What's new

Ex-US ambassador "plotting" the overthrowing of Duterte

Cossack25A1

SENIOR MEMBER
Joined
Jul 11, 2014
Messages
2,566
Reaction score
2
Country
Philippines
Location
Philippines
US ex-envoy plotting Duterte fall – source
By DR. DANTE A. ANG
December 27, 2016

LISBON, PORTUGAL: The Philippines may be in for another rough ride in 2017.

Not only did former United States Ambassador Philip Goldberg leave the Philippines with a legacy of fractured relations between the two countries, he allegedly left behind a “blueprint to undermine Duterte,” a strategic recommendation ostensibly to the State Department for the ultimate removal of President Rodrigo Roa Duterte from office, according to a highly placed source. It is not clear, however, if the State Department in Washington DC had given its imprimatur to the recommendation by its former ambassador to the Philippines.

gl1

A document received over the weekend by The Manila Times from that source said Goldberg had outlined a list of “strategies” to undermine President Duterte and called for his eventual ouster. The blueprint gave a
Goldberg also encourages support for the opposition through aids and grants, sowing discontent among the Duterte supporters and cultivating the cleavage between the congressmen and the senators over the Charter Change issue.

In brief, the plan calls on the US government to employ a combination of socio-economic-political-diplomatic moves against Duterte “to bring him to his knees and eventually remove him from office.”
The paper outlined the Ambassador’s “strategies to be employed” such as:

Political and economic isolation of the Philippines in the region by engaging the leaders of Japan, Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos and by “highlighting the basic question of the risk of doing business in the Philippines.”
Enhanced US military relationship with members of the Asean community except the Philippines.

Blackmail neighboring countries so they would turn against Duterte by reducing trade with the Philippines in favor of Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos.

Deepen ties with Philippine officials (the opposition), the police/military and leaders in the region who share the US concerns over Duterte.

Track corruption cases and highlight the failures of Duterte.

“Focus on the needs of the people at the grassroots and assist the opposition groups in delivering those failed promises through USAID – such as alleviation of poverty, housing and education – to name a few.”

Utilize the media to expose the truth about Duterte – “his false vision for the Filipino people and his dangerous international relationships with China and Russia.”

Goldberg also recommends, “change the political landscape by dividing the core leadership of Duterte” by “sowing discontent among (his) partymates.” He observed that some of the President’s allies are privately becoming concerned over his shift in foreign policy and the twist in the character of his economic and social agenda that veers closely toward the Left.

The former US Ambassador underscores the need to stoke the fire between the “defenders of the rule of law and Duterte’s Leftist group” by highlighting the demands of the Left to free all political prisoners in the country even before a formal peace agreement could be signed between the government and the CPP/NDF/NPA, and an end to US military presence in the Philippines.

It is not clear from what the source said how Goldberg would go about weakening the Philippine currency, but it states that such a scenario would lead to inflation (and would raise prices of food and other commodities). (Author’s note: He was wrong, though, in predicting that a weak peso would make our agriculture less competitive. On the contrary, a weak peso would help strengthen our exports and make our products more competitive in the global market.)

The paper also quoted Goldberg’s recommendation to “capitalize on a possible stalemate” as a possible course of action if and when the Lower House marginalizes the Senate on the voting on Charter Change. The Lower House has already publicly declared that both the House and the Senate should vote as one and not separately, as espoused by the Senators. Voting as one would, as some senators say, disenfranchise them given the sheer number of the congressmen – 240 representatives versus 24 Senators.

There will be fallout as a result of the Charter Change stalemate. Many legislators will break away from the administration as a consequence, Goldberg predicts.

In his observation, the US former envoy to the Philippines said that while President Duterte has been successful in earning the support of the people for his campaign against drugs, his political and economic program has failed to deliver the desired results. The US government, he said, should try “to understand how Duterte thinks” and what his next moves would be.

“With growing concern about the country’s security situation and economic discontent, the pressure is on Duterte to deliver concrete results,” the paper wrote, quoting Goldberg. “In this increasingly sensitive environment – a country susceptible to favor political disruption, our approach must be measured. Opposition actors across the political spectrum look at us (US) for cues, and our (US) influence is much greater than our footprint.”

Goldberg also advises “restraint in expressing public support for former President Fidel Valdez Ramos and Vice President Leni Robredo, as well as other opposition leaders “so as not to alarm the Duterte administration of an impending “destabilization or a coup.” He admits, however, that the “operation (coup) is obscured with difficulties.”

Two other options were presented by Goldberg, according to the paper: The rift among the Duterte supporters should be exploited, or assist the “Robredo-led opposition groups (to include the Catholic Church and other religious groups, business sectors, civil society groups and the youth) in addressing the international community regarding the shift in foreign policy issue, restoration of democracy and the protection of human rights through constitutional means.”

Goldberg predicts a worsening of the US-Philippine relations, more so on the issue of the US military presence in the Philippines, more particularly during the last two years of the Duterte administration.

The paper also wrote that the former US ambassador to the Philippines wanted to “know the views of Sen. Bongbong Marcos on a variety of issues such as: the Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement (EDCA), China, Human Rights and the US-PH relations.”

-----
Link -> http://www.manilatimes.net/us-ex-envoy-plotting-duterte-fall-source/303868/
-----


I don't like Duterte's approach to China while "kicking" the US, but overthrowing him is a really bad idea.
 
. . . . . . . . .
| Thu Dec 29, 2016 | 7:27am EST | Reuters
Philippines' Duterte calls U.S. envoys 'spies' over alleged ouster plot

By Martin Petty and Neil Jerome Morales | MANILA

Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte derided U.S. ambassadors as "spies" on Thursday, responding to a media report of an alleged American plot to destabilize his government, a job he said some envoys were appointed solely to do.

The volatile former mayor said though had received no intelligence reports of any U.S. plan to undermine his presidency, he believed most ambassadors were in cahoots with the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), which had a track record of meddling in other countries' affairs.

The Manila Times newspaper on Tuesday reported a former U.S. ambassador to the Philippines had prepared a "blueprint to undermine Duterte", citing a document it had received from a what it described as a "highly placed source".

The U.S. State Department has described the allegations as "false".

"Most of the ambassadors of the United States, but not all, are not really professional ambassadors. At the same time they are spying, they are connected with the CIA," Duterte said in a television interview.

"The ambassador of a country is the number one spy. But there are ambassador of the U.S., their forte is really to undermine governments."

Duterte has made no secret of his grudge against the United States and has a particular disdain for President Barack Obama, who he has told to "go to hell", mostly over Obama's concern s about Duterte's deadly drugs war.

He has made repeated threats to abrogate security treaties with the United States and vented almost daily about U.S. "hypocrisy" and "bullying".

On Thursday, Duterte said he would honor those treaties and that he liked U.S. President-elect Donald Trump and was keenly waiting for him to take office.

The Manila Times said Philip Goldberg, who recently ended his term as ambassador in Manila, had outlined various strategies over an 18-month period to destabilize Duterte.

That would include supporting the opposition and co-opting the media, the military, neighboring countries and senior government officials to turn against Duterte and isolate him economically.

Duterte has a dislike for Goldberg and has previously called him a "gay son of a bitch". He referred to him in three successive live television interviews on Thursday, calling him Washington's "superstar" with a track record of trying to undermine governments.

Goldberg was expelled as ambassador to Bolivia in 2008 by then President Evo Morales, who accused him of siding with his rightist opponents and of orchestrating street protests.

The United States rejected that and said his expulsion was a "grave error".

"Maybe he will deny it but it's not good," Duterte said of Goldberg's alleged blueprint, which he said was plausible because of Goldberg's history.

He added: "You might be able to oust me, but I will give you a bloody nose."

Attempts by Reuters to reach Goldberg this week were unsuccessful.

U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for East Asia and the Pacific Daniel Russel dismissed the Manila Times report.

"No such blueprint exists," he said in a statement on Tuesday.

"The United States respects the sovereignty of the Philippines and the democratic choices made by the Philippine people."


(Editing by Robert Birsel)
 
. .
are you sure? I don't want a nuclear powered Philippine. And I'm sure many Chinese friends here will agree with me.
We can supply a missile with a kill switch just like USA does to UK. Cannot be used against Chinese targets. The only problem would be the range. It can probably only hit Guam and Hawaii.
 
.
Well this plans and action of ex US ambassador and Aquino (yellow party) aided by the US selfish motives and twisted media are not enough to topple President Duterte. No amount of planning and twisted would bring about destabilization. Plotters have to have an armed component to pursue their sabotage and destabilization plans. That is why these plotters need the corrupt sector of the military and police, the army of drug lords, the criminals and the US CIA to join in their cause to topple Duterte.



Duterte to groups planning to oust him: ‘You’ll get a bloody nose’
December 29, 2016
By RUTH ABBEY GITA

“YOU’LL get a bloody nose.”

This was the stern warning of President Rodrigo Duterte to individuals who are planning to remove him from office.

In an exclusive interview with CNN Philippines, the President said he would not let anyone oust him because it was his “destiny” to become the chief executive and serve the Filipino people.

“I’m trying to communicate with the guys who want to remove me [from office]. To say that you will oust me, probably, I’ll give you a good fight. You’ll get a bloody nose,” Duterte said.

Duterte earlier accused the opposition Liberal Party that it allegedly has sinister plot to impeach him to favor its stalwart, Vice President Leni Robredo.

And just recently, an exclusive newspaper report by the Manila Times said that former United States Ambassador to the Philippines Philip Goldberg allegedly outlined a list of “strategies” to destabilize the Duterte administration and eventually oust him.

Duterte, however, merely shrugged off Golberg’s supposed blueprint, saying that most of the ambassadors are “not really professional” and that “their forte is really to undermine.”

“This is my message to the United States and everybody, you know, I feel that I have to honor the contract with the people,” he said. “Perhaps, the Lord really wanted to put me here [in the presidency]. It’s destiny. Whatever God wants to give me, I will accept it.

Asked then if he considered the alleged ouster plot against him seriously, the President said, “In the sense that maybe looking at its possibility, yes, but when you say fear of being ousted, [no]. In return, you should also be prepared.” (Sunnex)

Read more: http://www.sunstar.com.ph/manila/lo...lanning-oust-him-youll-get-bloody-nose-517382
 
.
Well this plans and action of ex US ambassador and Aquino (yellow party) aided by the US selfish motives and twisted media are not enough to topple President Duterte. No amount of planning and twisted would bring about destabilization. Plotters have to have an armed component to pursue their sabotage and destabilization plans. That is why these plotters need the corrupt sector of the military and police, the army of drug lords, the criminals and the US CIA to join in their cause to topple Duterte.



Duterte to groups planning to oust him: ‘You’ll get a bloody nose’
December 29, 2016
By RUTH ABBEY GITA

“YOU’LL get a bloody nose.”

This was the stern warning of President Rodrigo Duterte to individuals who are planning to remove him from office.

In an exclusive interview with CNN Philippines, the President said he would not let anyone oust him because it was his “destiny” to become the chief executive and serve the Filipino people.

“I’m trying to communicate with the guys who want to remove me [from office]. To say that you will oust me, probably, I’ll give you a good fight. You’ll get a bloody nose,” Duterte said.

Duterte earlier accused the opposition Liberal Party that it allegedly has sinister plot to impeach him to favor its stalwart, Vice President Leni Robredo.

And just recently, an exclusive newspaper report by the Manila Times said that former United States Ambassador to the Philippines Philip Goldberg allegedly outlined a list of “strategies” to destabilize the Duterte administration and eventually oust him.

Duterte, however, merely shrugged off Golberg’s supposed blueprint, saying that most of the ambassadors are “not really professional” and that “their forte is really to undermine.”

“This is my message to the United States and everybody, you know, I feel that I have to honor the contract with the people,” he said. “Perhaps, the Lord really wanted to put me here [in the presidency]. It’s destiny. Whatever God wants to give me, I will accept it.

Asked then if he considered the alleged ouster plot against him seriously, the President said, “In the sense that maybe looking at its possibility, yes, but when you say fear of being ousted, [no]. In return, you should also be prepared.” (Sunnex)

Read more: http://www.sunstar.com.ph/manila/lo...lanning-oust-him-youll-get-bloody-nose-517382
China should offer him PLA as personal guard against CIA sponsored assassination attempts.
 
.
Here is a PAPER which showed that between 1946 and 2000, the US intervened in foreign elections "only" 81 times, of which 65% were covert.

"Partisan Electoral Interventions by the Great powers: Introducing the PEIG Dataset"


By Dov H. Levin, Carnegie Mellon University, USA
Conflict Management and Peace Science (2016)

Abstract
Recent studies indicate that partisan electoral interventions, a situation where a foreign power tries to determine the election results in another country, can have significant effects on the election results in the targeted country as well as other important influences. Nevertheless, research on this topic has been hindered by a lack of systematic data of electoral interventions. In this article, I introduce the Partisan Electoral Intervention by the Great Powers dataset (PEIG), which provides data on all such interventions by the US and the USSR/Russia between 1946 and 2000. After describing the dataset construction process, I note some interesting patterns in the data, a few of which stand in contrast to claims made about electoral interventions in the public sphere and give an example of PEIG’s utility. I then describe some applications of PEIG for research on electoral interventions in particular and for peace research in general.

The 19-page PDF (735 kb): http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0738894216661190


* * * * * * *

A TIMELINE OF CIA ATROCITIES

By Steve Kangas
http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/CIAtimeline.html

The following timeline describes just a few of the hundreds of atrocities and crimes committed by the CIA. (1)

CIA operations follow the same recurring script. First, American business interests abroad are threatened by a popular or democratically elected leader. The people support their leader because he intends to conduct land reform, strengthen unions, redistribute wealth, nationalize foreign-owned industry, and regulate business to protect workers, consumers and the environment. So, on behalf of American business, and often with their help, the CIA mobilizes the opposition. First it identifies right-wing groups within the country (usually the military), and offers them a deal: "We'll put you in power if you maintain a favorable business climate for us." The Agency then hires, trains and works with them to overthrow the existing government (usually a democracy). It uses every trick in the book: propaganda, stuffed ballot boxes, purchased elections, extortion, blackmail, sexual intrigue, false stories about opponents in the local media, infiltration and disruption of opposing political parties, kidnapping, beating, torture, intimidation, economic sabotage, death squads and even assassination. These efforts culminate in a military coup, which installs a right-wing dictator. The CIA trains the dictator’s security apparatus to crack down on the traditional enemies of big business, using interrogation, torture and murder. The victims are said to be "communists," but almost always they are just peasants, liberals, moderates, labor union leaders, political opponents and advocates of free speech and democracy. Widespread human rights abuses follow.

This scenario has been repeated so many times that the CIA actually teaches it in a special school, the notorious "School of the Americas." (It opened in Panama but later moved to Fort Benning, Georgia.) Critics have nicknamed it the "School of the Dictators" and "School of the Assassins." Here, the CIA trains Latin American military officers how to conduct coups, including the use of interrogation, torture and murder.

The Association for Responsible Dissent estimates that by 1987, 6 million people had died as a result of CIA covert operations. (2) Former State Department official William Blum correctly calls this an "American Holocaust."

The CIA justifies these actions as part of its war against communism. But most coups do not involve a communist threat. Unlucky nations are targeted for a wide variety of reasons: not only threats to American business interests abroad, but also liberal or even moderate social reforms, political instability, the unwillingness of a leader to carry out Washington’s dictates, and declarations of neutrality in the Cold War. Indeed, nothing has infuriated CIA Directors quite like a nation’s desire to stay out of the Cold War.

The ironic thing about all this intervention is that it frequently fails to achieve American objectives. Often the newly installed dictator grows comfortable with the security apparatus the CIA has built for him. He becomes an expert at running a police state. And because the dictator knows he cannot be overthrown, he becomes independent and defiant of Washington's will. The CIA then finds it cannot overthrow him, because the police and military are under the dictator's control, afraid to cooperate with American spies for fear of torture and execution. The only two options for the U.S at this point are impotence or war. Examples of this "boomerang effect" include the Shah of Iran, General Noriega and Saddam Hussein. The boomerang effect also explains why the CIA has proven highly successful at overthrowing democracies, but a wretched failure at overthrowing dictatorships.

The following timeline should confirm that the CIA as we know it should be abolished and replaced by a true information-gathering and analysis organization. The CIA cannot be reformed — it is institutionally and culturally corrupt.

[... a long list of actions ...]


EPILOGUE

In a speech before the CIA celebrating its 50th anniversary, President Clinton said: "By necessity, the American people will never know the full story of your courage."

Clinton’s is a common defense of the CIA: namely, the American people should stop criticizing the CIA because they don’t know what it really does. This, of course, is the heart of the problem in the first place. An agency that is above criticism is also above moral behavior and reform. Its secrecy and lack of accountability allows its corruption to grow unchecked.

Furthermore, Clinton’s statement is simply untrue. The history of the agency is growing painfully clear, especially with the declassification of historical CIA documents. We may not know the details of specific operations, but we do know, quite well, the general behavior of the CIA. These facts began emerging nearly two decades ago at an ever-quickening pace. Today we have a remarkably accurate and consistent picture, repeated in country after country, and verified from countless different directions.

The CIA’s response to this growing knowledge and criticism follows a typical historical pattern. (Indeed, there are remarkable parallels to the Medieval Church’s fight against the Scientific Revolution.) The first journalists and writers to reveal the CIA’s criminal behavior were harassed and censored if they were American writers, and tortured and murdered if they were foreigners. (See Philip Agee’s On the Run for an example of early harassment.) However, over the last two decades the tide of evidence has become overwhelming, and the CIA has found that it does not have enough fingers to plug every hole in the dike. This is especially true in the age of the Internet, where information flows freely among millions of people. Since censorship is impossible, the Agency must now defend itself with apologetics. Clinton’s "Americans will never know" defense is a prime example.

Another common apologetic is that "the world is filled with unsavory characters, and we must deal with them if we are to protect American interests at all." There are two things wrong with this. First, it ignores the fact that the CIA has regularly spurned alliances with defenders of democracy, free speech and human rights, preferring the company of military dictators and tyrants. The CIA had moral options available to them, but did not take them.

Second, this argument begs several questions. The first is: "Which American interests?" The CIA has courted right-wing dictators because they allow wealthy Americans to exploit the country’s cheap labor and resources. But poor and middle-class Americans pay the price whenever they fight the wars that stem from CIA actions, from Vietnam to the Gulf War to Panama. The second begged question is: "Why should American interests come at the expense of other peoples’ human rights?"

The CIA should be abolished, its leadership dismissed and its relevant members tried for crimes against humanity. Our intelligence community should be rebuilt from the ground up, with the goal of collecting and analyzing information. As for covert action, there are two moral options. The first one is to eliminate covert action completely. But this gives jitters to people worried about the Adolf Hitlers of the world. So a second option is that we can place covert action under extensive and true democratic oversight. For example, a bipartisan Congressional Committee of 40 members could review and veto all aspects of CIA operations upon a majority or super-majority vote. Which of these two options is best may be the subject of debate, but one thing is clear: like dictatorship, like monarchy, unaccountable covert operations should die like the dinosaurs they are.


Endnotes:

1. All history concerning CIA intervention in foreign countries is summarized from William Blum’s encyclopedic work, Killing Hope: U.S. Military and CIA Interventions since World War II (Monroe, Maine: Common Courage Press, 1995). Sources for domestic CIA operations come from Jonathan Vankin and John Whalen’s The 60 Greatest Conspiracies of All Time (Secaucus, N.J.: Citadel Press, 1997).

2. Coleman McCarthy, "The Consequences of Covert Tactics" Washington Post, December 13, 1987.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom