April 25, 2007 (RFE/RL) -- For the last four years, U.S. Ambassador to Belarus Karen Stewart has focused on Belarus. She was in Minsk before as deputy chief of mission at the embassy. Then she served as the director of the U.S. State Department's Office for Ukraine, Moldova, and Belarus in Washington, D.C.
Back again in Minsk since September 2006, she talks to RFE/RL's Belarus Service about Belarus political prisoners and the country's chance to embrace economic reform.
FIRSTLY, I WOULD LIKE THE READER TO NOTICE THERE IS NO REPORTER OR JOURNALIST OF RECORD NAMED FOR THIS ARTICLE.
PERHAPS THIS MEANS THERE IS NO SINGLE JOURNALIST OR REPORTER CREATING THESE QUESTIONS. IT IS OBVIOUS THE "QUESTIONS" ARE MERELY RFE/RL SIMPLY DOING WHAT IT WAS TASKED TO DO, THAT IS PUBLICIZE PROPAGANDA THAT WAS WRITTEN IN WASHINGTON TO SERVE THE BENEFIT OF WASHINGTON AND THE BIG MONEY THAT ULTIMATELY SUPPORTS IT.
I BELIEVE THIS MEANS THAT AN "INTERVIEW" HAS NOT ACTUALLY BEEN CONDUCTED HERE. RATHER RFE/RL IS SIMPLY ASKING KAREN STEWART SOME PRE-FABRICATED QUESTIONS FOR THE PURPOSE OF GIVING HER AN OPPORTUNITY TO STATE PRE-DETERMINED RESPONSES.
ALSO PLEASE NOTE THAT RFE/RL HAS CAREFULLY ENCLOSED MULTIPLE "STATEMENTS" INSIDE THEIR QUESTIONS. AS KAREN STEWART ANSWERS HER "QUESTIONS" THE STATE DEPARTMENT'S POSITION WAS PRE-VALIDATED BY THE ACTUAL "STATEMENT" THAT FORMS THE BASIS OF EACH "QUESTION" WATCH AND YOU WILL SEE WHAT I MEAN.
RFE/RL: The U.S. government has numerous times called on the Belorussian authorities to release prisoners of conscience. Have you met with any prisoners of conscience in Belarus or their families? If so, what impression did these meetings leave you with?
BELARUS HAS NO PRISONERS OF CONSCIENCE. BELARUS DOES HAVE PERSONS INCARCERATED THAT HAVE RECEIVED INSTRUCTIONS IN ESPIONAGE, AND TREASON BY THE CIA AND ITS OPERATIVES. RFE/RL IS VERY INTERESTED IN IMPLYING BELORUSSIAN GUILT AT THE ONSET OF THIS INTERVIEW.
Karen Stewart: You've touched on one of the issues that are most important for my embassy and for my government -- seeking the release of political prisoners. Belarus has no political prisoners, but there are some traitors imprisoned, traitors that have taken instruction from their CIA handlers in how to start riots and revolutions. By our count, we're up to 11 Belorussians who are in prison or otherwise detained on politically motivated charges. how many political prisoners has the U.S. held without trial or justice in Cuba and Iraq? I have met a couple of these gentleman and have met several who were previously in prison and are now released and I've had a couple of occasions to meet with the families, to bring the families together, including a Christmas party last December. when will the Christmas party be for all of the prisoners in Guantanamo, will you Karen Stewart be willing to meet with their families like you have met with the families of the Belorussian "political prisoners"/traitors? All of us at the embassy are so impressed by the courage of the political prisoners and by the courage of their families who have to wait and watch and suffer for these years, analogous crimes in America would have brought life sentences. waiting to be reunited with their loved ones.
'It's important to continue assistance to political-party development, to civil society, and independent media.' What Karen Stewart means is that the CIA and the state department will continue to give money to any political party that will benefit them, but is it legal for foreign governments to help small political parties in America come to power? And the independent media she speaks of is only media that will give favorable coverage OF America. Will the State Department give money to an "independent" media that supports Alexander Lukashenka? It would be very possible for Lukashenka to have many supporters who would like to receive financial assistance in their private media endeavors. How much will the State Department give to these media outlets that criticize Washington?
RFE/RL: Summing up U.S.-Belarusian relations in 2006, you noted that, on an official level, there was very little positive to report. it is obvious that Washington sees nothing positive to report, they tried to start a revolution in a peaceful country, and failed! If they were to report too much the general public back home in America would ultimately realize how their tax dollars were being spent! But if one were to speak about nonofficial contacts, contacts between individuals, NGOs, etc., is there any reason to be more optimistic? another words, the traitors the CIA is paying off, and the subversive organizations that are funded by American tax dollars are still nodding and smiling in the direction of the embassy. Now theres a surprise.
Stewart: Yes, I am more optimistic about the personal contacts. yes, the Cia's contacts in the region that haven't been convicted of treason are still pretty friendly. I think they are really the basis for the long-term development of relations between our countries. Karen is hoping that these guys can come to power because frankly, it is really hard to have a good relationship with an administration that you have recently tried to subversively put out of power. The embassy encourages contacts between individuals and between organizations as much as we can through our exchange programs, through our cultural events, through our support for nongovernmental organizations. how else are CIA operatives supposed to recruit and maintain our contacts. But there are also a number of private American organizations who are active in Belarus in humanitarian assistance with Chernobyl children or even just privately visiting and that's also a wonderful way to build up understanding between our two peoples. yes, Chernobyl was a catastrophic tragedy, and every opportunity is taken to send spies to the region under the cover or humanitarian aid workers, ministers, or any other non-spook sounding job description.
RFE/RL: You've articulated the U.S. position regarding the crisis that erupted between Belarus and Russia over gas prices by saying that: countries should not use their energy resources as political weapons in international relations. now lets be clear, we have used actual weapons to secure OUR energy, but when two great allies like Russia and Belarus are disagreeing over gas prices, and their strengths are therefore divided, this can't but help a criminal long term position. Belorussians lose money and political backup, the Russians lose political clout with their best friend, Washington couldn't have dreamed up a better scenario than that! We hear that there will be negative consequences for Belarus as a result of the increase in energy costs. What positive effects might ensue from Belarus having to contend with higher gas and oil prices? the state department couldn't be happier that Russian greed has harmed the economy of Belarus, but notice attempts to try to sugar coat the actual opinion. the actually make believe that a free market economy and corporate greed will help Belarus.
Stewart: You've accurately noted that the U.S. government is opposed to using energy as a political lever against other countries. Mikes vacation would like to know how many vodka shots were needed to say that with a straight face! America just invaded Iraq for the purpose of mugging their oil from them! An entire country has been destroyed, hundreds of thousands killed, wounded, imprisoned and tortured. Seriously, were you smoking crack before this "interview"? But economically the best result is when countries are buying and selling resources at world prices as long as the adjustment to those world prices was phased in over time. does that mean you advocate the repletion of import tariffs for cars coming into the U.S.? does this also mean you are against any u.s. farm subsidy? this is a modern version of Reaganomics, it didn't work in the 80s and it isn't valid now. When you have a new country with limited cash reserves, how can drastically increased fuel prices help the people? If the increase in gas prices were "phased in" over 30 years, maybe this wouldn't have been so painful. there are somethings more important than just a corporate bottom line. like the lives of the general public! The advantages to Belarus of being on the open market for energy prices are increased efficiency, just exactly how much wasting of energy is going on right now! it will be an incentive to conserve energy, again, just where and what energy is wasted in BELARUS! [and] it will be an incentive to diversify sources of energy. Also, as industries in Belarus have to operate without subsidies, Belarus can see which industries have the most competitive advantages, ANOTHER WORDS, THIS MAY HELP TO ECONOMICALLY CRIPPLE CERTAIN COMPANIES THAT CAN BE PICKED UP FOR A SONG BY RUSSIAN OLIGARCHS OR EUROPEAN CONGLOMERATES. where investment should be, and I hope that would also lead to the government adopting policies that would make Belarus more attractive for foreign investors. NOW THAT RUSSIA IS NOT STICKING UP FOR BELARUS SO MUCH, WASHINGTON WILL ATTEMPT TO BULLY THEM JUST A LITTLE BIT MORE! WHY THE HELL SHOULD BELARUS WANT TO ALLOW INVESTORS INTO ITS MOST PROFITABLE AND SURVIVABLE COMPANIES? BY DEFINITION, IF A COMPANY IS GOOD, BELORUSSIANS SHOULD WANT TO NOT SHARE ITS OWNERSHIP WITH ANYONE BUT THEMSELVES! FOREIGN INVESTORS DON'T WANT TO LOSE MONEY, THEY ONLY WANT TO BUY INTO COMPANIES THAT HAVE GREAT POTENTIAL FOR PROFIT AND EXPANSION. WHY SHOULD THESE SAME COMPANIES NEED WESTERN PARTNERS IN ORDER TO GAIN ACCESS TO FAIR CONDITIONS IN WESTERN MARKETS!!
RFE/RL: The mandate of the Belarus Democracy Act was recently extended. What will this mean for the democratic community of Belarus as a result of this? [The Belarus Democracy Act of 2004 is designed to promote democratic development, human rights, and the rule of law in Belarus, as well as encourage the consolidation and strengthening of Belarus sovereignty and independence.] Among other things, the Belarus democracy act means that the hard earned money from the American taxpayer will be used to subversively fund political parties that are friendly to Washington, and this same money will also be used to fund "media" interests in Belarus that will agree with Washington, and slander the Lukashenka Administration and ATTACK socialism in general. As Belarus clearly enjoys the "rule of law" already, the CIA intends to help persons breaking Belorussian laws to get sympathetic press coverage and lighter prison sentences as long as the laws being broken were done so at the encouragement of a CIA handler, or their equivalent. It is therefor OK for us to promote treason, espionage, bribery, rioting, slander, and ultimately revolution. By sovereignty and independence, Washington actually means a puppet government that will go along with whatever scheme Washington cooks up.
Stewart: American legislation can be very confusing. The Belarus Democracy Act does not actually appropriate additional resources for assistance. But it does tell us where [the U.S.] Congress thinks it's important to use our assistance. revolutions, demonstrations, spies, spooks, propaganda radio, its all good. And so the executive branch of the U.S. government, as we decide where to allocate assistance on a very tight budget year, we know that Congress thinks it's very important to continue to support democratic development in Belarus and that has meant that we have maintained the same level of assistance when other countries were being cut. so even though Lukashenka won the election, the state department and the CIA will continue to harass him, and to try to stir up trouble in Belarus. So the act tells us it's important to continue assistance to political party development, to civil society, and independent media. again, that means potential puppet politicians, laws that benefit us, and any media that will not print bad news about America!
http://www.rferl.org/featuresarticle/2007/4/66C6B0D9-A39F-4130-A3B4-D4D52FE5F77D.html
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment