Interference: The Anatomy of "Regime Change" in the Age of "Congressional Oversight"
10 easy steps to overthrow a government without starting a war:
**This piece is to congratulate the United States and whoever is left of Al-Qaeda after the news that came out this morning of the overthrow of Bashar Al-Assad by “Rebel Forces”. Remember, any time they refer to “rebel forces”. What they mean is US+NATO/NGO’s/CIA-Trained forces, that is what we literally do. I’ll explain how but first, let’s take trip to 1962 and look at the situation on the ground.
Ah, The Good Ol’ Days…
Kennedy couldn’t believe what had came across his desk. Another attempt to replace Castro. After the last failure I thought they might give up. We’ll never have a lasting peace if we keep waging war. We need to regroup, rethink.
John had been mulling this over all evening when his Sec. of Def. Robert Mcnamara, stopped in to present him with the memo, as he was about to call it a night.
The memo read “TOP SECRET: Operation Northwoods". Approved by the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Mcnamara went through it with him.
John started thinking, this must be a joke, some kind of test. I thought they would get the idea after the bay of pigs, we’re looking for peace here, not war.
They didn’t. The memo laid out a plan to stage a terror campaign, in Miami, Washington, DC, and elsewhere, as a pretext to invade Cuba. Ships would be bombed, planes hijacked, and innocent Americans killed producing “casualty lists” which “would cause a helpful wave of national indignation” with the Cubans taking the blame and manufacturing consent of the public, to go to war with Cuba, and tear down the Communist regime, as John sat listening, he grew more and more furious!
“This is too far. They already defied me at the Bay of Pigs, now they’re just playing with me.”
Without another word, John picks up his phone, directs the operator to the Joint Chiefs office, the Chairman answers, “Yes, Mr. President?”
“The memo I just received, Operation Northwoods, did you approve this?”
“Ummm… Yes, Mr. President, it seemed like a solid plan”
“The answer is no.” He said with all the disdain he could muster. He starts shredding the paper the memo was written on, “can you hear that sound? That’s this memo and your job being shredded to bits, you are no longer needed here, pack your things and be gone by morning,”
“Yes, Mr. President.” He says grimly. John hangs up the phone.
The Previous Year, April 1961:
Previous to Operation Northwoods, there were numerous plans to get rid of Castro, the most detrimental to the Kennedy Admin had taken place a year earlier in April 1961. See, not all Cubans were happy with the election of Fidel Castro. Some anti-Castro Cuban exiles had headquartered in Mexico and formed the Cuban Democratic Revolutionary Front (DRF), and they were ready to take their country back from the “Authoritarian Communist Regime” of Fidel Castro, and the CIA had just the plan to benefit us and them. They had been training them in Guatemala and Florida for a surprise attack on Castro.
Their plan was to arm those rebels with American weaponry, build them up until they’re ready to take the castle, and then, with the backing of the United States Military, would invade Cuba from the southwest coast, the Bay of Pigs, and when they started to get overwhelmed by the Cuban military, the United States Air Force will already be on standby, and will come in from the air and blow Fidel’s army to shit and the DRF would take the capitol and throw Castro out on his ass, there’s just one problem.




President Kennedy turns down the hallway towards the oval office and sees his CIA Director, Alan Dulles, walking towards him, they meet in the middle.
Kennedy speaks first, “Alan, I don’t feel right about the ‘bay of pigs’ thing, have you seen the New York Times? We’ve already lost the element of surprise.”
He’s referring to April 7, 1961, the newspaper published a page-one article reporting that “United States experts” were training an invasion force of Cuban exiles in Guatemala and Florida. This is one week before the planned invasion.
“I can’t believe what I’m reading! Castro doesn’t need agents over here. All he has to do is read our papers!” Kennedy snapped. Although the invasion would lack the element of surprise, neither the CIA nor the White House called it off.
Going on with the invasion as they did, things quickly failed on many levels. Main one for Kennedy was the deniability to the public.
Having failed to wipe out the Cuban air force, the operation encountered further difficulty when a planned ruse backfired. One of the bombers that took off from Nicaragua landed at Miami International Airport with its pilot claiming to be a Cuban air force defector. CIA operatives, however, had painted the bomber to resemble one of Castro’s and riddled its engine cover with bullet holes to make it appear that it had survived combat.
The American hand in the operation, however, was quickly detected by reporters who noted the plane’s fresh paint job and the placement of machine gun barrels in the bomber’s nose and not mounted on the wings as on Cuban warplanes.
“Immediately the entire world knew they were CIA-backed pilots,” Rasenberger says. “Kennedy realized any illusion of plausible deniability was gone. He could no longer pretend the Americans weren’t behind it.”
The president responded on April 16 by cancelling a second round of bombings planned for the following day, which left Cuban air defenses intact for when the invasion force arrived in the Bay of Pigs the following morning. “The moment that Kennedy canceled the second round of bombings on Castro’s air fleet the operation was basically doomed, and everybody knew it,” Rasenberger says.
Further difficulties came when Castro’s aircraft sank two supply ships that carried food, medical supplies and ammunition. An additional failure of a CIA reconnaissance team to spot a radio station on the beach allowed it to remain in operation during the invasion and broadcast details of the attack across Cuba.
With the invasion floundering, Kennedy refused to send in Marines stationed in Puerto Rico or a large naval force that stood at the ready outside Cuban territorial waters.
After this failure, Kennedy addressed the nation and took full blame for turnout of the Bay of Pigs, from his view the CIA had totally defied him by going through with it. When he hung up the phone, he looked at his staffer sitting in the room with him and said, “Let this be known, I am going to smash the CIA into a million little pieces and scatter it to the wind!” He then got Dulles on the phone and told him, “Write your resignation letter, you’re done here.”
When Evolution Meets Revolution
This is how regime change used to work, obviously they still do it this way in cases like Iraq War II, when consent comes in the form of a falling tower. It’s a best-case-scenario for “Regime-Changers”. A little fake intelligence here, ex-Military-contributor there, add a couple bullshit slogans (You’re with us or you’re with the terrorists), and voila, military recruitment is up and American’s—the good ones anyway—are ready, willing, and looking for a fight! “Never let a good crisis go to waste, right?
See, the failure in the Bay of Pigs invasion was basically, you don’t shit where you eat. Cuba was too close for us to invade in secret without being noticed by the press and their cover was blown (since back then the press was less of a mouthpiece for the powerful, not yet). The issue, they decided was covert regime change, but if they could do it overtly, it wouldn’t be an issue. There can’t be oversight of something not being hidden.
It all came to a head during the Reagan Administration, when the Iran-Contra Affair unfolded. See, what happened was:
There was a Communist government, democratically elected (but not democratic enough for us) in Nicaragua called the Sandinista’s, and there’s a right-wing death cult, oops, my bad, what I meant was, group of “democratic rebel’s” called the Contras, who the CIA is arming and training to overthrow the “Communist” Sandinista government of Nicaragua.
At the same time an Iranian terrorist group has American hostages. Iran said they’ll get the hostages freed if we sell them weapons.
Both Operations become covert simultaneously:
Iran was subject to an arms embargo making it illegal to sell them weapons.
Congress cut off funds to the Contras.
Reagan and the CIA made the plan to use the money from the Iranian arms deal, to continue funding the Contras
Under the Boland Amendment, further funding of the Contras by legislative appropriations was prohibited by Congress, but the Reagan administration figured out a loophole by secretively using non-appropriated funds instead.
The idea of using non-appropriated funds would open the door for a whole new world and change the nature of regime changes forever!
During the Reagan administration it was realized that the press and the populace was becoming too aware of these regime changes. They needed a way to do this that wasn’t so…controversial. The solution was a laundry list of pro-democracy activist organizations or as we now call them Non-Government Organizations (NGO’s). Because Communism is still a problem, right? Everyone likes democracy, right? Wouldn’t the world be better if we changed these problematic countries to Liberal Democracies. So, these democratic institutions proliferated to support democracy around the world. Some examples of these NGO’s are the National Endowment for Democracy, United States Agency for International Development, or the National Democratic Institute. These NGOs are basically the wallets for regime change. They provide the funds, that feed the overthrow of governments around the world, with the stated plan to proliferate democracy far and wide. And they solve the problem of congressional oversight. Congress funding pro-democratic organizations is a much easier task than saying, “Well, Mr. Congressman, we’re gonna go topple this here government and we’d like you to approve me using the American taxpayer’s money to do it”. No, no, no! How about this: “Mr. Congressman, we need some money turn this struggling country towards a better life, in our image, just like the good book says, just a little money for a brand-new liberal democracy. Thank you, sir. We’ll keep you posted (Never!) just where and how this money gets spent on democracy.” See, much less messy, on paper, on the ground however, things turn dark real quick!
The NGO’s job is to find grants, through philanthropic organizations like George Soros’ Open Society Organization, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (things like that), and in large part funded by our government.
In order to make it even less controversial, as regime change used to be done by the CIA covertly, these NGO’s give every grant publicly or overtly (nowadays they post it on their site). David Ignatius explains this in the Washington Post in 1991, in an unbelievable article called, INNOCENCE ABROAD: THE NEW WORLD OF SPYLESS COUPS. If that’s not overt enough for ya, I just don’t know what to tell ya. He goes on to say,
The great democratic revolution that has swept the globe over the past few years has been a triumph of overt action. The CIA old boys spent a generation fantasizing about this sort of global anti-communist putsch. But when it finally happened, it was in the open. There were no secret paramilitary armies, and there was almost no bloodshed. The key operatives in the conspiracy turned out to be telephones, televisions and fax machines.
What does he mean by that? Let’s get into it.
10 Easy Steps to Overthrow a Government Without Starting a War (On Day 1):
*They already have the template down, to use this here at home. A populist winning the election who hates the elites and the intelligence community. They topple democratically elected governments for less than that all the time
**This is drawn from knowledge I’ve gained reading everything I could get my hands on about “Color Revolutions”, the New-Age sterilized term for government overthrow. Enjoy!
*Music from my youth.

First step has 2 parts, patience and propaganda:
The replacement regime must have unrest, and instability, in the region, sometimes this happens organically. Remember the old adage—Never let a crisis go to waste— at which time you would use this to your advantage (see Libya, Syria, and Ukraine).
Use the infrastructure and funding from the pro-democracy NGO’s, such as NED (National Endowment for Democracy)—what’s described as the sugar daddy for regime change—the NDI (National Democratic Institute, USAID (United States Agency for International Development), or IRI (International Republican Institute), to broadcast through the state-run media like Freedom House, or Radio Free Liberty, or CNN stories that shed a negative light on the ruling party, make them seem as corrupt as possible, genocidal even, plant sources, interviews in these stories that give the stories credibility. Make it clear that their sins are unforgivable. This is the most important part of any good regime change. Propaganda+Unrest=Regime Change.
“They have been doing in public what the CIA used to do in private -- providing money and moral support for pro-democracy groups, training resistance fighters, working to subvert communist rule.”
Moral support should come from authority figures, that the propaganda consumer doesn’t know to hate (Victoria Nuland, John McCain, Chris Murphy, did I mention John McCain?). It’s important resistance fighters, or paramilitary groups seem unaccountable to anyone, they can’t seem to be on one side or the other, they are fierce revolutionaries, and they will be the guys who actually go in to remove the ruler, Qaddafi video. In Operation Timber Sycamore—which was more of an old-fashioned CIA-led coup—they used members of the Nusra Front—linked to Al-Qaeda and a branch of ISIS—who we are supposedly still at war with, to overthrow Asad, which unfortunately was a failed mission.
Use the NGO money to provide or otherwise acquire a venue to hold the protests they invite speakers to give speeches promoting democracy from the resistance groups and heads of the regime change arm. John McCain, and Victoria Nuland spoke in Maidan, and Kamala Harris at the BLM rally here, Giuliani at J6. This sends the signal that they are not alone. The interested party has their back.
Host elections with NGO money to vote out regime, give the illusion of Democracy.
When step 4 doesn't work, and it usually doesn't, arm the resistance with American weapons. Then send in resistance leaders to negotiate with the regime, asking for them to step down, and new elections to take place—remember it's all about the illusion of Democracy—all negotiations and elections of course, hosted/funded by the NGO’s.
Meanwhile the unrest in the streets is escalating, and the state-run media is reporting on it.
Always portray the street opposition as the good guys in our western-civ-sensibility-type-of-way. Forming statements in slogan-form, like “Rebel forces are in the fight of their life in this Revolution of Dignity”, or this one that just came out Sunday, Dec. 8th: “Syrians cheer fall of Asad, Region Reacts”. Basically it’s (Insert “Dictator”), the ruling regime must always be a dictator who doesn’t believe in Democracy, or “doesn’t want “free and fair elections”, or Imprisons Journalists. This reminds them of the Hitlers and Stalins of the past. It is also helpful to give the movement a name, for media dissemination, in Ukraine, they called it the EuroMaidan Movement, or Revolution or the Revolution of Dignity, or consider this Black Lives Matter…. But these rebels aren’t Antifa or the Proud Boys, instead of throwing milkshakes and fists, these rebels throw missiles and hand grenades
Note: Don’t forget to defame “rational-speak”, anyone getting too close to the truth publicly, you must defame them as harshly as possible, all outlets on the attack, just headline after headline, PUTIN-PUPPET, ASSAD-TOADIE, PUTIN-PUPPET, ASSAD-TOADIE, like a new form of “ad hominem symphony”!
When elections fail, the rebels must rush the capitol before the regime has a chance to regroup, and expel the regime with all force necessary, whether it’s the Qaddafi example, or Yanukovych, it’s time for them to go.
Now it’s time to announce their victory. Western leaders give statements announcing their approval. The “Non-Government Press” runs positive propaganda pieces announcing the new government. This leaves it clear to the fleeing authorities that there is a new Sheriff in town.
Congratulations, you just brought an uninterested party into your sphere of influence. They are now Democratic, by the “most democratic means possible.” Now it’s time to pop champagne, give speeches and organize the government to fit your interest. I'm sure the entire population, and neighboring countries are happy with this choice.
TO BE, OR NOT TO BE, THAT IS THE QUESTION
Correctly stated, that is the question, is it not? In our time since 1776, militarism has increased in a manner as insidious as the parasites in the 1998 film The Faculty and as devastating as the bugs in the film rendition of Robert A. Heinlin’s Starship Troopers. As shitty as it is to say, the bugs are us. In a
debate recently, Bret Stephens called it “upsetting” to hear said that “America goes around the world causing disasters and starting wars” and it should be upsetting, especially to someone like him who has never seen a war he didn’t like but is full of excuses when asked to—as put it—to “put some skin in the game” and enlist himself, but that is simply the reality of what we are faced with. We can’t stop doing it. We’ve convinced ourselves that our system is superior to all others, and the suggestion it could be better is met with insults, they call you diluted, utopian, irrational, have no idea what you’re saying! But in the same breath will proclaim that we are superior, and everyone wants to be us.The first regime change was committed in 1904, as outlined by Stephen Kinzer in his book Overthrow: America’s Century of Regime Change from Hawaii to Iraq, and we’ve not slowed down once. The proliferation of American culture has been the supreme goal of every geopolitical operation of the last hundred+ years, whether they like it or not. That’s Irrational!
Thank you for reading!
Editor-in-Chief


This was on TV from when I was a toddler to teenager in my mom loved politics so it was on. Really interesting to hear more information on what actually happened.
Excellent summation of the mentally diseased culture that runs the enterprise known as democracy building or rules based order or humanitarian intervention or right to protect (aka Murder,Inc.) . Reminds me of a passage in a book by Chomsky and Robinson
"Needless to say, because even oppressive, criminal, and genocidal governments cloak their atrocities in the language of virtue, none of this rhetoric should be taken seriously. There is no reason to expect Americans to be uniquely immune to self- delusion. If those who commit evil and those who do good always both profess to be doing good, national stories are worthless as tests of truth. Sensible people pay scant attention to declarations of noble intent by leaders, because they are a universal. What matters is the historical record.
The received wisdom is that the United States is committed to promoting democracy and human rights (sometimes called “Wilsonian idealism” or “American exceptionalism”). But the facts are consistent with the following theory instead: The United States is very much like other powerful states. It pursues the strategic and economic interests of dominant sectors of the domestic population. In practice, this means that the United States has typically acted with almost complete disregard for moral principle and the rule of law, except insofar as complying with principle and law serves the interests of American elites. There is little evidence of authentic humanitarian concern among leading statesmen, and when it does exist, it is acted upon only to the extent that doing so does not go against domestic elites’ interests. American foreign policy is almost never made in accordance with the stated ideals, and in fact is far more consistent with what Adam Smith called “the vile maxim of the masters of mankind” in “every age of the world,” namely: “All for ourselves and nothing for other people.”
We might also call this the Mafia Doctrine. Its logic is straightforward and completely rational. The Godfather’s word is law. Those who defy the Godfather will be punished. The Godfather may be generous from time to time, but he does not tolerate disagreement. If some small storekeeper fails to pay protection money, the Godfather sends his goons, not just to collect the money, which he wouldn’t even notice, but to beat him to a pulp so that others do not get the idea that disobedience is permissible. But Godfathers, too, are known to convince themselves that they are kindly and benevolent.
The term “national interest” is itself a euphemism, for what is usually meant is the interest of a small sector of wealthy domestic elites. The American working class, whose members die in the country’s wars, do not have their “interest” served in any way by the wars that kill them. Nor are their interests served by the government spending money on weapons that could be used to repair school buildings. Indeed, when American actions abroad are exposed to the judgment of public opinion, they often prove deeply unpopular with the “nation” whose “interests” they are supposedly serving. A sophisticated propaganda system must keep the public in the dark, for if the truth were known, it would become immediately apparent that the public has a very different view of its “interests” than U.S. elites have.
We should also remember this the next time we hear talk about what “the Russians” or “Iran” have done. Totalitarians wish us to think that a country speaks with one voice, that it has a “national interest.” While it is the convention to refer to actions by the state as if they were actions by the country as a whole, and is unavoidable in discussions of policy, the formulation is ultimately misleading. The thousands of heroic antiwar protesters thrown in prison by Vladimir Putin have just as much claim to represent Russia as their ruler does. This is why it is an error to treat this book as arguing that “the United States is terroristic and destructive,” if the “United States” is understood to refer to some kind of collectivity of all Americans. Many in the United States have taken to the streets, and risked their lives and livelihoods, to oppose the acts of their government— when they have been permitted to learn about them, that is."