical weapons attacks blamed on the Syrian government; and high-ranking Turkish government admitted on tape plans to carry out attacks and blame it on the Syrian government.

(52) The former Ukrainian security chief admits that the sniper attacks which started the Ukrainian coup were carried out in order to frame others.

(53) Britain’s spy agency has admitted (and see this) that it carries out “digital false flag” attacks on targets, framing people by writing offensive or unlawful material … and blaming it on the target.

So Common … There’s a Name for It

The use of the bully’s trick is so common that it was given a name hundreds of years ago.

“False flag terrorism” is defined as a government attacking its own people, then blaming others in order to justify going to war against the people it blames. Or as Wikipedia defines it:

False flag operations are covert operations conducted by governments, corporations, or other organizations, which are designed to appear as if they are being carried out by other entities. The name is derived from the military concept of flying false colors; that is, flying the flag of a country other than one’s own. False flag operations are not limited to war and counter-insurgency operations, and have been used in peace-time; for example, during Italy’s strategy of tension.

The term comes from the old days of wooden ships, when one ship would hang the flag of its enemy before attacking another ship. Because the enemy’s flag, instead of the flag of the real country of the attacking ship, was hung, it was called a “false flag” attack.

Indeed, this concept is so well-accepted that rules of engagement for navalair and land warfare all prohibit false flag attacks.

Leaders Throughout History Have Acknowledged False Flags

Leaders throughout history have acknowledged the danger of false flags:

“A history of false flag attacks used to manipulate the minds of the people! “In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations, and epochs it is the rule.”
― Friedrich Nietzsche

“Terrorism is the best political weapon for nothing drives people harder than a fear of sudden death”.
– Adolph Hitler

“Why of course the people don’t want war … But after all it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship … Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.”
– Hermann Goering, Nazi leader.

“The easiest way to gain control of a population is to carry out acts of terror. [The public] will clamor for such laws if their personal security is threatened”.
– Josef Stalin

You need to be a member of maoliworld to add comments!

Replies

  • William Blum

    Overthrowing other people’s governments: The Master List

    By William Blum – Published February 2013

    Instances of the United States overthrowing, or attempting to overthrow, a foreign government since the Second World War. (* indicates successful ouster of a government)

    • China 1949 to early 1960s
    • Albania 1949-53
    • East Germany 1950s
    • Iran 1953 *
    • Guatemala 1954 *
    • Costa Rica mid-1950s
    • Syria 1956-7
    • Egypt 1957
    • Indonesia 1957-8
    • British Guiana 1953-64 *
    • Iraq 1963 *
    • North Vietnam 1945-73
    • Cambodia 1955-70 *
    • Laos 1958 *, 1959 *, 1960 *
    • Ecuador 1960-63 *
    • Congo 1960 *
    • France 1965
    • Brazil 1962-64 *
    • Dominican Republic 1963 *
    • Cuba 1959 to present
    • Bolivia 1964 *
    • Indonesia 1965 *
    • Ghana 1966 *
    • Chile 1964-73 *
    • Greece 1967 *
    • Costa Rica 1970-71
    • Bolivia 1971 *
    • Australia 1973-75 *
    • Angola 1975, 1980s
    • Zaire 1975
    • Portugal 1974-76 *
    • Jamaica 1976-80 *
    • Seychelles 1979-81
    • Chad 1981-82 *
    • Grenada 1983 *
    • South Yemen 1982-84
    • Suriname 1982-84
    • Fiji 1987 *
    • Libya 1980s
    • Nicaragua 1981-90 *
    • Panama 1989 *
    • Bulgaria 1990 *
    • Albania 1991 *
    • Iraq 1991
    • Afghanistan 1980s *
    • Somalia 1993
    • Yugoslavia 1999-2000 *
    • Ecuador 2000 *
    • Afghanistan 2001 *
    • Venezuela 2002 *
    • Iraq 2003 *
    • Haiti 2004 *
    • Somalia 2007 to present
    • Honduras 2009
    • Libya 2011 *
    • Syria 2012
    • Ukraine 2014 *

    Q: Why will there never be a coup d’état in Washington?

    A: Because there’s no American embassy there.

    ← Be nice to America. Or we’ll bring democracy to your country!

    Suppressing revolt and revolution →

    BOOKS BY WILLIAM BLUM

    America’s Deadliest Export: Democracy

    America’s Deadliest Export: Democracy

    The Truth About US Foreign Policy and Everything Else

    Rogue State

    Rogue State

    A Guide to the World’s Only Superpower

    Killing Hope

    Killing Hope

    U.S. Military and CIA Interventions Since World War II

    Freeing the World to Death

    Freeing the World to Death

    Essays on the American Empire

    West-Bloc Dissident

    West-Bloc Dissident

    A Cold War Memoir

    • 63 Documents the Government Doesn't Want To Read
      by Gov. Jesse Ventura


      63_Documents.jpg
      (Click for Amazon book review)

      Click on a participant to pop-up their full list of quotations 
      from 63 Documents the Government Doesn't Want To Read, by Jesse Ventura (number of quotes indicated):
      • Ronald Reagan (1) 
        OR click on an issue category below for a subset.

      OnTheIssues.org BOOK REVIEW:

      Jesse Ventura has taken on a new role as truthseeker against the US government. And this book establishes that the US government has many secrets which need exposure by a truthseeker. Ventura establishes here that most of those secrets are not kept for "national security" reasons, but instead are kept to hide the truth about ulterior motives for war; or to hide misdeeds with shady foreign leaders; or to hide some other embarrassment of the US government. Ventura details how it's the American government which hides the truth for its own benefit -- and NOT the American people. Ventura's purpose in writing this book is to get the American people to be aware that the American government keeps secrets from them, and to insist that it stop.

      The title "63 Documents" refers to 1963, the year in which JFK was assassinated. Gov. Ventura holds deep suspicions that the US government still maintains secrets about the JFK assassination. And about Iran-Contra. And about 9-11. Those all border on conspiracy theories -- hence the title of his previous book, American Conspiracies -- but Ventura establishes the paper trail of evidence. This book shows the actual original documents -- plus references to sources so you can find them yourself. This book exposes issues from the 1960s because, after decades of FOIA requests and delays, some of those "secret" documents were finally released. Ventura makes it clear that the US government carries on its inappropriate secrecy today -- which we'll only know about decades hence, after the next generation of FOIA requests and delays.

      -- Jesse Gordon, editor-in-chief, OnTheIssues.org, August 2011

      Reference:  http://www.ontheissues.org/63_Documents.htm

      ***********************************

This reply was deleted.