Tag: more liquid gold is being secured

  • Ten days of elections around the world may shape future of climate debate

    Spread the love

    Article by Paul Rogers republished from openDemocracy under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International licence.

    The results of votes in the US, Brazil, Israel and Serbia will have impacts that spread far beyond their borders. Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

    From the US to Brazil, Israel and Serbia, the far right have been delivered a number of mammoth blows

    In the wake of the US midterm elections, the sheer size of the electoral opposition to Donald Trump is still sinking in. It will take weeks if not months for a full analysis of the results to emerge but they are already having a global impact, with US tech companies losing $3.2trn in value since the vote on Tuesday. 

    Remember, though, the political focus barely two weeks ago was not just about the US midterms but how they related to three more elections across three continents, in Serbia, Brazil and Israel. In each case, there was uncertainty over the outcome but a recognition that it could have an impact stretching way beyond its borders.

    Two of the elections came on the same day, 25 October, in Serbia and Brazil, and the third was in Israel just two days later. The first two were general elections in which the populations as a whole could cast ballots, but in Israel voting was restricted to seven million Jews and the two million Palestinians residing in Israel, with five million Palestinians living under Israeli control in Gaza and the West Bank excluded.  

    In Serbia, the Serbian Progressive Party (SBS) had been in power for 14 years and was dominant across much of society, including the media and economy, and with plenty of influence across the legal system. Its increasingly autocratic leader, Aleksandar Vucic, had long allowed persistent favouritism and a high level of corruption coupled with organised crime, and in the past two years a substantial community of student activists had demonstrated repeatedly against the SBS and Vucic, giving rise to an opposition Student List of candidates when it came to the election.

    While the students had no clear leader, by the time of the election they were reportedly neck and neck in the polls with the government. When the election came, the Student List romped home, winning 53% of the votes, to the SBS’s 39%.

    What comes next is uncertain as the List’s newly elected parliamentarians seek to establish a stable if inexperienced government. Critics fear that a combination of years of corruption coupled with the power of organised crime will ultimately dominate but that is by no means certain; many thousands of students, supported by hundreds of thousands of others, see the future very differently.

    As the political environment in Serbia evolves, one thing remains certain, it has seen mass protest transform itself into a potential government. That will be watched uncomfortably by quite a few Western states, not least France, with its continuing country-wide street protests, and the UK, where over 4,000 pro-Palestine supporters have been arrested in recent years.

    Mass action also applies to Brazil, where the progressive incumbent, Luiz Ignàcio Lula da Silva, failed to lead at the first round of the election, initially having fought a lacklustre campaign. The favourite to win the run-off was his right-wing opponent Flàvio Bolsonaro, a key Trump ally and the son of former president Jair Bolsonaro, now imprisoned for his role in an attempted coup after losing the 2022 election.

    The prospect of defeat led to a country-wide campaign of mass rallies by Lula’s supporters, with huge crowds gathering in cities right across the country. That was paralleled by far greater use of social media, an element that had not previously been prominent in Lula’s previous approach to campaigning. 

    Since the return to democracy in Brazil over 40 years ago, no candidate losing the first stage of a presidential election had reversed the result in stage two, yet Lula’s renewed campaign did just this, turning a two million voting deficit in the first round into a substantial lead in the second three weeks later, having gathered around 10 million extra votes.

    Much of the change was due to internal politics, but it is at the global level that the result is of note. During his recent four-year term, Lula had made much of the need to slow the rate of destruction of the rainforest, which makes up one of the most significant global sinks of carbon. If Bolsonaro had won that would have been reversed, which would have been music to the ears of Trump and his supporters, as well as to climate change deniers across the world.   

    As to Israel, there are two main outcomes. First, Binyamin Netanyahu’s Likud-led coalition lost its majority, but Gadi Eisenkot’s Change bloc also fell short. Second, Palestinian Arabs allowed to vote did so in much greater numbers than usual, with a turnout of just under 80%, largely because of a determination to prevent Netanyahu contriving to cling on to power. 

    Overall, Arab-led parties won 19 seats in the 120-seat Knesset, including 11 for members of the Joint List alliance – enough to hold the balance of power. Ten days after the election, the Joint List announced it would support Eisenkot as prime minister, following in the footsteps of the other Arab group, Ra’am. Israeli president Isaac Herzog is now thought likely to invite Eisenkot to form a government.

    The election itself, though, displayed thoroughly uncomfortable attitudes among Jewish Israelis during the campaign. Politics concentrated substantially on domestic issues, including the demands for accountability over the 7 October Hamas attack, with little attention given to the terrible war waged in Gaza by the Netanyahu-led government and the repeated violence perpetrated by Jewish settlers across the occupied West Bank. It was as if over 80,000 Palestinians killed or missing were best ignored.

    Not all Jewish Israelis took this position, but a majority appeared to. This, coupled with Netanyahu’s decades of experience in the Israeli government and his capacity for personal survival, suggested that any sustained political stability based on trust would be difficult to achieve. What remained though, was the transformation among Palestinian Israelis and their determination to vote and put Netanyahu out of office.

    The fourth of the elections, the United States mid-sessionals for both houses of congress, was the one that sprung by far the greatest surprise. That the Republicans lost was not unexpected, it was the massive size of the loss that counted.

    Given Trump’s past behaviour, if a modest shift in votes had given the Democrats the House but not in the Senate, Trump and his team would have carried on if somewhat tarnished. That was not to be. The extent of the failure was so great that it undermined the entire Trump machine and with it the vast numbers of supportive officials brought on to the Federal payroll in the past two years.

    That has three implications. One is at the international level, where Trump will no longer maintain his status and influence. There is a risk of hitting out where he thinks he can, but the extent of the failure in these elections means a minimal risk of Trump trying to cry foul in 2028. Times have changed and it won’t wash.

    The second is that the last two years have been hugely profitable for the Trump camp but not just for them. Wealthy elites across the entire country have made millions if not billions and will be singularly unhappy at the great gravy train being derailed. Work will already be underway in the Heritage Foundation, the think tank that authored the Project 2025 blueprint for the second Trump administration, and other right-wing think-tanks to adjust to a different era. 

    Finally, on some key domestic issues with global implications, Trump’s abject failure is very good news. Of all the disastrous policies of the Trump years, it is climate denial and the curbing of the renewables revolution that have been the most dangerous. Within a day of the election result, though, the financial press was reporting a surge in the value of renewable energy outfits, not just in the US but across the world. 

    Trump is still in the White House and his supporters will still be in the system, but their power is already ebbing away. Taking a global view, the combination of Lula’s re-election in Brazil and Trump’s failure leading to a re-energised environmental movement give the world a rare day of good news.

    Article by Paul Rogers republished from openDemocracy under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International licence.

    dizzy: The reference to “… 4,000 pro-Palestine supporters have been arrested in recent years.” does not make clear that this is the number of Palestine Action supporters arrested as terrorists for holding protest signs.

    Almost 140 arrested at protest against Palestine Action ban outside US embassy in London

    …

    More than 4,000 arrests have been made for supporting Palestine Action since the ban came into effect, Defend Our Juries said, representing the vast majority of terror arrests since last July.

    …

    Climate science denier Donald Trump confirms that he knows nothing about democracy and that more liquid gold is being secured according to his policy of global privateering.
    Climate science denier Donald Trump confirms that he knows nothing about democracy and that more liquid gold is being secured according to his policy of global privateering.
    Orcas discuss Donald Trump and the killer apes' concept of democracy. Front Orca warns that Trump is crashing his country's economy and that everything he does he does for the fantastically wealthy.
    Orcas discuss Donald Trump and the killer apes’ concept of democracy. Front Orca warns that Trump is crashing his country’s economy and that everything he does he does for the fantastically wealthy.
    Keir "I support Zionism without Qualification" Starmer supporting genocide. He berates Palestine Action for upholding international law and prevent his - Labour and Israel's - Gaza genocide. Starmer says that that they've got a genocide to achieve, forced marches like the Nazis did, hospitals to bomb into obliteration, journalists, healthcare workers and starving people queuing for food to mass-murder and that they have to murder all Gazans for Zionism.
    Keir “I support Zionism without Qualification” Starmer supporting genocide. He berates Palestine Action for upholding international law and prevent his – Labour and Israel’s – Gaza genocide. Starmer says that that they’ve got a genocide to achieve, forced marches like the Nazis did, hospitals to bomb into obliteration, journalists, healthcare workers and starving people queuing for food to mass-murder and that they have to murder all Gazans for Zionism.

  • Lawsuit Targets Secretive Musk-Led Pentagon Panel Over ‘Enormous Potential Conflicts of Interest’

    Spread the love

    Article by Jake Johnson republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0).

    A meeting of the Pentagon’s Project Meridian was pictured on October 1, 2026 in Washington, DC.
    (Photo: US Department of Defense/X.com)

    “The federal government should not be outsourcing its vision on ‘the future of warfare’ to a panel dominated by individuals that stand to profit from it.”

    A coalition of government watchdog organizations sued the US Department of Defense on Monday over a recently announced initiative known as Project Meridian, a Pentagon advisory committee headed by SpaceX CEO Elon Musk and Anduril Industries cofounder Palmer Luckey—billionaires whose companies benefit extensively from federal contracts.

    The lawsuit, filed in the US District Court for the District of Columbia, alleges that Project Meridian violates the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), which “requires that any federal advisory committee that includes non-governmental members be created by a charter, have a defined structure and purpose, make its records and meetings open to the public, and be fairly balanced in its membership.”

    RECOMMENDED…

    Companies Backed by Trump Sons Have Scored Over $6 Billion in Pentagon Contracts: Analysis

    Companies Backed by Trump Sons Have Scored Over $6 Billion in Pentagon Contracts: Analysis

    President Trump Hosts Dinner At White House Ballroom

    Report Details How Trump Has Handed Get-Out-of-Jail-Free Card to Wall Street and Big Tech

    In his memorandum ordering the creation of Project Meridian, Pentagon Secretary Pete Hegseth set a deadline of January 28, 2027 for the panel to deliver recommendations to the US Defense Department on how to “map the trajectory of future warfare” and help the country “maintain global dominance.”

    Project Meridian has held at least two meetings at the Pentagon, which has not disclosed the specific contents of the gatherings or released a list of attendees. Former Republican House Speaker Newt Gingrich is helping Musk and Luckey spearhead the advisory panel, coordinated by the MITRE Corporation—whose board previously included the GOP’s nominee for US Senate in Michigan, Mike Rogers.

    “Despite its ongoing operations and imminent final report,” the new lawsuit reads, “defendants have failed to comply with FACA’s procedural and substantive requirements for new federal advisory committees, including FACA transparency requirements that disallow Project Meridian’s closed-door operations.”

    “Compounding the problem, Project Meridian’s private-sector membership raises precisely the type of conflict-of-interest concerns that FACA was designed to address,” the lawsuit continues. “Announced members include Elon Musk and Palmer Luckey, both leaders and stakeholders of major defense contractors with substantial financial interests in the outcome of Project Meridian’s recommendations. Other members likewise have direct financial stakes in Project Meridian’s findings or are dedicated to aggressive military action.”

    The lawsuit was filed by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), Public Citizen, and the Project on Government Oversight. The groups urged the federal court to “hold unlawful, vacate, and set aside Secretary Hegseth’s September 30 memorandum establishing Project Meridian,” “enjoin defendants from allowing Project Meridian to continue its work until defendants bring it into compliance with FACA,” and bar the Pentagon from “accepting or acting upon any recommendations by Project Meridian while it is acting outside the law.”

    Donald Sherman, CREW’s president, said in a statement on Monday that the Pentagon is “legally barred from getting advice in secret, by defense contractors with enormous potential conflicts of interest.”

    “But that’s exactly what Project Meridian is doing—soliciting private counsel from contractors about military capacity including the president’s largest political benefactor,” said Sherman. “The Federal Advisory Committee Act sets clear requirements about transparency and avoiding conflicts of interest, and Project Meridian must either comply or stop operating.”

    Musk’s SpaceX has secured more than $8 billion in Pentagon contracts in 2026 alone.

    Anduril Industries, Luckey’s firm, is known for building autonomous drones. The company won a $2 billion US Navy contract last month, days after Hegseth announced Project Meridian.

    “Project Meridian would outsource design of grand military strategy to two extremist Pentagon contractors, Elon Musk and Palmer Luckey,” Robert Weissman, co-president of Public Citizen, said Monday. “Very predictably, they will recommend more spending, much more spending, on more AI-enabled weaponry. That would simultaneously make the world more dangerous and starve funding for domestic and human needs.”

    “The law demands balance on advisory committees, precisely to prevent connected insiders like Musk and Luckey from writing policy at the expense of the public,” Weissman added.

    Article by Jake Johnson republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0).

    Climate science denier Donald Trump confirms that he knows nothing about democracy and that more liquid gold is being secured according to his policy of global privateering.
    Climate science denier Donald Trump confirms that he knows nothing about democracy and that more liquid gold is being secured according to his policy of global privateering.

  • Siding With DNC a Week Before Midterms, Judge Blocks Trump’s Taxpayer-Funded ‘Propaganda Campaign’

    Spread the love

    Article by Stephen Prager republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0).

    President Donald Trump’s first taxpayer-funded ad, which aired on September 23, 2026.
    (Screenshot from an ad posted by the White House)

    The administration had allocated $20 million in public funds to pay for ads celebrating Trump weeks before the midterms.

    Less than a week before Election Day, another federal judge on Wednesday blocked the Trump administration from using taxpayer funds to run ads promoting the president.

    US district judge Loren AliKhan froze the White House Office of Management and Budget’s $20 million allocation to run the ads, saying the administration likely “used public dollars to unlawfully finance a national media campaign in the final weeks before the November 2026 elections.”

    RECOMMENDED…

    dnc

    ‘The DNC Has No Choice’: Democrats Sue Trump Over Taxpayer-Funded Propaganda

    Judge Jennifer Rochon

    Trump DOJ Apologizes After Taxpayer-Funded Propaganda Ads Defy Judge’s Order to Stop

    The ruling follows a lawsuit filed earlier this month by the Democratic National Committee (DNC), which accused President Donald Trump of using funds to “finance a national propaganda campaign.”

    The ads, which stated that they were “paid for by the US government,” attacked Trump’s enemies as “Marxists,” celebrated his military operations in Iran and Venezuela, and promoted his personal declaration that his presidency marked the beginning of a “golden age of America.” Another ad that was reportedly prepared but never aired declared that “God made Trump.”

    Following public outcry over the ads, Trump promised that future ads would be paid for with money he raised for his super political action committee MAGA Inc.

    “That promise went unfulfilled,” wrote AliKhan, an appointee of former President Joe Biden. “The ads continued to air with the ‘Paid for by the US government’ disclosure for at least another week.”

    The US Department of Justice has also acknowledged that the ads continued to run hundreds of times after a court order issued on October 11 requiring them to be canceled.

    Federal law prohibits using federal appropriations for “publicity or propaganda purposes within the United States not heretofore authorized by Congress.”

    The DNC argued that the administration’s use of public funds illegally “deprives the DNC of a fair electoral process by adding public funds to the resources available to support Republican candidates.”

    AliKhan agreed that there was “little doubt that defendants’ unlawful use of public funds makes it more difficult for the DNC to achieve its mission of ‘electing Democratic candidates in federal, state, and local elections across the country.’”

    “The court just delivered a victory for the rule of law and for American taxpayers,” DNC chair Ken Martin said following the ruling on Wednesday. “Trump and his administration can no longer misuse Americans’ hard-earned dollars to run political ads while working families can’t even afford to pay for their gas and groceries.”

    Martin added that “Trump’s illegal and desperate attempt to save his cratering approval ratings ahead of the midterm elections only underscores how out of touch he is with the American people, who will hold him and Republicans accountable for their destructive agenda at the ballot box next week.”

    Article by Stephen Prager republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0).

    Donald Trump calls for help from NATO allies in securing the Strait of Hormuz despite saying on 7 March 2026 that they don't need people to join wars after they've already won. He's challenged with the claim that he lies as much as the IDF.
    Donald Trump calls for help from NATO allies in securing the Strait of Hormuz despite saying on 7 March 2026 that they don’t need people to join wars after they’ve already won. He’s challenged with the claim that he lies as much as the IDF.
    Climate science denier Donald Trump confirms that he knows nothing about democracy and that more liquid gold is being secured according to his policy of global privateering.
    Climate science denier Donald Trump confirms that he knows nothing about democracy and that more liquid gold is being secured according to his policy of global privateering (armed extortion).

    Orcas discuss Donald Trump and the killer apes' concept of democracy. Front Orca warns that Trump is crashing his country's economy and that everything he does he does for the fantastically wealthy.
    Orcas discuss Donald Trump and the killer apes’ concept of democracy. Front Orca warns that Trump is crashing his country’s economy and that everything he does he does for the fantastically wealthy.
  • Western Media Accept Trump’s Plundering of Venezuelan Oil as Business as Usual

    Spread the love

    Article by Ricardo Vaz republished from FAIR under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.

    Guardian: The truth behind Donald Trump’s ‘biggest oil deal in world history’

    Guardian (9/26/26): “Donald Trump has long coveted the oilfields of other nations.” [26/9/26]

    Since the January 3, 2026, military strikes and kidnapping of President Nicolás Maduro, the Trump administration has imposed semi-colonial rule over Venezuela, forcing dramatic shifts in the country’s domestic and foreign policies.

    The capstone of the new tutelary regime is an oil deal announced in late August that Trump called “the biggest in history.” The agreement turns over 17 prime oilfields, holding over 20% of the country’s reserves, to a Pentagon-controlled corporation tasked with supplying cheap fuel to the US war machine for decades to come.

    After spending years manufacturing consent for US-sponsored regime change in Venezuela (e.g., FAIR.org, 6/4/21, 1/11/23, 2/12/25), having a government in Caracas subservient to Washington represented a new scenario for the corporate media. The novel conditions have raised few significant qualms for Western outlets. Tactical objections notwithstanding, there is no fundamental disagreement with the US running the affairs of a Global South country.

    Not ‘stealing Venezuela’s oil’

    France 24: US not 'stealing Venezuelan oil,' energy secretary insists

    Energy Secretary Chris Wright (France 24, 3/9/26): “I’ve seen those headlines. ‘We’re Stealing Venezuelan Oil.’ Of course, that’s not true at all.”

    Working hand in glove with the Trump administration, the acting Delcy Rodríguez government has overhauled Venezuela’s hydrocarbon legislation (Venezuelanalysis, 7/13/26) to offer what oil experts consider a business environment more favorable to foreign capital than at any point in the country’s history. The new oil agreement with the White House manages to go even further.

    The 17 oilfields in question will be taken over by North American Blue Energy Partners (NABEP), a private company in which the Pentagon’s Office of Strategic Capital (OSC) will get a 35% stake while investing nothing—and wielding veto power over its board.

    Furthermore, according to the White House, the US State Department will secure 20% of NABEP’s output at cost, and have a right of first refusal over the remaining 80%. On top of this, Venezuelan officials have already suggested Washington would be given an additional “sales discount”  (Venezuelanalysis, 9/9/26).

    In summary, Trump is looking to secure cheap crude supplies at a time when his disastrous Iran debacle has thrown global energy markets into upheaval. The agreement is so blatantly skewed that US Energy Secretary Chris Wright felt he needed to clarify that Washington was not “stealing Venezuela’s oil” (AFP, 9/3/26).

    Nevertheless, Western media outlets were largely unfazed by such an obvious oil grab, euphemistically referring to the deal as “highly unusual” (New York Times, 8/29/26) or “remarkable” (BBC, 9/1/26), at most as “contentious” (Guardian, 9/1/26).

    Corporate journalists did raise objections over the central role played by NABEP owner Alejandro Betancourt, a shady Venezuelan businessman who faced multiple money-laundering probes before the Trump administration intervened, and pressured judicial authorities at home and abroad to drop the investigations (BBC, 9/2/26; CNN, 9/4/26; New York Times, 9/4/26).

    But media seemed satisfied with Trump’s state and energy secretaries Marco Rubio and Chris Wright pledging that US oversight will keep proceedings honest (Reuters, 9/2/26; New York Times, 9/4/26), despite the fact that billions in Venezuelan oil revenues, controlled by the US Treasury Department since January, are unaccounted for (Council on Foreign Relations, 6/3/26; Financial Times, 7/22/26).

    Procedurally transparent plunder

    NYT: Trump Promised Transparency in Venezuela, but Oil Secrets Linger

    The New York Times (5/5/26) wrote positively of “a new era of accountability” in which “the United States would control Venezuelan oil sales” and “Venezuela would submit monthly budgets to the White House.”

    Objections to the Venezuela/NABEP/Pentagon venture were mostly procedural and out of concern for appearances, not driven by any principled opposition to US imperialist predation. Faced with outright colonial plunder of Venezuela, the political and media establishment only demands “accountability” and “transparency” (New York Times, 5/5/26; Financial Times, 9/18/26).

    For months, the White House has controlled Venezuelan oil export revenues, with Trump officials openly calling them “one of the largest assets ever to go on the US balance sheet,” and a source of “leverage” over Caracas. Yet Trump’s Democratic opponents have found no issue with seizing another country’s income, raising only questions about the allocation of the funds in reference to alleged corruption on the part of Caracas and Trump insiders (The Hill, 9/30/26; Washington Post, 9/17/26). This despite the fact that the Venezuelan government has to submit a “monthly budget” to access its own funds (New York Times, 1/28/26) and is subjected to US-imposed auditors (Reuters, 4/27/26).

    The other source of disappointment with Trump stomping all over Venezuelan sovereignty, but prioritizing oil over regime change, is impatience for the restoration/recovery/return of “democracy” to Venezuela (Politico, 9/2/26; Guardian, 8/30/26; CBC, 9/3/26). Despite  widely acknowledgement that Trump is eroding democracy at home (New York Times, 8/20/26, 10/14/26; Guardian, 10/8/26), somehow pundits expected him to prioritize it in an oil-rich foreign country.

    In the establishment’s consensus, “democracy” does not mean a political system that meaningfully reflects the Venezuelan people’s collective will, but simply one that empowers opposition figures that have been groomed for years, like far-right María Corina Machado, their undemocratic credentials notwithstanding (FAIR.org, 10/23/25).

    Eager to stay in power, Rodríguez has over-complied with every US demand, going as far as adopting language about Venezuela undergoing a “democratic transformation.” Her pliancy has earned her favorable corporate media profiles that completely contrast with the demonization of Maduro.

    After securing an exclusive interview, Time (7/30/26) described the acting leader as a “disciplined operator” who “advocate[s] for greater economic openness,” in contrast to the “authoritarian” Maduro, who oversaw “economic collapse.” Along the same lines, the Guardian (9/12/26) presented Rodríguez as a “a pragmatic, witty and intelligent workaholic,” unlike her “authoritarian” and “incompetent” predecessor in the presidential palace.

    Nevertheless, given the broad Beltway consensus for comprehensive regime change, it is unlikely that the Rodríguez administration’s subservience to Trump will secure any leeway in determining its political path forward, free from outside meddling—especially if, as is anticipated, the GOP lawmakers most likely to be impressed by such obsequiousness lose power in the US’s upcoming midterm elections (Axios, 9/23/26; Financial Times, 10/9/26).

    Please think of the corporations!

    Reuters: Trump's oil deal with Venezuela raises red flags for some major producers, sources say

    Reuters (9/1/26): ExxonMobil and ConocoPhillips “have repeatedly said that their requirements of legal certainty and contract sanctity ‌have not ⁠yet been met.”

    Alongside their exceptionalist expectations about “democracy,” legacy outlets also focus on those they consider the true victims of Trump’s neocolonial offensive in Venezuela: multinational oil corporations.

    According to Reuters (9/1/26), the recent oil deal “raises red flags for major producers,” who fear having their reputation sullied by being “seated at the same table with Betancourt,” as well as the prospect of the US government becoming a “competitor.”

    Bloomberg (8/30/26) raised concerns that the agreement “reprises [the] neocolonial past” of Venezuela’s oil industry. The warning stems not from apprehension that the Venezuelan people’s future is being determined by a foreign nation, but from fear that the US’s “out-sized power” might lead to “popular unrest.” This could create conditions for what the business mouthpiece views as a catastrophic outcome: the nationalization of foreign-owned oil assets.

    “The troubled history of Venezuela’s oil offers a cautionary tale,” Bloomberg’s Kevin Crowley and Patricia Garip wrote:

    The country was once dominated by US and European operators and was among the world’s largest producers. But assets owned by ExxonMobil Holdings Corps. and ConocoPhillips were seized and nationalized during political upheaval in the 2000s.

    Corporate media present companies that made massive profits in Venezuela for decades as victims, because the Chávez government wanted them to comply with new laws and accept minority stakes in joint ventures.

    The New York Times (9/1/26) complains that the two corporations “have spent years trying to get the country to repay them for their seized assets, with little success.” The statement conceals the fact that the Venezuelan government, when it enacted the 2007 decree imposing state majority in all Orinoco Oil Belt projects, offered to compensate ExxonMobil and ConocoPhillips for their transition to minority partners, or to buy out their assets altogether. However, both corporations rejected the offers in order to pursue international arbitration. The former has already recouped most of what it was granted, while the latter will eventually collect on a significant award.

    Despite the fact that Chevron, BP, Shell and other energy giants have signed deals in recent months taking advantage of the reformed hydrocarbon law (Venezuelanalysis, 9/3/26), pundits complain that ExxonMobil and ConocoPhillips remain “hesitant” (CBS, 8/31/26) and need to be “lured” (Reuters, 9/1/26). Still, the Western corporations are likely to return to the country with favorable deals (Reuters, 9/16/26).

    The victor and his spoils

    Al Jazeera: To the victor belong Venezuela’s spoils: Delcy Rodriguez’s UNGA about-face

    Belén Fernández (Al Jazeera, 9/24/26): “You’re not technically supposed to admit that you attacked a country just to get its oil.”

    Faced with strategic defeat in West Asia, Trump has clung to his Venezuela success, stating on multiple occasions that “to the victor belong the spoils,” in reference to the US hijacking the Venezuelan oil industry following the January 3 attacks and presidential kidnapping (Al Jazeera, 9/24/26; Guardian, 9/26/26).

    Furthermore, Trump has not been shy in boasting about the US winning a “war” against Venezuela (Financial Times, 9/18/26; New York Times, 6/26/26). Corporate journalists have rarely pointed out that this stance directly contradicts the administration’s official position that the kidnapping of Maduro and Flores was a “law enforcement” operation (New York Times, 1/6/26; PBS, 1/8/26) in order to justify bypassing congressional approval.

    The US president has likewise claimed to have recovered the costs of the military operation “many times over” (Al Jazeera, 3/3/26; Guardian, 6/28/26), a fact confirmed by Luigi Pisella, a business sector spokesperson with close ties to the acting Rodríguez administration (Venezuelanalysis, 8/10/26). Pisella stated that the US has retained $4.7 billion from the Venezuelan export revenues it controls to cover the costs of its military operation.

    In spite of their ostensible hostility to Trump, corporate outlets have historically been complicit with his Venezuela policies, from whitewashing a deadly sanctions program (FAIR.org, 6/13/22) to endorsing a military buildup over debunked “narcoterrorism” accusations (FAIR.org, 11/19/25). The New York Times and Washington Post went as far as to withhold information in order to not jeopardize the January 3 operation (FAIR.org, 1/13/26).

    Now, with a semi-colonial regime in place, the only concerns are about procedural transparency, democratic appearances and the well-being of multinational corporations. The Venezuelan people always get the short end of the stick.

    FAIR’s work is sustained by our generous contributors, who allow us to remain independent. Donate today to be a part of this important mission.

    Article by Ricardo Vaz republished from FAIR under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.

    Climate science denier Donald Trump confirms that he knows nothing about democracy and that more liquid gold is being secured according to his policy of global privateering.
    Climate science denier Donald Trump confirms that he knows nothing about democracy and that more liquid gold is being secured according to his policy of global privateering.

  • Navi Pillay Punctured Trump’s Overblown Ego in Six Words

    Spread the love

    Article by Steve Kaagan republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0).

    Chair of the Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and Israel, South African judge Navanethem “Navi” Pillay, gestures after a press conference in Geneva on September 16, 2025.
    (Photo by Fabrice Coffrini/ AFP via Getty Images)

    With one seemingly off-hand comment, Pillay framed a comparison between a cause she has fought for her whole life on behalf of her fellow human beings and the smallness of a man who is doing his best to unravel that work.

    Asked for her thoughts, after learning that the Nobel Committee had awarded her the 2026 Peace Prize, Navi Pillay added a one-liner to an appreciative response, “I’ll share the award with Trump.” The seemingly off-hand comment was anything but. Rather, it showed power and depth in its pointedness, irony, sarcasm, humor, wisdom, and humanity. Here, within the context in which it was made, is what I gleaned from the comment.

    The Nobel Committee’s rationale for awarding Pillay the prize included her dedicated efforts to defend international institutions and protect human rights. As a justice on the International Criminal Court, she had secured the indictment of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for crimes against humanity committed against the people of Gaza, which amounted to genocide.

    RECOMMENDED…

    US-POLITICS-TRUMP

    ‘By Annihilating Iran, We’ve Created Peace’: Trump’s Genocidal Rhetoric Takes Orwellian Turn in Time Interview

    Navi Pillay wins Nobel Peace Prize

    ‘Why Would You Need Courage to Speak the Truth?’: Navi Pillay, Who Led UN Report on Gaza Genocide, Wins Nobel Peace Prize

    Perhaps the most obvious connection she was making with the comment was the futile gesture of Maria Corina Machado, 2025 Peace Prize winner. Machado attempted to leverage Trump’s support for her movement’s claim to the presidency of Venezuela, by sharing her Peace Prize with him—a move the Nobel Committee prohibits. In effect, Pillay was saying, “Look what that got her, nothing.” The implication is that it is wrongheaded to believe that pandering to petty, aspiring dictators will yield anything positive for a righteous cause.

    Her use of humor highlighted its essential role in dressing down bullies who blatantly seek to dominate other human beings and trample on their inherent rights.

    At the same time, with her sarcastic jibe, she added emphasis to the cause for which she was awarded the prize, the defense of international institutions and protection of human rights. In citing Trump by name she implied that he is the “poster boy” for the very assault she has dedicated her life to countering, particularly through her work at the International Criminal Court and the United Nations Human Rights Commission.

    Additionally, her use of humor highlighted its essential role in dressing down bullies who blatantly seek to dominate other human beings and trample on their inherent rights. Through implicit ridicule she deftly punctured an overblown ego. Whether the target of the jibe gathered the intent or not was immaterial. Others would get the gist.

    Navi’s use of sarcasm also served another purpose. It eviscerated Trump’s assertions of power, making a distinction between real power that derives from righteous cause and mutual respect, and the semblance of power that comes from the fawning of sycophants. It also reinforced the absence of Trump’s moral standing as world leader and portrayed him appropriately as one for whom “I’ll scratch your back if you scratch mine” is his most notable achievement.

    With one seemingly off-hand comment, Navi Pillay framed a comparison between a cause she has fought for her whole life on behalf of her fellow human beings and the smallness of a man who is doing his best to unravel an endeavor which, for a quarter of a millennium, has served as a beacon to the world for the ennoblement of humanity. More power to her!

    Article by Steve Kaagan republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0).

    Orcas discuss Donald Trump and the killer apes' concept of democracy. Front Orca warns that Trump is crashing his country's economy and that everything he does he does for the fantastically wealthy.
    Orcas discuss Donald Trump and the killer apes’ concept of democracy. Front Orca warns that Trump is crashing his country’s economy and that everything he does he does for the fantastically wealthy.
    Climate science denier Donald Trump confirms that he knows nothing about democracy and that more liquid gold is being secured according to his policy of global privateering.
    Climate science denier Donald Trump confirms that he knows nothing about democracy and that more liquid gold is being secured according to his policy of global privateering.
    Donald Trump warns against following the Onaquietday.org blog, says that he's heard that she's a which with a black cat and a dangerous kitchen.
    Donald Trump warns against following the Onaquietday.org blog, says that he’s heard that she’s a which with a black cat and a dangerous kitchen.