Secretary Pompeo Is Proving That America's gov is Behind Recent Protests & Coups "

Secretary Pompeo has being taking to the twitter to show support among the so called Freedom and Democratic protests in Iran and Coups in Bolivia.
America's gov had being know for years to spend millions and billions into funding protest movements and protest groups with the help of Soros NED groups simiarl ones that have brought down Serbian gov in 2000 and Ukrainian gov in 2014.

Pompeo Pushes Support for protests in Venezuela
Source

Venezuelans continue to take to the streets, as they have day after day, in city after city, to demand their basic needs be met. Maduro’s illegitimate corrupt regime attempts to silence them, but as the world saw in #Bolivia, the will of the people will always prevail.

On Iran Secretary Pompeo has once again claimed that Iran is the only one in the middle east region that destabilizing the region with its activities and should abandon its revolutionary posture.

Why is Secretary Pompeo clamming that Iran is the only one the middle east region that destabilizing the region? is Iran somehow responsible for the destabilization of Iraq or Libya?

Its rather ironic that regime change bots quickly are formed on Secretary Pompeo's twitter page demanding for a regime change.

Source

The Iranian people will enjoy a better future when their government begins to respect basic human rights, abandons its revolutionary posture and its destabilizing activities in the region, and simply behaves like a normal nation. The choice is with the regime. #IranProtests

Ineteresting timing for these so called democratic protests.

The US and Iran in Iraq: Protestors take over the streets, demanding government reforms “or else”…

During the last decade, whenever an Iraqi government was about to be formed or the election of a Speaker, a President and a Prime Minister is underway, US and Iranian envoys become very active, with the goal of influencing the elections and the formation of political coalitions and bringing “friendly” candidates to power. Iran is demonised by the US administration and mainstream media for its success in bringing to power leaders friendly to itself in Iraq. Iran also has robust ideological support among the security forces, but the mass media in the west seem entirely opposed to Iran. The US-Iran battle has heated up since the 25th of October, when protestors invaded the streets of different provinces, making legitimate demands for amendments to the constitution, serious political reforms, the improvement of basic life support needs and an end to the long-standing corruption. Grand Ayatollah Sayyed Ali al-Sistani has said clearly that these justified demands should not become pretexts for international (US) and regional (Iran) powers to intervene in Iraq. So what does the future hold for Iran and the US in Iraq?

Al-Hashd al-Shaabi, the ‘Popular Mobilisation Forces’ that represent the favourite target of the US and mainstream media as “Iranian proxies”, stayed off the streets and kept their men in the barracks.

This move was meant to neutralise any accusation of direct Iranian involvement in oppressing protestors in Iraq. Some protestors chant “Iran out, Baghdad remains free” while others burn the US and Israeli flags. Neither side completely represents the real demands for reform requested by the population. However, the anti-Iran acts in Iraq are only sporadic but highlighted by the mainstream media for propaganda purposes.

All about the oil. And US still steals Oil from Iraq.
The US gov is demanding Iraq that it stops buying electricity from Iran. The American gov doenst care about the Iraqi people or their wants.

These analysts – who oppose US withdrawal from Iraq – think Iraqis believe the US wants Iraq to be sovereign, stable and democratic.

In fact, the US controls Iraqi oil and only grudgingly accepts Baghdad’s necessary relationship with Iran. Indeed, the US wants to control Iraq and prevent officials from dealing with Iran, Russia or China, as President Barham Saleh has said. The US wants Iraqis to accept being the target of the Israeli air force, and to allow Israel to assassinate Iraqi commanders. The US wants Iraq to stop buying electricity from Iran – that could trigger a real revolution if the southern cities of Iraq are deprived of electricity – and close its borders with Syria. That is what sovereignty means for the US think tank analysts.

In fact, the US controls Iraqi oil and only grudgingly accepts Baghdad’s necessary relationship with Iran. Indeed, the US wants to control Iraq and prevent officials from dealing with Iran, Russia or China

Now ask yourselves what America is doing in the middle east to Iraqis? how is this any normal nation to behave like a normal nation while threatening and making demands at the expense of their own people?

a reply to: ChefFox

I would suggest folks read Manifest destiny by William F Engdahl, he goes into all the NGO and Soros and the whole cabal.
www.youtube.com...

Deja Vu?
Or a scratched 45 vinyl ?
regime overthrow...
regime overthrow...
regime overthrow...

Time to get some new media.
Or , better yet , step up to DVD.
This is the 21st Century.

Some "regimes" are oppressive and deserve to be overthrown.
Or , do you support oppressive regimes ?

Have you read up on the history of Hong Kong yet like I recommended ?

a reply to: Gothmog

Some "regimes" are oppressive and deserve to be overthrown. Or , do you support oppressive regimes ?

So why arent there any protests yet agaisnt the oppressive regime like the ones in Qatar or Saudi Arabia yet? who are killing innocent civilians in Yemen?

dont claim that the people in Qatar and Saudi Arabia actually love their oppressive regime state that has being killing gays and arresting women for removing their religious clothing.

You are just now figuring out that the US is doing this? Overthrowing governments has been going on since WWII.

a reply to: ChefFox

I support them too, am I behind it?

Question, do you believe the people of HK should be under the tyranny of China when they were promised they would not be?

Its, like, what we do....

a reply to: ChefFox

Why is Secretary Pompeo clamming that Iran is the only one the middle east region that destabilizing the region? is Iran somehow responsible for the destabilization of Iraq or Libya?

Because it pleases America's friends in the region who are hostile towards Iran , nobody has destabalised Iraq more than the coalition that invaded it and Libya serves as a lesson to others who trust the word of the West.

Given their past history I'd be surprised if the usual suspects aren't stirring the pot in Iran.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: ChefFox

I support them too, am I behind it?

Question, do you believe the people of HK should be under the tyranny of China when they were promised they would not be?

Who made that promise? One question if China had not turned communist would they of honored the 1897 treaty? Or lets look at it this way. Your neighbor through coruerion takes part of your property and then say you can have it back in 20 years. In those twenty years. In the mean time you become a what ever ideology and the person who took your land then say opps your going to have to wait another 20 years and then we will talk about it again. would you be t-off? I know I would be.

originally posted by: PhilbertDezineck

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: ChefFox

I support them too, am I behind it?

Question, do you believe the people of HK should be under the tyranny of China when they were promised they would not be?

Who made that promise? One question if China had not turned communist would they of honored the 1897 treaty? Or lets look at it this way. Your neighbor through coruerion takes part of your property and then say you can have it back in 20 years. In those twenty years. In the mean time you become a what ever ideology and the person who took your land then say opps your going to have to wait another 20 years and then we will talk about it again. would you be t-off? I know I would be.

China did. One country 2 systems. Instead China forced HK to accept puppet leaders that had to bow to China and do only what China said. China made a promise, then broke it.

a reply to: OccamsRazor04
HK was stolen from China by England through pressure over the opium wars.
then they did not like China going comunist and they attached more string to the deal.
I would not blame China at all if a ww3 started and they nuked England.

So we are back to the omni present bogyman of the US sponsoring unrest the world over?

We cant ever manage to find the bad guys till after they do something bad yet our intel agencies can manage numerous insurrections the world over without giving up any hard evidence they are doing it...

originally posted by: PhilbertDezineck

I would not blame China at all if a ww3 started and they nuked England.

Am I wrong in thinking that is a bit extreme?

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: PhilbertDezineck

I would not blame China at all if a ww3 started and they nuked England.

Am I wrong in thinking that is a bit extreme?

Not really during a world war it seems like old grudges get settled, and we all agree it would be a limited nuke war so get rid of the one who's screwed you first.
I would imagine there a lot of countries who secretly hold grudges against the empire that the sun never sets on. If and when it goes ww3 it will truly be a world war not a limited European theater, small countries have a lot of grudges to settle too.

WAIT...isnt that interfering with the elections of other countries? dang

The US has been doing that for at least fifty years, it is not a new thing. Same dinner entree, different restaurant.

originally posted by: PhilbertDezineck
a reply to: OccamsRazor04
HK was stolen from China by England through pressure over the opium wars.
then they did not like China going comunist and they attached more string to the deal.
I would not blame China at all if a ww3 started and they nuked England.

Exctly it was stolen by the British Empire which ironical was also being protected by American forces at that time i do remember reading history about the bloody parts on it. The British empire killed thousands of thousands of Chinese just to keep hold onto the Hong Kong.

Before the British empire Hong Kong never had a boys only school system. That system was only introduced by the British empire among other British things.

The Chinese own HK through a bloody war back then only after the British withdrawn of their empire and forces did the agree to a somewhat treaty.

originally posted by: roadgravel
You are just now figuring out that the US is doing this? Overthrowing governments has been going on since WWII.

originally posted by: rickymouse
The US has been doing that for at least fifty years, it is not a new thing. Same dinner entree, different restaurant.

You two have seriously underestimated how long it has been going on.

Smedley Butler on Interventionism
-- Excerpt from a speech delivered in 1933, by Major General Smedley Butler, USMC.
War is just a racket. A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems to the majority of people. Only a small inside group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few at the expense of the masses.
I believe in adequate defense at the coastline and nothing else. If a nation comes over here to fight, then we'll fight. The trouble with America is that when the dollar only earns 6 percent over here, then it gets restless and goes overseas to get 100 percent. Then the flag follows the dollar and the soldiers follow the flag.
I wouldn't go to war again as I have done to protect some lousy investment of the bankers. There are only two things we should fight for. One is the defense of our homes and the other is the Bill of Rights. War for any other reason is simply a racket.
There isn't a trick in the racketeering bag that the military gang is blind to. It has its "finger men" to point out enemies, its "muscle men" to destroy enemies, its "brain men" to plan war preparations, and a "Big Boss" Super-Nationalistic-Capitalism.
It may seem odd for me, a military man to adopt such a comparison. Truthfulness compels me to. I spent thirty- three years and four months in active military service as a member of this country's most agile military force, the Marine Corps. I served in all commissioned ranks from Second Lieutenant to Major-General. And during that period, I spent most of my time being a high class muscle- man for Big Business, for Wall Street and for the Bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism.
I suspected I was just part of a racket at the time. Now I am sure of it. Like all the members of the military profession, I never had a thought of my own until I left the service. My mental faculties remained in suspended animation while I obeyed the orders of higher-ups. This is typical with everyone in the military service.
I helped make Mexico, especially Tampico, safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefits of Wall Street. The record of racketeering is long. I helped purify Nicaragua for the international banking house of Brown Brothers in 1909-1912 (where have I heard that name before?). I brought light to the Dominican Republic for American sugar interests in 1916. In China I helped to see to it that Standard Oil went its way unmolested.
During those years, I had, as the boys in the back room would say, a swell racket. Looking back on it, I feel that I could have given Al Capone a few hints. The best he could do was to operate his racket in three districts. I operated on three continents.