Posts Tagged ‘NATO’

via The most perilous time in world history got worse

The Most Perilous Time In World History Just Got WORSE! Posted By Luther Blissett: By Stephen Lendman: Intrepid Report 03/19/18: Or:

Events ongoing should terrify everyone—things likely heading for greater war than already.

Most Americans, Brits, and others in NATO countries are unaware of the danger posed by hardline Western extremists in charge of policy-making—notably in Washington, London and Israel, the Jewish state an alliance Mediterranean Dialogue member.

Businessman Trump was co-opted to be a warrior president—neocon generals in charge of geopolitical policies, their agenda hardened by Mike Pompeo replacing Rex Tillerson at State, along with torturer-in-chief Gina Haspel appointed new CIA director.

An unholy alliance of US extremist policymakers allied with like-minded ones in partner countries risks war winds reaching gale force, a terrifying prospect if confrontation with Russia, Iran or North Korea occurs—the possibility increased by recent events.

Earlier this week, US Defense Secretary Mattis and UN envoy Haley threatened Russia and Damascus.

Russia vowed to retaliate against US attacks on Syrian forces in East Ghouta or elsewhere endangering its personnel in the country.

Anti-Russia hysteria in Britain over the Sergey Skripal poisoning affair, most certainly Moscow had nothing to do with, soured bilateral relations more than already.

In response to British PM Theresa May demanding swift Russian answers to questions posed about the incident, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman (speaking for her government) replied sharply saying, “One does not give 24 hours notice to a nuclear power,” adding the “Skripal poisoning was not an incident but a colossal international provocation,” adding not a “single international legal mechanism [exists] to probe the Skripal case.”

Russia’s embassy in London said “Moscow will not respond to London’s ultimatum until it receives samples of the chemical substance to which the UK investigators are referring.”

“Britain must comply with the Chemical Weapons Convention which stipulates joint investigation into the incident, for which Moscow is ready.”

“Without that, there can be no sense in any statements from London. The incident appears to be yet another crooked attempt by the UK authorities to discredit Russia.”

“Any threat to take ‘punitive’ measures against Russia will meet with a response. The British side should be aware of that.”

“Not only is Russia groundlessly and provocatively accused of the Salisbury incident, but apparently, plans are being developed in the UK to strike Russia with cyber weapons.”

“Judging by the statements of the prime minister, such a decision can be taken at tomorrow’s meeting of the National Security Council.”

Given the gravity of the situation, the above comments by Russian diplomats were uncharacteristically strong.

Sergey Lavrov warned Washington that “[i]f a new [US] strike . . . takes place [against Syrian forces], the consequences will be very serious,” adding, “I simply don’t have any normal terms left to describe all this.”

What’s coming remains to be seen. Hostile rhetoric from US and UK officials, along with hawkish extremists Pompeo in charge at State and Haspel appointed new CIA chief likely signal more war, not less.

What’s ongoing assures no possibility of improving dismal bilateral relations with Russia, China, Iran and other sovereign independent countries.

Talks with North Korea could either be scuttled or confrontational if they take place.

Given very disturbing ongoing events, the perilous state of world conditions reached a new low.

Be scared about what may follow—be very scared!


By Ric A Ohge [Excerpts & Sources Noted]

Tragedy continues to unfold in the Paris attacks, that depending on which News Service you heard it from, counts anywhere from 140 to 150+ dead, 1-5 gunmen using an uncertain group of weapons, representing-allegedly-ISIS-an INTRIGUING idea as it has become common knowledge, that France, as a member of NATO would have a part, along with the Saudis, Israel and the US in their formation and ongoing support.

The aftermath was presented without excess gore by Reuters in this video entitled “Blowback in Paris – Terrorists Kill 142 As Hostages Are Killed At Bataclan“: [], which, interestingly enough, has been REMOVED. 

Now, WHY would YouTube do THAT?

Or, perhaps there’s something in it that SOMEONE  doesn’t want us to see or hear-and we should be at least QUESTIONING WHAT that might be.

Brandon Turbeville floated some well-crafted and solid questions regarding all this in his regular Activist Post Column just today: [9 Reasons To Question The Paris Terror Attacks:]

Among the nine reasons he listed, two jump out as worth a closer look: 

1. Who Created ISIS-As Right Now They’re Being Blamed For The Attack? 

Tony Cartalucci points out in his article following the “Charlie Hebdo” shootings: “Paris Shooters Just Returned From NATO Proxy War In Syria: [

Shooters were radicalized in Europe, sent to Syria, returned, have been previously arrested by Western security agencies for terrorism and long on the watch-list of French and other Western intelligence agencies. 

Yet “somehow” they still managed to execute a highly organized attack in the heart of Europe.  

In an all too familiar pattern and as predicted, the shooters involved in the attack in Paris Wednesday, January 7, 2015, were French citizens, radicalized in Europe and exported to Syria to fight in NATO’s proxy war against the government in Damascus, then brought back where they have now carried out a domestic attack. 

Additionally, as have been many other domestic attacks, the suspects were long under the watch of Western intelligence services, with at least one suspect having already been arrested on terrorism charges.

USA Today would report in an article titled, “Manhunt continues for two French terror suspects,” that:

The suspects are two brothers — Said, 34, and Cherif Kouachi, 32, both French nationals — and Hamyd Mourad, 18, whose nationality wasn’t known, a Paris police official told the Associated Press. 

He spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak publicly.

USA Today would also report (emphasis added):

The brothers were born in Paris of Algerian descent. 

Cherif was sentenced to three years in prison on terrorism charges in May 2008. Both brothers returned from Syria this summer.

The implications of yet another case of Western-radicalized terrorists, first exported to fight NATO’s proxy war in Syria, then imported and well-known to Western intelligence agencies, being able to carry out a highly organized, well-executed attack, is that the attack itself was sanctioned and engineered by Western intelligence agencies themselves. 

This mirrors almost verbatim the type of operations NATO intelligence carried out during the Cold War with similar networks of radicalized militants used both as foreign mercenaries and domestic provocateurs. 

Toward the end of the Cold War, one of these militant groups was literally Al Qaeda – a proxy mercenary front armed, funded, and employed by the West to this very day.

Additionally, in all likelihood, the brothers who took part in the attack in Paris may have been fighting in Syria with weapons provided to them by the French government itself.  


France 24 would report last year in an article titled, “France delivered arms to Syrian rebels, Hollande confirms,” that:

President Francois Hollande said on Thursday that France had delivered weapons to rebels battling the Syrian regime of Bashar al-Assad “a few months ago.”

Deflecting blame for the current attack on “radical Islam” is but a canard obscuring the truth that these terrorists were created intentionally by the West, to fight the West’s enemies abroad, and to intimidate and terrorize their populations at home.


 …To this day, the US, its NATO partners including Turkey, and regional partners including Israel, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar are arming, funding, harboring, training, and otherwise perpetuating these “Islamic extremists” within and along both Syria and now Iraq’s borders.


If this proves to be a “False Flag” [And do NOT let the huge loss of life convince you it’s necessarily something else. 9/11 is looking more like one every day as the evidence continues to be uncovered and posted around the net.

What was France doing when Charlie Hebdo happened?

Still in play is France’s bid to exit from the Russian Sanctions imposed after the Proxy Government was imposed on the Ukraine by a NATO coalition led by the US to lock up access to oil and gas in the region, and to further hem in Russia, who with it’s growing military capabilities, and it’s BRICS banking resistance to the IMF and Western Global Banking concerns, is pushing the US “Petro Dollar” out of its place as the World’s Reserve Currency, as this recent article notes:

Associated Press: France Wants Top-Level Ukraine Talks, Hopes To End Sanctions

By The Associated Press | Posted In The Kyiv Post | September 7th, 2015

“France wants to hold a meeting among the leaders of Russia, Ukraine and Germany in the coming weeks to resolve tensions around eastern Ukraine, in hopes of eventually lifting EU sanctions.

French President Francois Hollande said Monday that he will propose such a meeting in Paris ahead of the U.N. General Assembly later this month. 

He said there has been progress in recent weeks in implementing a troubled February peace deal, and said if that continues, “then I will argue for lifting the sanctions.”

EU sanctions and a subsequent Russian embargo have hurt many French and European companies.

Ukraine’s president is pushing to devolve some powers to the regions despite internal opposition. 

Russia firmly denies that it has sent troops and equipment to separatists in eastern Ukraine.”

I WONDER how much favor THAT buys with the US Banking and War Machine?

If THAT’S not enough, then there’s these “Swan Songs” for Monsanto that ALSO comes from France:

A. Russia And France Ban GMO’s []:

“On Thursday, France followed in the footsteps of other European Union countries—Scotland, Germany, Latvia and Greece—and has chosen the “opt-out” clause of a EU rule passed in March that allows its 28-member bloc to abstain from growing GMO crops, even if they are already authorized to be grown within the union.

Specifically, the country wants to shut out the cultivation of nine GMO maize strains within its borders, according to yesterday’s joint statement from Ségolène Royal, France’s Minister of Ecology and Sustainable Development, and Stéphane Le Foll, the Minister of Agriculture and Energy.

“It is part of the very important progress made ​​by the new European framework on the implementation of GMO cultivation in which France played a leading role,” the statement reads (via translation from Sustainable Pulse). 

“This directive makes it possible for Member States to request the exclusion of their territorial scope of existing authorizations or of those under consideration.”

France’s latest GMO-sweep also singles out Monsanto’s MON 810 maize, the only GMO crop grown in Europe, and is currently under review at the European level, Reuters reported.

France, which is the EU’s largest grain grower and exporter, is further cementing its anti-GMO sentiments with this latest move. 

The country already prohibits the cultivation of any variety of genetically modified maize due to environmental concerns.”

B. THEN THIS: “Monsanto Research Site in France Goes up in Flames” By Christina Sarich, Posted October 30th, 2015 in the Natural Society Newsletter:

[ ]:

A Monsanto research site in France was enveloped recently in heavy flames due to a possible arson attack against the company. 

Two areas dedicated to maize research caught fire with the smell of petrol lingering in nearby hallways and throughout other areas of Monsanto’s building site.

Jakob Witten, an official spokesperson for the company told police that the company suspects arson because no electrical damage was found.

Witten said that this was unprecedented violence against the Big Ag company as no other arson attempts had been made in Europe to date. However, forty tons of GM sugar beets were torched in Oregon, sparking an FBI investigation, so the sentiment behind this latest arson, if it indeed was an act of violence, is not unprecedented.

As Real Farmacy points out:

“. . this is exactly the type of retribution many have warned about, when lawmakers and corporations refuse to honor the Constitution and instead engage in ‘legalized’ criminal acts such as enabled by the ‘Monsanto Protection Act.’”

The news comes as Monsanto announces the closing of 3 research and development centers as well as the termination of approximately 2,600 employees amid falling stock prices and GM seed support.

The French have often criticized the U.S. agribusiness model and though member states of the EU were recently given an option to forgo the cultivation of GM crops with new legislation, politicians recently tried to over-rule that legislation and force GM crops on EU states who have made it exceedingly clear they aren’t interested in growing them.

Oh, SNAP…THAT Can’t Have Made Many Friends For France Among American Corporatists-N’EST PAS?

C. The TTIP Negotiations Seem Doomed In France , As Well:

France Threatens “Outright Termination” Of TTIP Corporate Trade Negotiations”

By Cassius Methyl, October 2nd, 2015 In Commentary In The Activist Post:

In a recent development with multinational trade agreements, France threatened to walk out on Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) negotiations this week. 

France is frustrated with the United States’ unwillingness to budge on issues, most notably the issue of secrecy within negotiations.

France’s junior trade minister, Matthias Fekl, is threatening “outright termination” of France’s involvement in the partnership, saying “total lack of transparency” in negotiations constitutes a “democratic problem.”

In an interview on Monday with French newspaper Sud-Ouest, Matthias Fekl said:

Europe has offered many compromises, in all areas, and has received no serious offers from the Americans in return. 

Neither for access to their public markets, nor for access to their agricultural and food markets, which remain closed.

According to Fekl, the United States must modify their position or face consequences. 

One of their main concerns is that the deal is highly secretive. 

According to Fekl, U.S. officials have access to more information than European officials and there is a serious lapse in communications.

He continued, “American members of parliament have access to a much higher number of documents than we do in Europe.”

“If nothing changes, that will show that there is no willingness to ensure a mutually beneficial negotiation process,” said Fekl. “France is examining all its options, including abandoning the negotiations all together.”

The TTIP is a trade agreement that makes leaps in enforcing the same laws across the board in several countries.

This is a secretive agreement made for corporate power at the expense of whatever stands in their way — an agreement protested by citizens — similar to the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TTP).

Details of the TTP and TTIP are not only hidden from the public, but are even hidden from government officials involved in the deals. 

Talks for the TTIP began around 2013.

For A Usually Benign France, Those Are Starting To Sound Like Fighting Words!

SO, it looks VERY clear, that as far the plans of the Obama Regime to push Russia around by proxy, create regime change in Ukraine AND Syria by proxy, maintain US Corporate Hegemony through Monsanto AND the TTIP/TISA, France has put it ALL in the crapper and is poised to pull the handle.

The US Corporate Plans for the world remain unchanged-but what happens now? With everything in flux as I’ve pointed out, the powers that be needed a major distraction. France has “strayed too far off the reservation” in regard TTIP/TISA and Monsanto, and needed a “wake-up call”…A Little Punishment, Perhaps?

And, of course, the Game of Brinkmanship Obama continues to play with Putin has been escalating over the last couple of weeks, with our partner Israel actually bombing Syrian targets…I doubt much “Detente” will come from that.

So…time for a REALLY BIG “False Flag” perhaps?

I’m just saying…

Niall Bradley – 22 Aug 2015 


In theory maybe…

With Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras calling snap elections in Greece, the boom has been lowered on that country’s rebellion, at least in its current form. 

Even before Syriza – arguably the first truly leftist government in Europe since Spain pre-WW2 – came to power in Greece in January this year, the EU central powers’ knives were out for them.

Immediately following Syriza’s victory at the polls, the Eurocrats began shutting off the cash flow from the European Central Bank to the Bank of Greece. 

They also began a sustained campaign of ‘capital flight’, withdrawing billions of euros from the Greek economy, thereby encouraging private investors to follow suit. 
They then put ‘capital controls’ in place, ostensibly to dampen the capital flight they themselves were causing, and which had the foreseeable effect of increasing Greece’s total outstanding debt by one third to an unpayable 312 billion euros. 

Greece’s economy has shrunk 30% since it first went into recession 8 years ago, a contraction worse – in both duration and depth – than the American Great Depression of the 1930s.

Throughout this campaign of financial terrorism, the Eurocrats stone-walled or otherwise thwarted all efforts by the Greek government to implement reforms that would relieve the Greek people and make the their economy productive again. 

They did this because they sought to bring the country to its knees, then institute the raft of austerity measures we’ve seen the Greek government accept now, in one fell swoop, and without resistance. 
For those of you familiar with Naomi Klein’s Shock Doctrine, this is economic shock therapy 101:
Only a crisis – actual or perceived – produces real change,” said monetarist schizoid-in-chief, Milton Friedman. In the process, the idea that the EU is based on social justice and solidarity has been exposed as nothing more than manipulative and cynical rhetoric. 

The European central powers sought to make Europe’s peripheral member-states aware of the real rules that govern the EU: ‘We rule, you comply. We pillage, you submit.’

During the crisis, the plucky Greeks brought up Nazi-era war reparations, and spoke out against anti-Russian sanctions, but at no point did they publicly mention a ‘Grexit’; rumors in that direction always came from the Eurocrats and the bankers.

Like a psychopath gaslighting its prey, they painted Grexit as a nightmare scenario, and then used it – ruthlessly – as leverage with which to financially terrorize the Greek population and ‘mentally waterboard’ their leaders.

The Greek government did, however, briefly consider what to do in such a ‘worst case’ scenario, but the half-hearted nature of their plans in that direction is the clearest indicator that they were committed to remaining in the EU and the euro zone, and transforming it from within.  

Unsurprisingly, the impetus for this came from former finance minister Yanis Varoufakis, who, when asked if they had made preparations for leaving the euro, said that his government had discussed it and:

“if they dared shut our banks down, which I considered to be an aggressive move of incredible potency, we should respond aggressively but without crossing the point of no return. We should issue our own IOUs, or even at least announce that we’re going to issue our own euro-denominated liquidity; we should haircut the Greek 2012 bonds that the ECB held, or announce we were going to do it; and we should take control of the Bank of Greece. This was the triptych, the three things which I thought we should respond with if the ECB shut down our banks.”

A (super)natural conspiracy


‘Not friends anymore?’. Dutch Fin. Min. Dijsselbloem offers a begrudging handshake to Varoufakis

Although the creditors and bondholders of so-called Greek ‘debt’ are protected by anonymity, lists have been leaked to German investigative journalist Harald Schumann, creator of two excellent documentaries: On the Trail of the Troika (2015), and The Secret Bank Bailout(2013). 

The biggest recipients of these billions read like a who’s-who of the financial world – Rothschild, BNP Paribas, Deutsche Bank among others. 

The reason these zombie banks cannot be allowed to fail is because the judicial process of discovery that would accompany such an event would reveal a network of bribery, corruption and nepotism between high finance, national banking sectors, and national government officials.

This is why, according to Varoufakis, Juncker said: “We can’t solve the systemic crisis and remain in power.”  

Whether you believe you’re looking at a conspiracy or ‘just the natural state of affairs’, the interests of political animals like Juncker and the financial vultures come together in tight-knit ways via networks spread out across Europe. Consider this passage from Political Ponerology:

In every society there are people whose basic intelligence, natural psychological worldview, and moral reasoning have developed improperly. Some of these persons contain the cause within themselves, others were subjected to psychologically abnormal people as children. Such individuals’ comprehension of social and moral questions is different, both from the natural and from the objective viewpoint; they constitute a destructive factor for the development of society’s psychological concepts, social structure, and internal bonds.

At the same time, such people easily interpenetrate the social structure with a ramified network of mutual pathological conspiracies poorly connected to the main social structure. These people and their networks participate in the genesis of that evil which spares no nation. This substructure gives birth to dreams of obtaining power and imposing one’s will upon society, and is quite often actually brought about in various countries, and during historical times as well.

In mathematics, ‘ramification’ is a geometric term used for ‘branching out’. It’s an apt term in this context because it captures the interconnectedness of financial speculators, Eurocrats, and clandestine military-intelligence networks without there necessarily being intentional linking-up or conscious coordination between all, or even most of them. 

Much like an ‘artificial neural network’ used in statistical models, we can conceive of networks of people – some explicitly bound to each other via conspiracies, others just loosely bound via mutual self-interest – that overlay and interpenetrate “the main social structure”; that is, the legitimate and productive social economy in which the masses of normal people live, work and develop normal relationships.


Ramified networks of mutually reinforcing vectors, feeding off the human super-organism

Varoufakis vs the Minotaur


‘EU Democratic principles? What EU Democratic principles?’

As the arbitrary June 30th ‘bailout deadline’ approached and Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras stunned the technocrats by announcing a referendum on whether or not to accept their demands, they did effectively shut down Greece’s banks, but the Greek government didn’t enact Varoufakis’ triptych. 

If you haven’t yet read it, here is Yanis Varoufakis’ interview with the New Statesman, which took place after he resigned and before the ‘deal’ took place in Brussels on July 12th.

Asked to share his experience of taking part in European Union-level meetings, Varoufakis said that it was “worse than he imagined“, that Eurocrats, prime minsters and finance ministers have a “complete lack of any democratic scruples.”

Varoufakis recounted how he would be met with blank stares when he explained the plain facts of Greece’s situation to them, “as if you haven’t spoken.” 

While you’d be forgiven for assuming that they did not understand what Varoufakis was saying, or that they did not want to hear what he was saying, he clarified that, occasionally, when they came out from “behind the parapet of the official line“, they “looked me in the eye and said: ‘You’re right in what you’re saying, but we’re going to crush you anyway’.”

Varoufakis at one point sought a legal opinion after the ‘Eurogroup’ chairman – Dutch Finance Minister Jeroen Dijsselbloem – broke with convention to issue a communiqué without all eurozone finance ministers being present. 

Varoufakis was told “the Eurogroup does not exist in law“, therefore he could have no objections to whatever its dominant members decreed.

Confirming what everyone knows about the state of ‘democracy’ in the EU, but which the mainstream media has acquiesced in covering up, Varoufakis said the ‘Eurogroup’ is

“not answerable to anyone, given that it doesn’t exist in law. No minutes are kept; and it’s confidential. So no citizen ever knows what is said within. These are decisions of almost life and death, and no member has to answer to anybody.”

Dijsselbloem – pronounced ‘day-sell-bloom’, and nicknamed ‘Mr.Euro’ – is a pen-pushing poster-boy of the EU project, a thoroughbred technocrat who oversaw the fleecing of Cyprus in 2013, when its government was told: “You agree to this, or you’re out of the eurozone.” 

The Troika forced the Cypriots, at financial gunpoint, to transfer 6 billion euros from Cypriot depositors’ bank accounts into one of the Greek zombie banks, which was thus ‘miraculously’ resurrected overnight, going from ‘insolvent’ to ‘profitable’.

Dijsselbloem warned at the time that “Cyprus would be used as the model for future bailouts.”


Wolfgang Schaeuble, Germany’s Finance Minister. Is it just me or is he the spitting image of a certain notorious German Chancellor?

Other revelations from Varoufakis make it crystal clear that Germany – in the form of German Finance Minister Wolfgang Schäuble – was in charge of proceedings throughout, and that the European Union today is a thoroughly German-controlled institution.

When ‘old ironsides’ Wolfgang said ‘jump’, everyone present knew the only answer was ‘how high?’

While European media have spent the last 6 months pumping out lies about Greek ‘intransigence’, ‘brinkmanship’, and ‘reluctance to negotiate’, Varoufakis reveals that what really happened is that the bankers, via the EU-ECB-IMF ‘troika’, were playing hardball from the moment Syriza was elected – stalling, blocking, or simply ignoring all proposals (most of which were patently conservative and ostensibly in line with creditors’ wishes) put forward by the Greek negotiating team.

Why would they do this if they were so concerned with recouping their money, and getting the Greek government to ‘reform’ Greek institutions?

Because the Eurocrats had zero interest in negotiations. 

It was THEY who were stalling for time in order to bring about precisely the scenario Greeks are faced with today: a state of economic siege, under assault from financial terrorists.
Varoufakis was explicit: “We were set up.” 
Ok, but still, why risk regional, and potentially global, economic fallout from the shock of a ‘Grexit’? 

Because the Criminal Class is gunning for regime change in Greece, and the regime change they seek is not just a changing of the guard via the removal of “those two communists, Tsipras and Varoufakis, but a literal change of regime in Greece: breaking the back of Greek popular resistance to ‘austerity measures’.

Their new foreign minister Nikos Kotzias had academic connections with one Aleksandr Dugin, the ideological leader of the Eurasianist Movement, a character so vilified in Western policy circles that you can feel the spray coming off the screen when reading rants about his alleged ‘neo-fascist, nationalist Bolshevik designs on destroying America and taking over the world.’

Whatever those two may have discussed prior to Syriza winning power, there’s no reason to doubt that the extent of recent Greco-Russian ‘plotting’ at government level was limited to discussion of sanctions and bilateral trade, including extension of the Turkish Stream gas pipeline into Greece. 

Ultimately, what Putin had to say on the matter… was all there is to say on the matter:

“Greece is a member of the EU and …conducts complicated negotiation process with its partners. Mr. [Alexis] Tsipras didn’t ask us for any help. And in general, it’s understandable because the numbers [of Greece’s debt] are high.”

There was nothing Putin could do to ‘save’ Greece.

The ‘obvious’ solution touted by some commentators – leave the eurozone, switch to the drachma, seek financial aid from Russia/BRICS, then join the Eurasian Economic Union – requires long-term thinking and planning, and expertly judicious execution. 
And no, Greece could not have gone solo by ‘doing an Iceland’.
The time to do so was in 2010, before Greece accepted ownership of the debt burden. 
But even then, it would have been no easy choice for Syriza’s predecessors.
Greece, unlike Iceland, is fully integrated, financially, economically and militarily, within the EU and NATO. 

It was in no position to leave because, had it done so, Germany and every financial speculator out there would have torn the Greek economy apart piece by piece.


Putin and Tsipras

There have been a number of rumors flying around about Greek-Russian ‘deals’ during the crisis. 

Among them is the claim that the Greek government asked Moscow for $10 billion to fund a return to the drachma, a request that was supposedly only turned down on the night of the referendum. 

Another story has an element of the Syriza party, upon learning that Tsipras had decided to fold to Germany, briefly considering placing the governor of the Greek central bank under house arrest, emptying the central bank’s vaults, and only then appealing to Moscow for help (presumably as ‘guarantors’ of their coup).

Evidently, none of that happened. Varoufakis has since gone public with detailed contingency plans he drew up at the eleventh hour to prepare for Greece being forced out of the Eurozone – or Tsipras deciding to keep up the fight against the Troika, whichever panned out first. 

For this, Varoufakis has been accused of treason, a ridiculous charge on the face of it, but one that has some truth to it: the Greek state was – and still is – effectively in ‘a state of coup d’état‘, thus if its leaders were going to make any bold moves, they would have had to do as Varoufakis suggested and take such measures as hacking their own tax systems in order to take back control from the real coup plotters in Brussels and Berlin.

But once Tsipras decided to fold and Varoufakis resigned, Greece’s swan song of protest had been sung.

I think the reason why Tsipras capitulated, when he appeared to have a stronger hand thanks to a successful referendum result against EU austerity, and after having already held out for six months, was because he didn’t have any other (humanitarian) option. 

Any rash decisions taken at that moment would only have brought a ‘color revolution’ on the heads of ordinary Greeks, and a headache for Moscow at a time when its strategy regarding US-occupied Europe – as far as it can be discerned – is to hold out for such a time when Berlin may reconsider its alignment with Washington.

A coup of sorts?

If we consider the historical pattern of reactionary forces across post-WW2 Europe that were either established by or subsumed into NATO-CIA-MI6 military-intelligence structure, and whose common


The Greek resistance fought the Nazis during WW2 only to be betrayed and slaughtered by the British

was to subvert trends towards left-wing government (under the pretext that such government is de facto under Moscow’s control), then we might wonder if this situation, where an actual left-wing European government made a show of developing friendly relations with Russia, presents a clear invitation to that power structure to respond covertly with some form of force.

Greece has all-too-vivid memories of counter-revolutionary forces suppressing democratic expression.

When the British crushed a popular Greek uprising in 1944, they did so by creating a right-wing military brigade (outside of the popular, anti-Nazi, volunteer resistance army, EAM) that went on to win a civil war and form the basis of today’s regular Greek army

When Greece joined NATO in 1952, the CIA made Greek Special Forces (the LOK Mountain Raiders) the country’s NATO ‘stay-behind’ secret army, and put them into action in a military coup in 1967.

Could Tsipras have been told or had it indicated to him – perhaps in no uncertain terms, but more likely through ‘whispers on the wind’ – that bloody mayhem would ensue if Syriza didn’t back down?

It has been speculated, based on reports that the Greek military was put on standby on July 5th – referendum day – in a rather ominously titled ‘Operation Nemesis’, that a Maidan-like showdown hung over Athens like the proverbial sword of Damocles:

‘Greek army and police prepare for street battles’
UK Sunday Times, 5 July 2015

Greek security forces have drawn up a secret plan to deploy the army alongside special riot police to contain possible civil unrest after today’s referendum on the country’s future in Europe.

Codenamed Nemesis, it makes provision for troops to patrol large cities if there is widespread and prolonged public disorder.

The Greek army has long avoided involvement in politics, but deployment of troops to contain unrest is extremely sensitive in a country with a history of military coups.

Several ministers in Alexis Tsipras’s leftist government, some of them former communists, voiced outrage when told of the proposal at a cabinet meeting on June 26, hours before he announced the vote.

 In Greek mythology, ‘Nemesis’ follows ‘hubris’, so was this a thinly veiled threat of retribution against Syriza’s ‘hubris’ for standing up to the money masters?
To gauge the likelihood of that, we’d need to know the circumstances behind the operation. 

As it was reported, there’s no reason to think that it wasn’t sanctioned by Tsipras as a precaution against riots breaking out – whether they occurred spontaneously or with the assistance of outside or subversive forces. In this case, putting military and security forces on alert is surely a measure to thwart conditions leading to a coup, not instigate them.

Nevertheless, there is some circumstantial data (it’s not ‘evidence’) of subversive forces at work in the background.

  • The day after Syriza was elected, a Greek F-16 fighter jet crashed on take-off at Los Llanos military base during a NATO military exercise in Albacete, Spain, killing two Greek and eight French military personnel, and injuring 21 others.
  • In mid-March, US Assistant Secretary for War in Europe European and Eurasian affairs, Victoria Nuland, visited Athens to subtly remind Tsiprasnot to break ranks with NATO allies against Russia.
  • The day after the punitive ‘bailout’ deal was reached in Brussels, locals were adamant that destructive fires, which broke out in and around Athens, were the work of arsonists. Pointing out that at least some of them began simultaneously, the mayor of the district of Ilioupoli, Vassilis Balassopoulos, claimed, “This is clearly arson, I heard explosive devices go off in the forest.”

But the best clue pointing to deliberate mahyem-making came when Athens police arrested 26 people during a riot in Athens on July 17th and charged them with smashing up a metro station and attacking police officers. 

14 of these agitators were non-Greeks: four came from Germany, three from Poland, two were French, one Australian, one Ukrainian, one Dutch, one Italian, and one Albanian.

In addition, police officers told Greek media outletKathimerini that there were other recent cases of foreign rioters, including a Syrian, a Pakistani and a Georgian arrested during similar clashes on July 5th. Some of them told police they had been paid between 20 and 30 euros to take part in the disturbances.

Whose army?

A variety of statements made by Greek and American elites highlight U.S. government interest in Greece accepting the third bailout program and remaining in the euro zone.

On the eve of the referendum, a group of 65 former generals and other senior Greek military personnel, including General Frangoulis Frangos, a former defense minister and head of the Greek army general staff until 2011, made an extraordinary intervention by signing an incredibly shrill public statement calling for a ‘yes’ vote:

“We have vowed to the Homeland and the flag. We devote our lives to the defense of the country. We have served the Republic and Liberty. Our goal has always been to defend the Nation and its Welfare. The circumstances and the times force us to express our fears and worries. The strength of our country is the most important thing we have and at this time its power is compromised. Our exit from Europe and the euro will make our country weaker. We will lose allies who have stood by our side. We will lose the power that is given to us by the associations and groups of countries to which we belong historically and culturally.

An important factor in a country’s power are its allies, who will hasten when it faces the highest risk. Without allies, our strength diminishes, the position of our country is discredited and the consequences will be terrible. The geopolitical position of the country is power, but also weakness [‘Power’ from the perspective of Greece’s location being important to the US; ‘weakness’ from the perspective of Greece being tempted to re-align with Russia – NB]. Our exit from Europe will make us weak to pressures that will intensify and become more threatening, and all the sacrifices Greeks have made will go to waste.

By choosing isolation we are endangering the Homeland and its future. With the choice of isolation, we are taking a risk with painful consequences. A risk that can have enormous costs for the Country, Democracy, Freedom and National Sovereignty. With the choice of isolation we are making the country powerless against the challenges of those who conspire against it; we make it weak against those who want it to kneel and to be subjugated.

Europe is our ally.

Greece is Europe.

Yes to Greece. Yes to Europe.”

To read that, you’d think Greece was facing an existential threat, like imminent nuclear holocaust, not a political decision over whether or not to accept the latest Brussels bailout terms.

And indeed, Greece is in a dire straits, but it’s a result of being in the euro, not out of it. In addition to this bizarre statement, Frangos ranted to Kathimerini:

“With its irresponsibility and its verbiage, the coalition government has vilified our homeland and Greeks worldwide, and have led them down a difficult path with an uncertain future, and complete impoverishment as a result of the criminal irresponsibility of those who cheated with ambiguous and false promises, and who have usurped the vote of the Greek people. Greeks must, as ever, decide wisely and with temper for our survival as a nation within Europe with a resounding YES on Sunday!”

Clearly referring to Tsipras, Fragkos also said that “the moral values and principles that have always defined us Greeks are not under negotiation with any clueless and historically ignorant [politician] who is advancing his own party interest.” 

But rather than describing Tsipras or the Syriza party, Frangos’ rant perfectly describes the kind of people who got Greece into this situation, and who Syriza ministers are up against in trying to get Greece out of it. Where does such paranoia come from, if not the Strangelovian mindset at NATO or the irrational Russophobia in Washington?

When Syriza first formed, one of the items on its to-do list was the “closure of all foreign bases in Greece and withdrawal from NATO,” something that would not have gone down well with the Greek military or Washington.

For some 15 years now, Greece has – per capita – consistently been the highest-spending European NATO member, thanks in part to enormous bribes for contracts from German and French weapons manufacturers

Even during its ‘debt crisis’, Greece has been one of just four member-states that fully implemented the NATO target of spending at least 2% of its annual GDP on the military.


Greece’s per capita military spending (on US, German and French weapons systems)

Oligarkhia, from oligoi – ‘few’ – and arkhein – ‘to rule’

There are countless ways in which pressure could have been brought to bear on Tsipras and his government. 

The question to ask is: who would have had the means and motive to threaten them? 

While the retired generals’ intervention made no explicit mention of NATO or US geopolitical interests, a separate intervention by wealthy Greek-Americans did cut straight to the chase in a pre-referendum statement on Greek priorities:

“Regardless of the outcome of the referendum held in Greece on July 5, 2015, what is crucial to the Greek American community is that U.S.-Greece relations remain strong and certain, and Greece’s geostrategic importance and contributions to the security interests of the U.S. and NATO is valued and appreciated.”


Greek-American lobby groups have been received at the White House by US Vice President Joe Biden on a number of occasions in recent months, ostensibly as part of their funding drive to provide Greece with ‘humanitarian aid’. 

In their most recent meeting, it was agreed that the US government will establish an “interministerial working group” to investigate possible areas of assistance to Greece, including “military support from the Pentagon.” 

In what appears to be an oblique reference to the Greek government’s deal with Putin to extend the Turkish Stream gas pipeline through Greece, these Greek-American lobbyists said they would like to see the US government “send a clear message that the U.S. wants Greece to become an energy hub,” presumably to the exclusion of Russian involvement.

There’s not much we can say about the likelihood of Greek military intervention in the form of a coup, or even whether the mere threat of a coup was weighing on Tsipras’s mind as the referendum result was announced, without knowing the political leanings of the current military heads. 

On the whole, I’m inclined to assume that their training and education – to say nothing of their daily working contact with NATO, especially in the current climate of hyper-paranoid US antagonism towards Russia – is likely to make them pro-NATO to the extent of supporting Washington’s bottom line: Greece must not be separated from the EU because the risk of separation from NATO follows.

Robert Kaplan is Senior Fellow at the Center for a New American Security (CNAS), the Democrats’ answer to the neo-conservative Project for a New American Century think-tank.  

In his June 30th op-ed in the Wall Street Journal, ‘The Greek Crisis Is About More Than Money‘, Kaplan went beyond Europeans’ fear of “euro-debt contagion” to spell out US geostrategic interest in keeping Greece within the Western fold:

[…] the spectacle of a major Balkan country pivotally loosening its ties with the West, even as Russia appears momentarily ascendant in the region, will be sobering in the extreme.

The first post-Cold War decades featured a secure Eurasian maritime sphere from the Mediterranean across the Indian Ocean to the Western Pacific. Thus, the weakening of Greece’s ties with the West in the eastern Mediterranean has to be seen alongside the ascendancy of Iran in the Persian Gulf and the rise of China in the South and East China seas as a singular process in the chipping away at American power.

Whether or not it was explicitly intended, the split we’re seeing in Syriza was inevitable: the revolutionary or independence movement’s leadership – when confronting the “ramified network of mutual pathological conspiracies” – is always forced to make the difficult, but heavily weighted, choice of backing down to live another day, or risking going down in flames with large numbers of the people they’ve sworn to defend.

By Eric Zuesse – Aug 16, 2015

What follows here, about the current U.S. government’s lying, is banned by all major news sites in the United States, and by most ‘alternative news’ sites, such as Common Dreams, Alternet, and Truthout (although some of those alt-news sites do issue watered-down reports from Robert Parry and a few other establishment journalists, about related matters):

Vladimir Kornilov posted to his Facebook page[] on August 15th, a terrific question that’s getting increasing attention on other independent websites:

I wonder about this: 

When the army of the DNI [commonly called Ukraine’s ‘rebels’] are retired Russian military, the West immediately writes about “Russian aggression”. 

And if retired (believe that retired) military mercenaries from the EU are fighting on the side of the APU [commonly called the Ukrainian government], why do the same media not write about “the aggression of the European Union?” 

That’s a great question, because it laser-focuses upon a Big Lie in the Western press regarding the civil war in Ukraine: that the Russian army is itself participating in Ukraine’s civil war (not merely providing professional military advisors to a self-arisen civilian army who are protecting their own families from invasions and basically from a U.S.-sponsored ethnic cleansing campaign by an imposed Ukrainian government in Kiev, which the residents in the separatist region never even had any participation in democratically electing — and, after the man, for whom those residents had actually voted 90%+ in Ukraine’s last genuinely democratic election, was thrown out of office in a violent February 2014 U.S. coup). [Link:]

The Russian armed forces are not participants in Ukraine’s U.S.-caused civil war: that’s a fact:

The allegation to the contrary is a U.S.-Ukrainian government lie — nothing else.

The U.S. Government is simply trying to fool the public into believing that the Ukrainian government’s bombing that area of the former Ukraine doesn’t cause thousands of the residents there to take up arms against those invaders, and against that government — the government which calls all of these residents ‘terrorists.’

Despite the claims by the Ukrainian government and by the American government that placed them into power, the Ukrainian government only wishes  that it were fighting against Russia, and so it is urging the U.S. government and America’s allies to supply more weapons to them so as to enable that to happen. 

On August 15th, a Ukrainian government site headlined, “Ukrainian army is not ready for war with Russia with the use of aircraft, helicopters and missiles – expert,” and quoted “Director of the Center for Army, Conversion and Disarmament, Valentine Badrak. 

According to the expert, ‘I am still of the opinion that the Kremlin made a bet on the maximum loss of Ukrainian personnel [in the event that Ukraine were to invade Russia — an invasion which some Ukrainian leaders strongly want], but in the final analysis the Kremlin boss can decide on war generation using modern aircraft, helicopters and missile technology.’”

Of course, ever since the war started, the bombs have been dropped by the Ukrainian government’s planes, onto the residents in this area, not by planes on the residents’ side, which has no air force of its own.

On 19 September 2014, I had headlined, “Russia’s Leader Putin Rejects Ukrainian Separatists’ Aim to Become Part of Russia,” and reported that, “The leader of the Ukrainian separatists says that their efforts to get Russia’s President Vladimir Putin to accept their territory as being a part of Russia have been firmly rejected by Putin’s government; and, so, ‘We will build our own country.’” 

And, ever since then, Putin has been very clear in all of his communications with Merkel and other foreign leaders, that Russia would not accept that region as being a part of Russia. 

He also made clear his reason: 

He wants the people in that region — who had voted 90%+ for a neutralist person, Yanukovych, to lead Ukraine — to remain within Ukraine’s electorate, so as to provide the necessary moderating element and counterbalance to the rabidly anti-Russian racists that were placed into power in Ukraine (next door to Russia), by Obama’s February 2014 coup. 

In other words: not only is the Ukrainian government not at war with the Russian government, but Russia’s leader, Vladimir Putin, is doing everything he can to prevent such a war from occurring.

In fact: Before the United States overthrew and replaced Ukraine’s government in February 2014, in a coup that started being organized in early 2013, Ukraine had no civil war; it was at peace, as it long had been.

Obama destroyed Libya, and also Ukraine, and is now destroying Syria, all in his obsession to conquer Russia, which had helped all three. 

And, now, Vladimir Putin is demonized by the Western ‘news’ media.

That’s how ‘news’ is being ‘reported,’ in the West. Except for sites like this, which don’t sugar-coat the reality to protect the guilty (and to shift blame to the actual victim).

In fact: the entire case for sanctions against Russia is pure lies.

Please click onto the link here :, if you want to see the evidence. 

(For example, here: you can listen-in while Obama’s people are actually planning whom to place in charge of Ukraine after their coup will be over. Obama has some nerve, pontificating against Putin, even after such vileness became public.)

%d bloggers like this: