Ronald Reagan’s regime, fittingly that of an actor, was the first self-consciously and fully p.r. managed administration. Professional liars in charge of all official reality.
This is part 1 of a commentary on the documentary film “Deception: The Reagan Method – Cold War in the Great North” by director and journalist Dirk Pohlmann. The film was published on the German/French channel ARTE in 2015, but has received undeservedly little attention since. In Western societies, there is a long tradition of tolerating inconvenient things to be published, presuming they never are placed in context and don’t get too much attention. But because of the timing of the documentary, during the intensified new Cold War with Russia after 2014, the explosive facts presented in it got even less broadcasting space than otherwise would have been the case.
Part 2 of the commentary discusses the false flag submarine operations against the Swedish Government and the murder of Olof Palme.
This article uses extensive quotes from the documentary, not all of them fully marked.
Part 1. The Deception Committee
Ronald Reagan came to power in 1981, and immediately ratcheted up the tensions in the Cold War. Reagan initiated a massive military buildup, accompanied by a major disinformation campaign and a war of nerves aimed at reducing the Soviet leaderships self-confidence. Superior financial resources and new technological innovations gave the US a technological and military edge. Reagan’s intention was to not just to hold one’s own, but to win the Cold War outright.
To achieve this, he formed an informal group, known as the ‘deception committee’, consisting of a few select close associates led by CIA-director Bill Casey. These military and intelligence officers were responsible for operational activities, giving the White House plausible deniability in case of exposure.
The Bear Trap
The Soviet Union had for many years been sourcing technology and high-tech parts from the West, legally if possible, illegally if necessary. The Soviet leader of this operation defects to the CIA, and tells them everything he knows. The CIA, led by Bill Colby, decides to lay a trap. From now on, every product or technology the Soviets acquire will have some hidden fault in them.
Colby’s plan had two stages. The first one is the direct problems causes by the faulty products and technology (like the dramatic explosion in the Yamal pipeline, below). The second stage is when the Soviets realize they have been duped. Since this imported technology is spread everywhere in the Soviet military and industry apparatus, Colby hopes that the Soviets will become so uncertain of what is real and what is false, that they will mistrust everything they have.
Sabotage of the Yamal Natural Gas Pipeline
In 1982, the Yamal pipeline, bringing natural gas from Siberia to Western Europe explodes. The blast is the largest non-nuclear explosion ever recorded. The reason? Faulty microchips from Western sources. Internally in the Reagan-administration, the CIA takes credit for it.
Extremely aggressive military exercises in the Barents Sea
The Deception Committee wants to go on the offensive. The US Navy, under Admiral James ‘Ace’ Lyons, is ready to make Reagan’s plans into reality.
James «Ace» Lyons, US Deputy Chief of Naval Operation:
Reagan embraced the maritime strategy. It suited perfectly his conviction that we had to go on the offensive in order to win the Cold War. With the previously used methods, we were not going to accomplish that. How could one use the US naval power, instead of just parading it?
John F. Lehman, US Secretary of the Navy:
Reagan accepted my recommendation that we immediately should start a major NATO exercise north of the line Greenland-Iceland-Great Britain. Immediately. And repeat them every year. To prove to the Soviets that we could operate in the Barents Sea, the Norwegian Sea.
The US Navy positions itself in front of the most important Soviet harbor, Murmansk, with an aircraft carrier and its escort ships.
The Kola Peninsula was at that time the world’s most valuable real estate, because the Soviets had concentrated their entire strategic submarine with nuclear missiles there. Which they rightly regarded as the basis of their nuclear power. Like us with our nuclear submarines. Because these nuclear missiles were invincible – they thought.
The US Navy is going to show the Soviets something else. The technological superiority is so large that they can play cat and mouse with the Soviets, whenever the navy wants to. ‘Ace’ Lyons decides on hard measures. Lyons wants the Soviets to experience Shock and Awe. The US Navy is going to teach the Russians a lesson, to prove to them how inferior they are.
Admiral Lyons: We used a lot of camouflage and deception, and one method was to let a destroyer send all the signals you would normally expect from a carrier. That is, communication, all the sounds a carrier entails, we transmitted artificially. So that Soviet submarines could pick that up. Lyons lets the destroyer withdraw. The Soviets believe the carrier has turned back, but suddenly the sky is full of American fighter planes.
The entire air wing from the carrier USS Eisenhower then practices a first strike on the Soviet Union in the Barents Sea.
Lyons: By flying one mission after the other, all the way to the border, we demonstrated that we could penetrate their defenses and destroy their submarine fleet, their command and control, and their support on the Kola Peninsula – and put them out of action.
In addition, the US Air Force every week flew missions with bomber planes all the way to the Soviet border. The Soviets didn’t know what was going on. From this, the Soviet leadership is supposed to get the message that their military machine, impressive when seen from outside, in reality isn’t able to defend the empire.
John F. Lehman, US Secretary of the Navy:
We know, from their own operational analysis, that they only could hold out for a week. And that they would lose their entire Northern Fleet in less than a week. So that knowledge fed back to the Soviet general staff and the Soviet leadership. But also to the corresponding NATO-councils.
The public in the NATO-states is not informed about the Soviet fears, and also not about the growing panic in the military and the Politburo, which fears that the American attack exercises are preparations for a possible first strike.
One might notice that Lehman sees nothing wrong in almost starting WW3.Instead he scoffs at the ones urging caution:
Lehman: We were not concerned that an error, an unintended war, should start. Those who feared it the most were the same people who for 20 years had prevented NATO-navies from successfully operating outside the Soviet coast.
These new aggressive exercises almost stated a nuclear war in other places as well. In 1983, the NATO-exercise Able Archer in Central Europe introduced a new level of realism. The realistic features, combined with aggressive rhetoric, makes the Soviet leadership conclude that a nuclear attack is imminent. Soviet nuclear bombers with their engines running are only waiting for the ‘go’ signal. Frenetic warnings from spies at the last minute prevent a nuclear Holocaust.
The documentary concludes this part with: «The Deception Committee had gone too far. This wasn’t a brilliant game of intelligence-chess, it was an all-in with the Third World War as stake. Even then, the Committee continued to use staging of reality, to create ‘Shock and Awe’ as a reaction.»
Published on 19 Jun 2019
False Flag Submarines in Sweden – the Olof Palme assassination
This is part 2 of a commentary on the documentary film “Deception: The Reagan Method – Cold War in the Great North” by German director and journalist Dirk Pohlmann. The film was published on the German/French channel ARTE in 2015, but has received undeservedly little attention since (except from the chief of the Swedish Navy, who held a lecture about the documentary to a select audience). Because of the timing of the documentary, during the intensified new Cold War with Russia after 2014, the explosive facts presented in it got even less broadcasting space than otherwise would have been the case.
Palme – a man with enemies
Sweden had long been aligned with NATO. Already in the 1960s, Sweden was integrated in NATO’s plan. Only hours after a world war breaks out, Central Europe would, as the main battle ground, only be a pile of radioactive ashes. The plan was then for the US to use Sweden as an air base against the Soviet Union, an unsinkable aircraft carrier. This was a common policy, agreed upon by all the major Swedish parties, including the Social Democrats, but was kept hidden from the Swedish population.
Sweden was a split society, a division that got harder in the 1980s. The elected government has long been the Social Democratic Party. But the country has a very reactionary elite, in business, aristocracy and the military. This elite identifies very closely with Britain and the US.
From the US/NATO point of view, Olof Palme showed several problematic tendencies even before he became prime minister. During the Vietnam War, he prominently joined peace demonstrations, walking together with the North-Vietnamese envoy. Already in 1972, Nixon called Palme «that Swedish asshole».
In 1980, Olof Palme, now Prime Minister, established the Independent Commission on Disarmament and Security Issues, also known as the Palme Commission. The Commission favored the demilitarization of space, the elimination of chemical arms from Europe, and the reduction of conventional weapons. The commission also advocated negotiations in Europe to reduce political tensions between the states and military blocs, to reduce the potential for military conflict. This goes down very badly with the Reagan administration.
The curious Whiskey on the Rocks incident
On October 27, 1981, a Soviet submarine in the Whiskey-class got stranded in a fjord outside the Swedish naval base in Karlskrona, the infamous Whiskey on the Rocks incident. The documentary analyses the highly curious random movements of the sub before the stranding. The fjord where the alleged spy sub ran aground is really unsuited for submarine activities, with only two feet of water under the keel. The Soviets would have been aware of this.
The sub also did some curious maneuvers after getting stuck. Instead of using proper procedures for getting off the reef, newly revealed camera footage reveals the submarine seems to have used the propeller force to get even more stuck – making it much more visible.
The Swedish officer is charge of the first response is interviewed, and states that he was not allowed by his own superiors to question all the relevant crew members, only a few select ones.
What really happened is still unclear almost 40 years later, but are we talking treason, or did the Deception Committee play a part?
The pictures of the stranded Soviet sub goes around the world, a PR-disaster for the Soviet Union.
False Flag Submarines Sweden – The admirals commit treason against their own government
A while after the grounding outside Karlskrona, a periscope and submarine tower is sighted outside the Swedish naval base of Muskö. The submarine makes no attempts at hiding its presence, and the Swedish navy begins a frenetic anti-submarine hunt. World media rushes in again, and gives this new chase wide coverage. But no submarine is found.
This pattern repeats itself several hundred times over the next few years. A submarine is spotted, but the chase gives no results. At the time, the Palme-government had begun several broad detente initiatives, but because of all these sightings, he was instead forced to send angry protests to the Soviet ambassador. The ambassador’s answer? After conferring with home, he tells the Swedes: «We know they don’t belong to us, so we aren’t worried. But if you are sure, please bomb them!»
When the Swedish navy subsequently finds something and is prepared to force the suspected submarine to surface, the chase is always cancelled at the last minute by direct orders from high-ranking Swedish admirals.
From a US/NATO point of view, these incidents are a major success. The number of Swedes believing in a Soviet threat increases from 24% to 83%.
Mathias Mossberg, general secretary of the third Swedish government commission on the submarine incidents concludes his interview as follows:
The Swedish public, the Swedish parliament and the Swedish government were taken for a ride. And Swedish media? In what kind of world are we really living?
Ambassador Pankin became the Soviet Union’s last foreign minister, under Gorbachev. He uses the opportunity to inquire if there really were any Soviet submarines in Swedish waters.
I asked defense minister Shaposhnikov and KGB-leader Batakin, officially and unofficially. I asked them to search their archives and find out if there were documents that confirmed we had crossed their border. I motivated them by making it clear that they were not bound. They were appointed by the new democratic leadership in the country, and did not have to hide their predecessors ‘skeletons in the closet’. And both gave me an official answer within two weeks. There were no documents, no evidence, pointing in that direction.
Ambassador Pankin finishes plaintively:
There is something that worries me a lot. That it even in such an enlightened, educated, European, Northern European country, a bastion for democracy, seemingly is simple, as it turned out, to fool the majority of the population, to zombify them.
Since 1983, there have been three inquiries into the submarine affair. The first inquiry concluded that there were Soviet submarines. The second concluded that one couldn’t prove it. A couple of years later, an interview with US Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger was published, where he clearly admitted the US had been involved. This forced the Swedish parliament to start a third inquiry.
Caspar Weinberger, US Secretary of Defense:
There was no testing of the Swedish defenses without prior consultation with the Swedes. You are speaking of an agreement.
Keith Speed, UK Navy Minister:
There might well have been penetrations of Swedish territorial waters; could submarines penetrate and emerge in Stockholm harbor? Not quite, but something similar. When I was minister, we had the Oberon and Porpoise-classes of submarine, our diesel submarines.
In clear language: The high command of the Swedish navy knew that NATO-submarines cruised in Swedish waters. Why didn’t they inform their own government? And what role did the Americans and British play?
Mathias Mossberg, general secretary of the third inquiry:
And these were the kind of things we had to fight with. …What we were dealing with, was a certain group who didn’t tell the whole truth to its own government, about what they knew, what had happened and what they had done.
They had made decisions with wide-reaching implications for Swedish security and foreign policy. Decisions made outside the democratic structures of the Swedish government. Then you have to ask yourself where you really are. In a country where the military conspires with a foreign power against their own prime minister?
(Ulf Svensson, Director for Security Policy in the Swedish Foreign Ministry):
The highest level of the military claimed this was the Eastern Bloc, Russian submarines, even when they knew it wasn’t. They should have been charged, legally. For the most serious crimes. For the worst of crimes. For having breached fundamental national interests. But in order to do this, the case would have to be airtight.
Documentary narration: In the meantime, new circumstantial evidence have emerged from the murky waters. The identity of the mysterious submarines is now largely established. Mini-subs and their so-called ‘mother ships’ were observed by witnesses. They saw 3 types of submarines. A large sub, that remained a bit away from the coast. In the brackish Baltic Sea, the submarine has less buoyancy than in the North Sea, which it was originally designed for. If it also carries two mini-subs, the buoyancy isn’t sufficient to let the vessel float. Therefore the air tanks have to be enlarged. And that is just what one can see in this photo. A provisional device of white air pipes and angel irons, protection against collision with the mini-subs.
And then there were two types of submarine closer to shore. There are very detailed descriptions of them in top-secret documents. The smaller one, 30 feet long, was teardrop-shaped. It had a window in front and a chute on top. And all this information is identical to an Italian submarine called 3GST9.
Drawings made by eye witnesses show the second type. A mini-submarine in the Cosmos-class. Characteristic is the foldable snorkel mast behind the tower, with an orb for satellite communication.
(Ola Tunander, Professor in Security Politics at PRIO):
When I talked to a top representative of the US Navy and asked him why all the information matched Italian submarines, and asked him why you used them, he answered ‘plausible deniability’. If it is an Italian submarine, then one doesn’t have any physical evidence leading to the US. So one can say: ‘yes, these Italian captains are very adventurous, you can never trust Italians.’
(the article continues under the picture)
The Palme assassination
Many people involved believed the common European security policy again had a chance of succeeding. The Russians, at least, were very interested in getting something like this moving.
Palme planned a state visit to Moscow in 1986. The subjects: Common security policy and the submarines incidents. With the new leader Gorbachev, everything is possible.
Four weeks before the state visit, which might have been a breakthrough for Palme’s policy, he was murdered.
Gorbachev: I have no doubts that it was a political murder. A contract murder. Such a murder doesn’t happen by coincidence, no.
Question: Why do you believe it was a political assassination?
Gorbachev: If his vision had come true, it would have disturbed powerful interests. There are groups which are not interested in a better world.
The Swedish state channel SVT did purchase the documentary and had it translated into Swedish. On reply to a question, SVT said that they intended to send it «after the summer» 2016. It was to be followed by a critical comment by representatives of the Swedish Armed Forces, explaining the established line in the submarine issue and where they thought the documentary was wrong. In the end SVT cancelled the airing.
Dirk Pohlmann, despite his many previous documentaries, extensive knowledge in this area and undeniable journalistic talent, has not been contracted to make any new documentaries since. His most recent focus, documenting how the German part of Wikipedia is tightly controlled by a small clique of Wiki-editors who allow no dissent in sensitive issues, and where critics of the transatlantic line are thoroughly character assassinated similar to the Phillip Cross affair in Britain, is only published by the alternative press.
The documentary finishes:
Reagan laid the foundation for a gigantic expansion of special forces and the intelligence services. Today they have a budget of approximately 80 billion dollars. His Deception Committee was enormously successful. How often have his methods been copied? The Reagan method is now also known to the Russian leadership. And since then, at the latest, this method entails a high price.
That we all are paying.
There have been several earlier versions of the Deception Committee, most notably under president Eisenhower. Looking at today’s headlines, how many stories are NOT created by a modern counterpart?
Be sure to get the most unique history of the Russo-American conflict now spanning almost a century! The book that every American should read.
THIS WORK IS LICENSED UNDER A Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License