125 Comments
User's avatar
Vin LoPresti's avatar

I love that Julian Assange is all over the Swedish government for awarding the Nobel to Machado. "The Swedish government violated its own laws by awarding the Nobel Peace Prize to Venezuelan opposition figure Maria Corina Machado, according to an explosive legal brief filed by Julian Assange". Read about it at the Grayzone. https://thegrayzone.com/2025/12/17/julian-assange-sweden-nobel-venezuelas-machado/

LATE EDIT: Here's what Assange's complaint says: “The political decision of the Norwegian selection committee does not suspend the fiduciary duty of Swedish funds administrators. … Any disbursement contradicting this mandate constitutes misappropriation from the endowment.” Read more from Joe Lauria at Consortium https://consortiumnews.com/2025/12/18/assange-files-complaint-to-block-machado-from-nobel/

The Revolution Continues's avatar

This is fantastic news! We need to let the empire know that we're not buying their shit anymore. Take the Nobel away from Machado--lock her up instead!

JennyStokes's avatar

Dump the whole Nobel shit forever.

Nancy's avatar

Norway awarded the Nobel Peace Prize to Machado — not Sweden.

Vin LoPresti's avatar

Read the post -- the prize is awarded in Swedish Kroner.

"The Nobel committee’s decision to award Machado the Peace Prize — and the 11 million Swedish Kroner ($1.18 million USD) reward which accompanies it — means that “there is a real risk that funds derived from Nobel’s endowment have been or will be… diverted from their charitable purpose to facilitate aggression, crimes against humanity, and war crimes,” Assange stated.

Shall I paste the entire article?

Nancy's avatar

Read the coverage. A Norwegian committee awarded the prize to Machado in Oslo. Sweden awards the other Nobel prizes, but not the peace prize. Whose currency is used is a different issue. I’m a fan of Assange’s and will read your link, but it’s not going to change the fact of what country decided to award the prize to Machado.

Vin LoPresti's avatar

But you miss the essential guts of the point that Julian is a clever journalist who's apparently found a legal hitch to attempt to reveal the corruption in the entire enterprise of awarding this prize & the money to a warmonger. Nitpicking the details to dilute the impact is just a waste of your time and mine. Welcome to wheel-spinning. I'll just demur, thank you.

Tom's avatar

That is interesting. Learn something new every day. Why is that the only Nobel prize awarded by Norway (not including the fake "Nobel Prize in Economics").

Nancy's avatar

Good question. I don’t know the answer. I remember thinking when Trump was promoting himself for the prize that the committee would never give it to him. Then they awarded it to Machado and I read that there were demonstrations against the committee in Norway, as well there should have been.

Moebius Infinity's avatar

Make a post of it that we can restack.

And post us a link here please.

Vin LoPresti's avatar

Not sure what I should post. Martin's link, just above, sums it up, and it's as simple as Sweden controls, invests, and disburses the prize, so regardless of what the idiots in the Norway Peace prize Committee decide, it's on Sweden to validate or invalidate that decision by disbursing the prize money or NOT.

Moebius Infinity's avatar

Just a text instead of an offsite link that can be changed without notice.

Davina's avatar

Is she the woman who asked America to invade Venezuela? If so, why would that merit a "peace"prize?

Ling's avatar

Actual war criminals are recipients, including Henry Kissinger, Obama and Menachem Begin. Go figure…

JennyStokes's avatar

Yes. Funny how all these despicable women in the West are coming to the fore!

We have a huge bunch in Europe.

Moebius Infinity's avatar

The corruption is THAT BAD.

Its a perversion of sadist proportions

Aamir Razak's avatar

yes I believe so Davina. Definitely undeserving of a peace prize, but seeing who past recipients are of the award, I guess it's par for the course....

Joy in HK fiFP's avatar

I found the article a bit confusing as it's the Norwegians who award the Peace Prize, not the Swedes. I guess there is some connection, and the point was that Machado is totally undeserving, and may be violating the Swedish laws, which might apply if they are funding it. I really couldn't follow the switching back and forth between Sweden and Norway. But, one thing I know for sure, thanks to my Swedish grandmother, Norwegans sure as hell are not Swedes.

Vin LoPresti's avatar

Joy, here's a clarification, courtesy of martin. Thank you, martin.

Nobel Foundation: A Swedish organization based in Stockholm that administers the Nobel Prizes overall.

Most Nobel Prizes (Physics, Chemistry, Medicine, Literature, and Economic Sciences):

Decided by Swedish institutions and committees.

Nobel Peace Prize:

Decided by the Norwegian Nobel Committee, whose members are appointed by the Norwegian Parliament

This split was specified by Alfred Nobel in his will.

Nobel Foundation (Sweden)

• Owns and manages the endowment left by Alfred Nobel

• Invests the assets

• Decides the prize amount for each Nobel Prize each year

• Pays the prize money to the laureates

• Prize-awarding bodies / committees (Swedish academies and the Norwegian Nobel Committee) Do not control the money. They only decide who wins, not how much is awarded.

The Foundation is governed by a Board of Directors, appointed by the Swedish prize-awarding institutions, and operates independently of both the Swedish and Norwegian governments.

So in short:

👉 Selection = committees

👉 Money = Nobel Foundation (Swedish, centralized)

https://chatgpt.com/share/6943fb5b-6a70-800d-8e0f-3af5983f643e

Aamir Razak's avatar

Major respect to Mr. Assange for that, a totally undeserved Nobel "Peace" prize for Machado, who called for the invasion of her own country and seeks regime change in order to have her nation's oil reserves stolen.

Feral Finster's avatar

Law is meaningless. Enforcement is the only thing that matters.

Vin LoPresti's avatar

Yeah, but egg on the face tastes better than egg on the plate.

Diana van Eyk's avatar

I love it too. Thanks for sharing this important article. I shared it on BlueSky.

Moebius Infinity's avatar

What can we do here to help Julians message scale up?

Vin LoPresti's avatar

Make it clear to everyone we know that no matter whom the corrupt committee selects, that if it's a demonstrated warmonger like it has been repeatedly of late, the Swedish govt. & it's funding arm have a duty to withhold the money. They should've never funded Obama, for example. Bet Julian would've been all over that one too, but as I recall, he was fighting for his own life at the time.

SamAsIAm's avatar

That the repeatedly exposed lies I've heard so often, since the Gulf of Tonkin, can still manipulate as many in the US as they do, reenforces my late, history teacher friend's slogan: "Humans, a failed experiment." That we're years into a genocide the billions of people on earth could've stopped with general strikes, but instead, succumbed in many nations to being criminalized for pointing it out, doubly reenforces it.

SW's avatar

Tens of thousands of people have opposed this massacre in Gaza and the West Bank. The problem is they don’t have the power to stop it, only oppose and expose it. The corrupt politicians across the board enable it to go on. I’m hoping the example of Mandami’s election in NYC and his public statement he’d arrest Netanyahu will empower others to stop taking Israeli lobbyists’ money and break with them.

Trump’s “address to the nation” tonight left out Venezuela. It’s so transparently criminal and every poll is overwhelmingly against it. Trump is losing ground. His ugly, mean spirited post on the murder of the Reiners did him no favors.

Barrie's avatar

TRUMP, must be the greatest wanker of all time, what a total tool, could anyone one else be so full of shit, really!!!!!

Nancy's avatar

It should be abundantly clear by now that Trump is seriously mentally ill. Yet he is treated by the majority of U.S. media and too many politicians as business as usual. In the last few days, he actually suggested that actor/director Rob Reiner was murdered because he had been critical of Trump, and that the murder was therefore predictable, and, presumably justified. (That’s before Reiner’s son had been arrested and charged with the murder of both his parents). Everything is about Trump, first and foremost. And anything is justified as retribution in his name.

Not all mentally ill people are dangerous, but Trump is both mentally ill and evil, a very dangerous combination, especially in the form of the “leader” of the world’s (arguably) most powerful nation.

He’s overseen the killing of Venezuelans in violation of both domestic and international law. Yet, much of the U.S. media is falling in line by discussing whether these are war crimes. We’re not at war (what happened to the Article I provision that only Congress can declare war)? These are murders pure and simple — as the U.N. has labeled them, extrajudicial killings. Only a madman would so blatantly refer to the resources of a sovereign nation as belonging to the U.S. Yes, other U.S. presidents have acted as if that’s the case (e.g., re Iran), but none has previously been so deranged as to shout it to the world. His behavior is jaw dropping, yet our politicians and media have normalized it, as have some foreign leaders like Sturmer, who recently feted him.

As many of us know, the sociopaths are in charge, while many more are just sleep walking through it, and enabling it by their inaction.

Jo Waller's avatar

Trump may well be ill, like Biden was. It's not really relevant. The continuity of agenda of the US based interests in oil, arms, pharma and finance will carry on regardless. They got a boost out of playing Trump against Biden and the 'covid' measures, but they will surely get another boost with whoever they've lined up next.

Joy in HK fiFP's avatar

I was reading earlier today on Substack that not only is Trump a Malignant Narcissist, but seems to be suffering frm PFD, Frontotemporal Dementia, which manifests in confabulations of grandiouse delusions that are believed completely by the person making this stuff up. I can see that happening here, and probably he really believes that Venezuela stole America's oil and land.

Nancy's avatar

The diagnosis sounds right. He lies so much, it’s hard to know what he believes and doesn’t believe. I remember that he said to VP Mike Pence when he was trying to convince him to reject the vote count for the 2020 election that Vance was “too honest” when Vance refused. Thus, he knew he had lost the election, yet he continues to claim it was stolen, even today. He himself was trying to steal the election. As some have said about him, every accusation is a confession, a classic case of projection.

Tom's avatar
Dec 18Edited

There is a regular physician contributor to Naked Capitalism who has diagnosed Trump not with dementia but with "white matter disease":

https://www.webmd.com/brain/white-matter-disease

I'm kind of with him on that. The symptoms (late night bizarre rants, his patterns, his megalomania, etc.) fit much more with WMD (funny that acronym in this context) than with dementia, like Biden has.

Also helping confirm our suspicions is that they specifically did not address or release brain MRI results. IIRC, dementia is not diagnosed via imaging, but rather through cognitive and behavioral testing and clues. WMD can be and is diagnosed via imaging:

"Advances in medical imaging have made white matter disease easier to spot. An MRI test, which takes pictures of the inside of your brain, can show any damage. Changes in the white matter will show up super-bright white (your doctor may call this "hyperintense") on an MRI scan. You may need more tests to rule out other causes."

Davina's avatar

But he's had grandiose imaginings for decades.

Nana Baakan Agyiriwah's avatar

For what it's worth, Davina, I did an I Ching Life Path reading on Donald Trump. It reveals so much about him. I also did readings on his role as President and his health back during his first term. Let me know if you would like that as well.

Here's a link to the Life Path Reading, start the video at 7:00 minutes... https://topicsfromatoz.substack.com/p/life-path-reading-for-donald-j-trump-420

Davina's avatar

The silence could be bought or, they could be afraid they might be Mossaded 😉

A d while I'm in this chat, isn't it time Lindsay Graham's surname was changed to Gvir?

grahamlyons's avatar

Vax Daddy, Zio Daddy, War Daddy, Bad Santa. "Joe Biden, come back, all is forgiven, you're starting to look good!"

Chang Chokaski's avatar

Perfectly expressed Nancy! Thank you!

Feral Finster's avatar

If a purported MD on nakedcapitalism.com (IMDoc) is to be believed, Trump clearly suffers from "White Matter Syndrome".

Barrie's avatar

Surperbuly sumerised.

Tom's avatar

Exellintly ellaberated.

gypsy33's avatar

Caity, Caity. Epstein unalive?

He’s livin high on the hog in Tel-a-Fuckin-Viv.

Davina's avatar

Prefer if he was living in a hog pen.

Moebius Infinity's avatar

Poor hogs, they would feel so insulted to be in the same pen.

Davina's avatar

Well said 🤣🤣

Rachel Cockbain's avatar

Wouldn't surprise me in the least …. !

Feral Finster's avatar

N.b. the empire managers know full well that Venezuela did not steal the empire's oil, any more than an armed robber knows or cares that they are not entitled to your stuff by any law other than naked force.

Tom's avatar
Dec 18Edited

I mean, let's be real here with regard to Chomsky. At his age, and with his academic and research/authorship workload, he almost certainly believed the commonly held opinion that Epstein was "gross" in his sexual proclivities, but wasn't aware of the true depth of the situation until very recently. He knew Epstein had served time in jail (albeit far too little and the case was intentionally handicapped as we all know) and I'm pretty sure Noam's conversations with him were of the "ideas" type - since Chomsky knew that Epstein was until a very late date still plugged in with the 'movers and shakers' in government, finance and academia, I'm sure he used their dialog to glean a lot of important contextual information on those things. Even if Chomsky compartmentalized a lot of stuff he MIGHT have known about Epstein (but I doubt he did), this is human nature and he had nothing to fear or hide because 1) His reputation and legacy are both well earned/defended and 2) He wasn't guilty of anything himself and almost certainly wasn't aware of Epstein's true depravity. It ain't like Chomsky ever rode the Lolita Express or went to Epstein's Island, right? NC isn't exactly well known for liking little girls or writing spirited defenses of JE like that scumbag Zionist plagiarist filth Alan Dershowitz.

Red Brown's avatar

The most bothersome thing is Chomsky's response to the news. He refuses to explain, and so on. I've always admired his refusal to explain, or apologize, but it was because it was part of his refusal to cede an inch to the prevailing opinion which supported the establishment. Here, it's just . . . what does one do with it except wonder if this helps account for his incomprehensible wholesale rejection of "conspiracy theories" related to the JFK assassination, etc., and thereby a whole dimension of political explanation?

It's disappointing in this respect that he doesn't give more consideration to how this could compromise his intellectual legacy even by just a peg. It seems needlessly wasteful. And I don't even think there's anything per se the matter with him hanging around with Epstein for intellectual reasons. I agree generally with Chomsky's opinion that a criminal who serves his sentence should not be permanently condemned, although the Epstein matter is not your ordinary criminal case. This is kind of a crucial stance to get behind, actually - especially, although not exclusively, if one is a civil libertarian. But it still seems unseemly from a distance that Chomsky is hobnobbing with such a grotesque figure, as much because of the sexual stuff as because of Epstein's position as an apparent middle manager for the elite. He could offer a few more words on this before he goes.

Tom's avatar

You make good points. And my biggest beef with Chomsky has always been his "last minute" shift to implore people to vote for the Democrat in the general election. Not that he has a ton of influence in that regard, but that's almost the point. And I agree with you on Chomsky's ridiculous refusal to reconsider the OFFICIAL conspiracy theory on JFK, etc.

Neural Foundry's avatar

The fentanyl-as-WMD framing is wild becasue Venezuela doesn't even produce it, but that logic barely matters when you need a pretxt for resource extraction. I've followed enough regime change ops to recognize the pattern where accusations get progressively more absurd until they manufacture consent for invasion. What's almost darkly funny is watching the same Iraq playbook get reused two decades later and people still fall for it.

Jo Waller's avatar

I thought they were blaming China for the fentanyl? I guess it's interchangeable.

Feral Finster's avatar

So what? It works.

Chang Chokaski's avatar

Caitlin, you said it all wonderfully in this article. Thank you! ❤️🙏

Landru's avatar

Yes my friend. All I can say is Thank you : )

Joy in HK fiFP's avatar

Innovative work to help the orphans of Gaza

The Gaza Children Village is working to help give medical, psychological, and educational assistance to the children of Gaza. They need our support. Always money for guns, never enough for people. That is where we come it. We, the people, have to do what we can to make a better world. Find out more here:

https://www.thegazachildrenvillage.org

To donate online:

https://www.thegazachildrenvillage.org/donate 

Joy in HK fiFP's avatar

More important than ever! The work that the Hind Rajab is doing to track down and bring Israeli criminals to justice is one that is vital in the effort to hold Israel accountable.

Find out what they’re doing here:

https://www.hindrajabfoundation.org

Donate to help them here:

Support the Hind Rajab Foundation

https://donate.stripe.com/cN228hbY5g7jaM84gg

Feral Finster's avatar

Note that the Americans will not pull their punches the way Russia does. The only thing this accomplishes is to reinforce the perception of Russian dithering and impotence.

Tom's avatar
Dec 18Edited

Not the same types of situation. Ukraine had been built up over years and had arms and money flowing in at almost unprecedented "peace time" rates. Ukraine had the backing of NATO. What Trump is doing (as other American presidents in the past have done) is picking on what he views as a weakling that has been worn down by years of sanctions and lacking any real international support (again, in the Americans' views - see: Iraq).

"Every ten years or so, the United States needs to pick up some small crappy little country and throw it against the wall, just to show the world we mean business"

- (Attributed to Michael Ledeen, a scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, and was popularized by Jonah Goldberg in the National Review around 2002.)

In this particular case the punches started being thrown decades ago and this is just the culmination carried out by a desperate regime in D.C. suffering from major scandals, almost historically low approval ratings, and against a socialist country with a lot of oil. So it's not really apt to bring the Russians into the conversation in that manner. Their 'civilizational mentality' is not even roughly comparable to the quote I cited above, which is in fact very representative of a LOT of Americans' thinking.

Jo Waller's avatar

Yes I agree. Putin, and Xi, want peace, so are prepared to put up with a lot of provocation, until they can't or are sufficiently prepared. The war on Venezuela, Russia's ally, is a proxy war and it's all to weaken and isolate the ultimate 'enemy'- China. It's all connected but not in the way that most people think.

Feral Finster's avatar

Because Russia only had eight years to prepare for a war that everyone knew was coming.

Tom's avatar

Again, not the same at all. Apples and oranges. Whereas the Russians were at least lied to by the collective waste and Ukrainians for a good amount of time, the Venezuelans have always been told the truth. And don't get me going down a path of looking like I'm 'defending' Putin or Russia's approach to the UkraNato war - I'm just pointing out the differences.

Feral Finster's avatar

So you and Putin are apparently the only two people on the planet who didn't realize that Minsk and Minsk-2 were an obvious sham, even as NATO poured money, weapons and training into Ukraine.

Jo Waller's avatar

Yes, that's why Russia waited until they were prepared, and it wasn't a done deal that they would prevail- it's been a hard conflict of attrition for them.

Feral Finster's avatar

Russia obviously wasn't prepared.

Literally Mussolini's avatar

To tag onto your comment more about what seems obvious:

Russia expected that a swift incursion, with a relatively small force, would shake the Ukrainians up and get them to seriously address Russian concerns about goings on in their country, which were reasonable since Ukraine borders Russia and has a large Russian population.

The Russians didn't seem to realize that they were actually walking into a proxy war with the US, which was willing to expend nearly unlimited resources and expend the lives of every single living creature in Ukraine to do even the slightest harm to Russia.

When the original SMO, as a result, went south on them, the Russians were scrambling to come up with a plan B, which as you said, they had not prepared in advance.

Feral Finster's avatar

At every stage of this war, Russia has underestimated just how far the West would go.

This is because the Russian leadership do not want to end the West. They seek to join it, just not as supplicants. Fools.

The West openly seeks their destruction, even as the Russians tell themselves that the europeans could not possibly mean that, we're cultured, we write symphonies, we write plays!

Davina's avatar

All to appease the arms companies in casethe so-called ceasefire in Gaza holds. Gotta keep selling those bombs.

Spunty's avatar

The "ceasefire" in Gaza never started.

Davina's avatar

Absolutely correct, it only ever cuts back a bit.

Jim S's avatar

Thank You Caitlin

Penelope Prill's avatar

Beautiful shot at over lauded intellectual Chomsky who is insufferably arrogant. Brilliant work as always about the putrid Western Empire.

Dan's avatar

Try reading a few of his "over lauded" books and you might not make such ignorant comments

Penelope Prill's avatar

Dan, you are a BOT.

Penelope Prill's avatar

Try reading my reply. I own his books. He is a linguist not God.

Penelope Prill's avatar

I have read them. I own copies. Now who's making ignorant comments.

Dan's avatar

Your comment was still ignorant.

Shawn Heslip's avatar

I don't think Chomsky cares what anyone thinks.

Dan's avatar

Attempting to smear Noam Chomsky with his most certainly innocuous connection with Epstein makes you sound like an idiot.

martin's avatar

he kinda smeared himself and it doesn't delegitimize the good work he did, imo. he was human and could be played like all of us.

Dan's avatar

No valid smear there. It's analogous to saying anyone ever having been in any contact with a criminal must also be a criminal. That’s just stupid.

martin's avatar

well, he could've at least stated that epstein's pedophilia and especially his connection to israeli intelligence and lobby-groups shone quite a different light on the very insightful, intellectual conversations they had (and on their innocuous relation). re: association with a criminal: it's often how public opinion and investigative policing work (and algorithms), i think.

Dan's avatar

The claims about Noam Chomsky having a “relationship” with Jeffrey Epstein have been widely circulated but are routinely mischaracterized and exaggerated. When examined carefully, the evidence strongly supports the conclusion that any contact was limited, non-criminal, and consistent with Chomsky’s long-standing intellectual habits, rather than indicative of any meaningful personal or social relationship.

Below is a clear, evidence-based breakdown.

---

1. What is actually documented

The publicly known facts are narrow:

Chomsky met Epstein a small number of times, primarily in the early 2010s.

There is email correspondence in which Epstein facilitated or discussed logistical matters, including travel arrangements.

Chomsky has acknowledged these contacts openly and never denied them.

Crucially:

No evidence exists of Chomsky visiting Epstein’s properties for leisure.

No evidence links Chomsky to Epstein’s criminal activities.

No victims have accused Chomsky of wrongdoing.

No financial ties between Chomsky and Epstein have been substantiated.

---

2. Chomsky’s explanation (and why it fits his life pattern)

Chomsky has consistently stated that:

Epstein was presented to him as a wealthy individual interested in political philosophy and global affairs.

Conversations were intellectual and political, not social.

He accepted logistical assistance for travel without any personal relationship.

This explanation is entirely consistent with what is already well-known about Chomsky:

For decades, Chomsky has responded to letters and emails from strangers, students, prisoners, activists, dissidents, businesspeople, and critics alike.

He has engaged in dialogue with people across ideological, moral, and political divides, including those he strongly disagrees with.

He has repeatedly stated that he does not vet correspondents’ personal lives before discussing ideas.

This is not a new or ad hoc defense—it is a documented behavioral constant going back to the 1960s.

---

3. Why the “relationship” framing is misleading

The term relationship implies intimacy, friendship, or sustained association. None of that is supported by evidence.

What existed instead was:

Limited intellectual contact

Transactional logistics

No shared social circle

No ongoing personal connection

By normal standards applied to academics and public intellectuals, this would be classified as incidental contact, not a relationship.

---

4. Guilt-by-association and why it fails here

Epstein deliberately sought proximity to prestigious academics to launder his reputation. Many respected figures—not just Chomsky—were contacted, hosted discussions, or accepted funding before Epstein’s crimes were fully exposed.

Holding Chomsky responsible for Epstein’s crimes by mere contact would require a standard that:

Would implicate hundreds of academics

Ignores intent, knowledge, and conduct

Replaces evidence with insinuation

That standard is not used elsewhere in serious moral or legal analysis.

---

5. Assessing likelihood: innocuous vs. sinister

Given:

Chomsky’s documented lifelong openness to correspondence

The absence of secrecy or denial

The lack of corroborating allegations

The absence of any benefit derived from Epstein’s crimes

The probability that this contact was innocuous and intellectual is very high, while the probability of any hidden wrongdoing is extremely low and unsupported by evidence.

---

6. Why this keeps resurfacing

The issue persists largely because:

Chomsky is a prominent critic of U.S. power, imperialism, and elite hypocrisy

Epstein’s name is rhetorically potent

Smears via association are easier than rebutting Chomsky’s arguments

This pattern mirrors past attempts to discredit him through selective outrage rather than factual refutation.

---

Bottom line

There is no credible evidence that Noam Chomsky had anything resembling a meaningful or morally compromising relationship with Jeffrey Epstein. The known facts align cleanly with Chomsky’s long-established practice of engaging intellectually with anyone who reaches out—often without regard to their wealth, status, or background.

martin's avatar

you're totally barking up the wrong tree. chomsky just isn't the holy saint to me like he is to you. he could just acknowledge that learning about mr epstein's shady past and probable association with mossad and the israel lobby, puts the intellectual, academic exchanges he had with this person into a different light. he could aknowledge that his innocuous exchange of ideas might have been an israeli attempt to at least measure, maybe influence, his thoughts on the israel-palestine (or other) question. for me his association with epstein in no way discredits any of the ideas explained in, e.g., 'manufacturing consent'.

Eat me's avatar

Lies, disinformation, BS, flow like stinky sewage from the orange freak and his vile cabinet. To invade Venezuela based on lies. Even the least informed knows fentanyl is not produced in Venezuela, nor coke. WH thinks we're all complete morons, but at this stage in their foul evolution, the freak's loathsome cabinet couldn't care less if the true intentions of their fascist imperialism is known. All in the open now. Viva Venezuela, the UN, NATO and the beloved ICC. Arrest the 2 ICC indicted war mongering thugs and cowards now!!