Taiwan: US deployment area against mainland China – since 1945

Please make sure these dispatches reach as many readers as possible. Share with kin, friends and workmates and ask them to do likewise.


By Werner Rügemer
(Germany)


Under U.S. guidance, the regime of Generalissimo Chiang Kai-Shek was installed in Taiwan beginning in 1945: He had already been supported by the USA in the 1920s, then also by Hitler's Germany. Taiwan is being instrumentalized against the People's Republic of China, again intensified since U.S. Presidents Obama and Trump. The current US President Biden is even toying with a possible war with the help of Taiwan.

At the end of the 19th century, China was simultaneously subjugated and exploited by all colonial powers of the time - especially by Great Britain with the help of the annexed territory of Hong Kong (crown colony since 1843), but also by Russia, France, Italy, the Netherlands, Belgium, Portugal, and finally also by the colonial newcomers USA, Japan and Germany. In a joint war campaign, they bombed the capital Beijing, then set up embassies there and took command of the formally continuing Chinese government.

The colonial powers raided enormous wealth with their trading companies, banks, mines and corporations, crushed uprisings (most famously the "Boxer Rebellion"), destroyed the rule of law, civil society, order, government and the environment. Partial modernization and industrialization along Western lines simultaneously benefited a tiny Chinese elite. The country plunged deep into poverty, disorganization and depression (mass sale of opium by British companies from Hong Kong). Local warlords, collaborating with the colonialists, exploited the ungovernability. Millions of people starved, vegetated, were killed for resisting and rebelling.

Bourgeois Revolution: Sun Yatsen 1912

The bourgeois-radical revolutionaries under Sun Yat-sen and his Kuomintang Party ousted the Chinese collaborationist government in 1912 and declared the Republic of China. Sun Yat-sen was supported also by the Soviet Union, the Comintern, and the Chinese Communist Party, which was founded in 1921.

In contrast, the colonialist victorious powers of World War 1 in the Treaty of Versailles under the leadership of U.S. President Woodrow Wilson (1919) allowed Japan's rule over the Chinese island of Taiwan, annexed in 1895, to continue and even transferred rule over the previous German colony of Quingdao to the further rising imperial power of Japan. England's annexation of Hong Kong remained in place, as did Portugal's annexation of Macao.

The United States, in particular, continued to treat China as one of its spheres of influence: Standard Oil took over the oil and gasoline business, the Rockefeller Foundation financed the medical department of Peking University, and the lavishly funded missionary organizations Young Men's Christian Association (YMCA) and Young Women's Christian Association (YWCA) established schools and boarding schools in many cities. Sun Yatsen's government could not withstand these influences.

 USA and Hitler support Chiang Kai-Shek

After SunYat-sen's death in 1925, the old feudal and US-British oriented elites remained in China. They relied on General Chiang Kai-shek as the new leader of the Republic of China. He was simultaneously head of the military and the government. He was supported by the United States who funded his army and his lifestyle, which included an extensive court.

Nazi Germany also recognized a kindred spirit in Chiang: Hitler Youth camps in China. Hitler sent Wehrmacht generals Hans von Seeckt and Alexander von Falkenhausen as military and industrial advisors. The German corporations IG Farben, Junkers, Heinkel, Rheinmetall, Messerschmitt, Krupp, Otto Wolff equipped chiang‘s army. However, German support ran out from 1938 after Japan invaded China and Hitler allied with the Japanese Empire as the incomparably larger and more important power.

U.S.: "He's a son of a bitch, but he's our son of a bitch."

But the U.S. continued its support of Chiang. During the World War, there were about one thousand U.S. military advisors in Chiang's army: it was supposed to fight the Japanese occupation army, but increasingly fought the strengthening People's Liberation Army under Mao Tse Tung. The Catholic Church also joined in the fight, because the U.S. favorite, like Hitler, proved to be a militant fighter against the "communist danger." In 1942, Chiang's dictatorship received diplomatic recognition from the Vatican (which continues uninterrupted to this day). In 1943, Chiang was invited to Cairo by U.S. President Roosevelt and British Prime Minister Churchill.

The Vatican and the national Catholic churches, like the U.S. - especially the arms, oil and car companies and Wall Street banks - supported anti-communist Catholic dictators and putschists everywhere at the time, such as Mussolini in Italy, General Franco in Spain, Salazar in Portugal. Shortly after Hitler came to power in 1933, the Vatican had already concluded the Concordat with him. Chiang did not even have to be a Catholic; he had converted to Methodism as a favor to the United States, but that did not bother the Vatican.

Chiang Kai-Shek had workers' and peasants' uprisings shot up. U.S. military advisers coined for him, with understanding, the consecration "Cash My Check“ in allusion to his name. U.S. President Roosevelt supported the corruption system, following the time-tested motto of U.S. foreign policy, "He's a son of a bitch, but he's our son of a bitch."

1945: The USA smuggles the Chiang regime into Taiwan

After the war, the U.S. took over the island of Taiwan, which had been annexed by Japan until then, and handed it over to Chiang as head of the Republic of China, which was declared to continue to exist. The U.S. military smuggled some 600,000 soldiers and officers from the Generalissimo's demoralized army, which was losing more and more rapidly to Mao Tse Tung's army of millions, to the island.

Chiang formally continued the Republic of China with the Kuomintang Party on the island. He had taken the gold treasure of the rump state with him, as well as the administrative elite. Together with the United States, they hoped for the rapid overthrow of the People's Republic, which had been founded under the leadership of Mao Tse Tung in 1949.

Massacre of locals

The U.S. Army trained Chiang soldiers in the United States : They were then parachuted into mainland China from the island and from Hong Kong to organize uprisings.

The good dozen indigenous peoples and the majority of the locals were kept in check, as under the Japanese colonial regime, and were allowed to take up only subordinate positions. Local uprisings were bloodily put down by Chiang's deputy, justified by the "communist danger" staged by the USA in Europe and Asia at the time. On Feb. 28, 1947, the regime massacred a popular uprising - at least 28,000 locals were murdered.

The counterrevolution exported to the mainland did not work. The population on the island had to be kept down. Therefore, in 1948, with the approval of the United States, the "Temporary Regulations for the Period of National Mobilization to Suppress the Communist Insurrection" were issued. This emergency decree, with the sole authority of the president and the prohibition of new media, associations and parties, then applied "temporarily," namely for four decades, until 1988.

Taiwan: Unsinkable carrier of the USA

The U.S. practiced what it later called nation-building: It enforced that the separated territory of Taiwan represented all of China in the UN. And the island was promoted industrially while the "CoCom list" (Coordinating Committee on Multilateral Export Control) was drawn up by the U.S. In 1949 excluded the People's Republic of China from the supply of technologically important goods - Taiwan was showered with them. All members of NATO including also Japan, Australia and even "neutral" Switzerland had to abide by this. (CoCom only in 1994 was dissolved)

As in the Federal Republic of Germany, which was occupied by the USA at the same time, production in Taiwan in the 1950s was for the US war in Korea. The U.S. Army as well as the military of the West German Federal Republic trained Taiwanese officers.

The island with the small islands Quemoy and Matsu offshore to the mainland was developed into an unsinkable US aircraft carrier. In the following decades, subcontracting orders, initially for U.S. corporations, led to the creation of Foxconn, the world's largest organizer of casernized low-wage labor (today's main customers are Hewlett Packard, Apple, Microsoft, Sony and Nintendo), and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Corporation (TSMC), one of the world's largest chip manufacturers.

In contrast, the USA prevented the People's Republic of China from joining the World Trade Organization (WTO) until 2001.

1971: The People's Republic replaces Taiwan in the UN

It was not until 1971 that the People's Republic, supported by several dozen developing countries and the Non-Aligned Movement, achieved recognition as China's representative in the UN (UN Resolution 2758 of October 25, 1971). [After much internal squabbling, and an opportunistic desire to put a wedge between Moscow and Beijing] the United States therefore also transferred diplomatic recognition to the People's Republic of China.

Taiwan, with its 23 million inhabitants, continued to receive special support from the United States. However, this was scaled back on the military level, at least until the early 2000s. The reason: The largest U.S. corporations were able to shift as much supplier production as possible to the People's Republic, which was extremely profitable, because the People's Republic was an absolute low-wage state at the beginning of industrialization. The low-wage economy was often organized with the help of Foxconn: The profits of U.S. corporations and then other Western corporations skyrocketed.

Low-wage organizer Foxconn flees to the USA and the EU

That changed slowly, but permanently. The practices associated with importing Western companies and contracts were transformed in the People's Republic, unlike other Western-dominated developing countries such as India: labor incomes in the People's Republic were gradually increased several times over decades, and the number of socially insured people is increasing. Chinese minimum wages now exceed the minimum wages of several EU countries (the U.S. anyway), especially when purchasing power is included.

The largest previous organizer of low-wage labor in China, the Taiwanese corporation Foxconn, is therefore gradually saying goodbye to the People's Republic. Foxconn migrated to the Czech Republic, a member state of the European Union, in 2016 with two plants and is taking advantage of the low EU standards and weak trade unions there. It also wants to develop further low-wage sites in the Middle East and Africa from there. At the beginning of 2019, Foxconn set up its first subsidiary in the USA with the support of US President Trump: the state of Wisconsin had declared itself a right-to-work state in 2015. It means: there, trade unions are additionally discriminated against compared to the already weak US federal laws. Thus the wages are low in a sparsely populated region, and company start-ups are highly subsidized by central and individual states. Foxconn is now building operations also in Thailand for e-car delivery. The decades-long super-profit source in the People's Republic of China is drying up.

Obama, Trump, Biden: Tightening up Taiwan's arms buildup.

Taiwan's one-party dictatorship lifted the emergency constitution in 1988, after four decades, and allowed parliamentary elections, gave itself a democratic appearance, continued to receive economic and media support from the U.S., but had to and was able to buy high-quality armaments elsewhere. This was not a problem: For example, the Armament company Dassault of France supplied the Mirage fighter jet.

With the unexpected economic and technological upswing of the People's Republic - both internally and globally as the largest trading partner and through the New Silk Road - and with the decline in super-profits for U.S. corporations, U.S. President Obama in particular then changed policy: "Pivot to Asia" was the new guideline - turn to Asia! The US animates their allies Australia and Japan to provoke conflicts with the People's Republic. Also, the USA concluded in 2021 an additional military alliance (AUKUS) to act more precisely against the new secular enemy.

With Abrams tanks, Stinger anti-aircraft missiles, guided missile-equipped warships and F-16 fighter jets produced by the US companies General Dynamics, Raytheon and Lockheed, Taiwan is fifth on the U.S. arms export list since 2020, after Israel, Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Australia.

The EU takes part

The Biden administration accompanies its military buildup with diplomatic campaigns. State Department's Antony Blinken wants to "upgrade" Taiwan at the UN. The most subservient U.S. vassal in the EU, the impoverished and at the same time highly digitalized small state of Lithuania with three million inhabitants, was the first to answer the call and inaugurated the "representation of Taiwan" in the capital Vilnius on Nov. 18, 2021 - the first of its kind. Until now, due to the diplomatic non-recognition of Taiwan, its representations abroad are called "Taipei Representation" (Taipei = capital of Taiwan).

The European Commission and the European Parliament did not prevent this breach of international law by the EU member Lithuania and did not even reprimand it. On the contrary, the Parliament decided by a large majority that a first bilateral investment agreement of the EU with Taiwan will be concluded and that the office of the EU in Taiwan will be strengthened. A parliamentary delegation in early November 2021 emphasized the EU's solidarity with Taiwan against the "threat" from the People's Republic of China and praised the Taiwanese government's exemplary cooperation with Facebook in combating disinformation campaigns.

U.S.: Nuclear first strike is possible, but strengthen intelligence first

Since Obama, the United States has again officially been preparing for the possibility of a nuclear first strike. The "only world power" maintains by far the largest global military apparatus, on land, at sea, in the air, in space and on several hundred territories around the globe - many of them illegally annexed, as in Guantanamo, Guam, Kosovo - in order to maintain its special role, which it has assumed and continues to assume in violation of international law.

Already against the already defeated Japan, the USA used the two atomic bombs over the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki at the end of World War II in violation of human rights and international law, without any remorse and compensation until today. How incomparably closer would be in this logic today the nuclear first use against China. But this is highly dangerous for the USA itself, in view of the superior second-strike capability of the People's Republic.

Therefore, the U.S. is intensifying its political and media destabilization campaigns. They are instrumentalizing colonial and pre-democratic remnants such as in Hong Kong, Tibet (religious feudalism), Xinijang (Muslim separatist movement), and Taiwan is now being increasingly added as a point of ignition.

But that's not enough for the crazed hotheads: in October 2021, the CIA intelligence agency announced the creation of a new independent large-scale unit - China Mission Center. It is to counter "the greatest geostrategic threat to the United States in the 21st century," the People's Republic of China. Espionage and counterespionage, terrorism and counterterrorism are part of it. But all important new global conflict areas are also to be instrumentalized: Climate change, technology, and global health, including health policy and pandemics.

It has never been more necessary than now that the EU, the whole of Europe and the "rest of the world" finally break away from this highly dangerous policy of the "only world power" USA, which constantly feels threatened and which is contrary to human rights and international law.


Werner Rügemer is a German commentator, lecturer and writer. He is considered to be a leading "intervening philosopher".

 


 

The views expressed herein are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of The Greanville Post. However, we do think they are important enough to be transmitted to a wider audience.


 


[premium_newsticker id=”211406″]


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License

ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL QUOTES BY THE EDITORS NOT THE AUTHORS

Read it in your language • Lealo en su idioma • Lisez-le dans votre langue • Lies es in Deiner Sprache • Прочитайте это на вашем языке • 用你的语言阅读




NATO: The founding lie

Please make sure these dispatches reach as many readers as possible. Share with kin, friends and workmates and ask them to do likewise.


Werner Rügemer

by Werner Rugemer
Monday Apr 25th, 2022 6:19 AM

In reality, the "cold" war began shortly after the war started, around 1941. Roosevelt and Churchill intervened militarily as late as possible in the war - despite repeated requests from their ally Stalin: The Red Army and the German Wehrmacht were to destroy each other as much as possible

Hitler salutes units of the German army, in Warsaw, Poland, Oct. 5, 1939. At far right is General Von Brauchitsch, Chief of the German Army. The Anglo-Americans' grand design was for Berlin and Moscow to destroy each other. (AP Photo)


After World War 2 in 1945, the U.S. knew: There is no danger from the weakened Soviet Union. But with the pincer grip of Marshall Plan and NATO, the USA integrated the Western, Northern and Southern European countries into its economic and military expansion. Ex-Nazis and ex-Nazi collaborators were promoted, on the other hand anti-fascist parties, movements, persons were eliminated, infiltrated, bought. At the same time, the USA also helped the governments to fight against liberation movements in the colonies - also because of raw materials for US corporations. After 1990, the founding lie and thus the military-capitalist pincer grip was continued with the "eastward expansion". This includes the dismantling of prosperity and freedom for the majority populations: The EU and more and more US corporations, investors and consultants are organizing Americanization with working poor, working sick as well as legalized and illegal labor migration - at the same time militarization and hostility against Russia is being expanded: Domination of Eurasia from Lisbon to Vladivostok was the plan from the beginning. We bring a chapter from the book by Werner Rügemer: Imperium EU - ArbeitsUnrecht, Krise, neue Gegenwehr. Cologne 2020. The war in Ukraine does not play a role in it, of course, but it becomes explainable in some respects. Sources have been omitted.

"Russia" after World War II: No Danger

In the run-up to the founding of NATO, those responsible in the USA knew: The Soviet Union posed no military threat. The weakened power could not sustain an attack on Western Europe even if it wanted to: The Soviet Union's economy is largely destroyed and technologically obsolete; its transportation system is too primitive; its oil industry is easy to attack. Nor does the Soviet Union have the atomic bomb. "The men in the Kremlin are clever tyrants who will not risk their internal power by military adventures abroad. They want to win the battle for Germany and Europe, but not by military action," was the judgment of George Kennan, the chief planner in the State Department, for State Department Chief Marshall, for President Truman, and for U.S. ambassadors in various memoranda in 1948.

But why did the U.S. and its then still few allies nonetheless establish NATO, a military alliance expressly directed against the Soviet Union?

The Legend of the "Cold War

The legend states that NATO was a "product of the Cold War" after the end of World War 2. In reality, NATO is a product of U.S. expansion, which was already underway before U.S. military intervention in WWII.

The "cold war" is one of the most resourceful ideological constructs used by the U.S. opinion machine to disguise U.S. practices from WW2 to the present. The term was popularized by the most important US ideologue of the 20th century: Walter Lippmann, the father of "neoliberalism."

"Cold War" is supposed to mean: After WW2, the military war is over, and the phase of non-military confrontation between the "free West" and the "communist Eastern Bloc" begins. But during the "cold war" the USA and the first NATO countries waged hot, very hot wars, e.g. in Greece, Korea, the Philippines, in Africa and Indochina - this will have to be returned to.

In reality, the "cold" war began shortly after the war started, around 1941. Roosevelt and Churchill intervened militarily as late as possible in the war - despite repeated requests from their ally Stalin: The Red Army and the German Wehrmacht were to destroy each other as much as possible. The U.S. and British governments also rejected in principle any internal resistance to Hitler. Wall Street lawyer Allen Dulles, as head of the intelligence agency Office of Stragic Services (OSS) based in Switzerland, did not want the assassins of July 20, 1944 to succeed - the U.S. military wanted to prevent an early armistice with the Soviet Union at all costs. The Red Army was to suffer as high losses as possible in the further fight against Hitler's Wehrmacht.

Advancing the U.S. "defense" line to Europe

Walter Lippmann (left), a Harvard graduate who initially saw himself as a leftist and socialist, had helped organize the propaganda for the U.S. entry into the war for the U.S. War Department during World War I (Committee on Public Information, CPI): In 1917, the pacifist neutrality pledge of U.S. President Woodrow Wilson was to be reversed, and the U.S. entry into the war was now to be justified.

After that, Lippmann had theoretically justified and journalistically accompanied the global expansion of the USA in a prominent position - especially concerning Europe and Japan. In 1938, as an opponent of Roosevelt's reform course (New Deal), he had brought together the later gurus of "neoliberal" economic theory such as Friedrich Hayek, Alexander Rüstow and Raymond Aron: It was here that the euphemistic term "neoliberalism" was coined for the global, anti-union, anti-communist sharpened doctrine of capitalism.

In March 1943, Lippmann wrote: After conquering North America, Central America, the Caribbean, the Philippines, and several islands in the Pacific (Wake, Guam, Hawai, Japanese Mandate Islands), the U.S. had been forced to "defend two-thirds of the earth's surface from our continental base in North America." Now, however, with the foreseeable defeat of the Axis powers of Germany, Japan, Italy, and their allies and collaborators, much broader access is opening up.

The U.S. will now no longer be able to "defend" its previously conquered territories, the geostrategist said, from its North American territory and scattered islands in the Pacific alone. Rather, America can and must now decisively expand its "defense" line "by basing our foreign policy on reliable alliances in the old world." New U.S. bases could now be established in Europe and Japan. This would allow the U.S. to move from the previous passive to active "defense" of its national interests.

USA 1947: "War" Department becomes "Defense" Department.

This strategy involved ideological artifice: The anti-liberal and anti-democratic intensified capitalism doctrine was called "neoliberalism."

And the intensified military expansion was passed off as "defense." From 1789, since its founding, the U.S. factually had a War Department: through wars, the North American continent was integrated into the national territory, then Central America, the Caribbean, Cuba, then the Philippines, Puerto Rico, China, etc. were militarily penetrated, temporarily occupied, vassal governments were installed, islands were occupied and developed as permanent military bases.

But just at the highest stage of its also military expansion up to then, the War Department was euphemistically and factlessly renamed to Defense Department in 1947. That is why the aggressive NATO was called the "defense" alliance.

The Twin: Marshall Plan and NATO

NATO, founded in 1949, was the twin of the Marshall Plan. The dual military-civilian character was embodied by George Marshall himself: During World War 2, as Chief of Staff, he coordinated the U.S. military in all theaters of war between North Africa, Europe and Asia. After the war, as Secretary of State from 1947 to 1949, he organized the Marshall Plan. And in 1950, the agile man slipped into the role of U.S. Secretary of Defense, organizing brutal interventions, including napalm bombings, against liberation movements around the globe, in Korea as well as in Greece.

From 1947 on, all later founding members of NATO received aid from the Marshall Plan: Great Britain, France, Portugal, the Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, Denmark, Iceland, Italy, Norway. This continued after NATO's founding until the end of the Marshall Plan in 1952. In addition, in 1949, the U.S. Congress approved $1 billion in aid for the rearmament of NATO's founding nations. In some cases, Marshall Plan aid was reallocated for military purposes.

All of these states - except Luxembourg, Italy and Norway - were also active colonial powers. Most of them were also monarchies and no paragon of democracy. The U.S. itself maintained numerous dependent territories around the globe in a neocolonial manner and dominated states in Central America and the Caribbean with the help of dictators - most famously in Cuba.

Preliminary Brussels Pact: "Germans" and "Communist Danger

Prior to NATO's founding, the most reliable European countries slated to be founding members were allowed to make their prelude. In March 1948, the governments of Great Britain, France and the three small Benelux monarchies, highly subsidized by the Marshall Plan, adopted the "Brussels Pact." It saw itself as a military alliance against renewed German aggression and against a threat of Soviet aggression.

These U.S.-led conspiracy practitioners simulated dangers that did not exist: Germany was fully disarmed and under military control of the Allies, including the Brussels Pact members themselves - France, Britain, Belgium, and the Netherlands were occupying powers in West Germany; and they could have a say in whether or not West Germany or the Federal Republic of Germany was rearmed. The Soviet Union was neither capable of nor willing to attack Western Europe, and even less willing to permanently occupy it - this assessment of the U.S. government was also familiar to the Brussels Pact states.

The Brussels Pact brought together, along with Great Britain, the states whose governments and economic elites had not resisted the occupation of the Wehrmacht, but had collaborated with Nazi Germany and also saw "communism" as the main danger. They all feared punishment, disentanglement or even expropriation after the war, the military and secret services feared loss of influence. But the U.S. held a protective hand over them.

On April 4, 1949 - a few months before the founding of the Federal Republic of Germany - the military alliance North Atlantic Treaty Organization, NATO, was founded in Washington. It was billed as a "defense" alliance, following U.S. language. All other members were dependent on the U.S., not only through the Marshall Plan, but also through additional loans, military aid and investments. NATO's headquarters were in Washington until 1952.

Also there: Dictator Franco with special status

The ruling circles of the USA had admired Mussolini's fascism: He had shown how to defeat the "communist danger" in the West. Mussolini was showered with loans by Wall Street, and U.S. investors bought shares in Italian companies, such as Fiat. With Mussolini and Hitler, U.S. corporations supplied the fascist Franco, who destroyed the Republic in a brutal civil war.

Franco had declared victory on April 1, 1939 - just two weeks later, the Roosevelt administration had appointed its ambassador in Madrid. Only Mussolini, Hitler, Pope Pius XII and the British fascist promoters King George VI with Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain had been quicker to diplomatically recognize the dictatorship.

For cosmetic reasons, Spain initially did not become a NATO member while Franco ruled. But the United States included Spain in its European expansion even without formal membership. They operated military bases here and promoted economic development, such as tourism. Fascism was compatible with "freedom and democracy" and NATO.

War against liberation movements in European colonies.

With NATO, with additional U.S. military bases in NATO member states and additional partnerships such as with Spain, the U.S. not only pushed its "defense" line into Western Europe in Lippmann's sense. It also supported the wars that the European colonial powers waged against the liberation movements in the colonies that had gained strength after the war. And in the process, the U.S. also gained access to raw materials in those colonies.

Great Britain

Britain had been supplied by the U.S. with armaments, ships and food during the war and was now heavily indebted to the U.S.. The U.S. saw to it that the International Monetary Fund (IMF), which it had founded and controlled in 1944, made its first major loan to Britain in 1947: this was used to conciliate and blackmail the Labour government.

Britain was also weakened in other respects: its most important colonies, such as India, were lost. Already during the war, Great Britain had ceded several military bases in the Commonwealth to the USA (land lease program). At the time of NATO's founding, the Labour-led government fought the liberation movement in Ghana, calling the leader of the Convention People's Party, Kwane Nkrumah, a "little local Hitler" and putting him in prison in 1950. Only in 1957 was Ghana able to become independent with Nkrumah.

The U.S., which had already been present in Greece and Turkey from 1943 with its secret service OSS, replaced Britain's military and secret service there in 1948 and took over the war against the anti-fascist liberation movement in Greece.

Canada

Canada, as a member of the Commonwealth, was doubly dependent: Since the late 19th century, the country had been an economic colony of the United States. Canadian troops and their intelligence service had been under British command, and British troops and the entire British war economy had been subordinate to the United States.

France

The second most important NATO member after Britain was France. The U.S. Army, along with the British and Canadians, had liberated the country from the Nazis and the Vichy collaborationist government under Marshal Pétain in 1944. The leftist Resistance, which had been infiltrated by the U.S. intelligence agency OSS, was gradually eliminated.

The unpopular General Charles de Gaulle, who had fought against Hitler and represented an independent France, had to be allowed to walk in the victory parade on the Champs Elysées in Paris, and then a provisional government was formed; it included the Communist Party, which had led the Resistance. But this government was never recognized by the United States. The World Bank, under President John McCloy, granted a loan to France even before the Marshall Plan, on the condition: De Gaulle and the Communists must be out of the government! U.S. Secretary of State Byrnes, Marshall's predecessor, promised a 650 million loan and the additional delivery of 500,000 tons of coal.

Christian lacquered politicians like George Bidault, a close friend of CDU chairman and future West German chancellor Konrad Adenauer and like the latter in contact with CIA chief Allen Dulles, were maneuvered into the government. De Gaulle was thrown out. The loan was granted. In 1948, the U.S. also rearmed three French divisions so that France could even act as a serious occupying power in its occupied territory in West Germany.

Algeria was not only a French colony, but was considered part of France, albeit with a racist apartheid system. This did not bother NATO at all: Algeria was immediately included in the NATO treaty area. The French government's brutal colonial war intensified. By independence, the French military had killed hundreds of thousands of independence fighters and civilians.

At the same time, the French government demanded military aid against "communism" in the colony of Indochina: the Democratic Republic of Vietnam, proclaimed in September 1945 by the Viet Minh independence movement under Ho Chi Minh, was to be destroyed - the U.S. helped France with military advisors, food and armaments. McCloy, as president of the World Bank, also approved a loan for this purpose in 1949, the year NATO was founded.

Belgium, Netherlands, Luxembourg
The three Benelux countries had made no military contribution against Hitler's Germany. Their governments and corporations had collaborated with the Nazis in the war. But Belgium and the Netherlands became NATO members and were allowed to enter West Germany as occupying forces by U.S. grace.

McCloy also conceded a World Bank loan to the Kingdom of the Netherlands in 1949, NATO's founding year, to fight the independence movement in the colony of Indonesia. Against the Republic of Indonesia, established in 1945 after the Japanese occupation, the 145,000 Dutch military forces proceeded to bomb cities, murder tens of thousands of resistance fighters and other locals, and capture the government.

Belgium
The Kingdom of Belgium continued to hold its resource-rich colony of Congo under the gun after 1945 with U.S. approval. The U.S. had obtained uranium, crucial for its atomic bombs, from the Belgian colony. The mining company Union Minière du Haut Katanga - in which the Rockefellers had a stake - had already moved its headquarters from Brussels to New York in 1939.

After 1945, anti-colonial resistance in the Congo was fought mercilessly: trade unions were banned, strikers were shot or publicly flogged. Later, in 1961, in Belgian-U.S. complicity (King Baudouin, U.S. President Eisenhower, CIA, native collaborators), the first prime minister of the newly independent Congo, Patrice Lumumba, was bestially murdered after a short time.

Portugal
Fascist Portugal had remained neutral in the war and therefore had been all the more important economically to Nazi Germany: As the most important state, Portugal supplied tungsten, a precious metal crucial to the war, for steel hardening, necessary, for example, for rifle barrels and cannon barrels. In Portugal, pirated shares and pirated gold were laundered to finance the German war effort.

After 1945, the USA returned the Asian colonies of Timor and Macau, which had been occupied by Japan, to Portugal. In the African colonies of Mozambique and Angola, colonialist forced and plantation economies (coffee, cotton) prevailed. The Communist Party, the main liberation organization, was banned and persecuted.

And the U.S. and NATO could now use Portugal's Atlantic islands, the Azores, as military bases.

Small states and later NATO members

Iceland, a Danish colony, had been occupied by Britain and the United States in 1940. The country had declared independence to Denmark in 1944. Therefore, Iceland received Marshall Plan funds and agreed to its NATO membership. The small country maintained no military of its own, but served as a U.S. and NATO base.

Denmark: An anti-fascist government was formed here after the Nazi era. It included the Communist Party, which had resisted the Nazis. Here, too, the U.S., with the help of social democracy and the Marshall Plan, drove out the non-alignment originally intended.

In the Danish colony of Greenland, the USA had already established military bases in 1941. The Danish government, which had reserved foreign and security policy rule over Greenland, agreed: Greenland was declared a NATO defense area in 1951. The U.S. military base at Thule in Greenland was developed into one of the largest foreign U.S. bases as a forward espionage site against the Soviet Union and then against Russia, determining Danish foreign policy.

Norway: Here, the Social Democratic government wanted to remain non-aligned after the German occupation. But with the help of the Marshall Plan and additional rearmament aid, the U.S. maneuvered Norway into NATO.

Greece: In NATO's founding year, U.S. dive-bombers napalmed the positions of the already victorious anti-fascist liberation movement in Greece and equipped the military loyal to the monarchy, which had collaborated with the Nazis. This was the only way to defeat the liberation movement. When the U.S. had ensured a U.S.-dependent government here as in neighboring Turkey, it brought the two countries into NATO in 1952.

Federal Republic of Germany: Largest U.S. Fortress in Europe

The U.S. wanted above all to bring the western occupied zones of Germany into NATO. But first, this West Germany was not yet a state; and second, the governments of France and Great Britain initially opposed rearming the Germans because of critical public opinion in both states.

But shortly after the founding of the new state of the Federal Republic of Germany (FRG), its Christian-painted chancellor Konrad Adenauer agreed (secretly) to rearm in 1950. He had the peace and neutrality movements fought and incited as "communist". The USA promoted arms production in the FRG for the needs of the war against the People's Liberation Movement in Korea as early as 1950. The West German arms industrialists lobbied for NATO. And as early as September 1950, NATO included the FRG in the NATO defense area - five years before formally joining NATO.

Today in the 21st century, no other state on the planet hosts as many additional U.S. military bases as NATO member West Germany.

The USA invades the European colonies

NATO was thus an alliance against post-fascist and anti-fascist democratization in Europe and against national self-determination in the colonies. And the neo-colonial NATO leading state USA invaded the old colonies of the Europeans.

B-52 exploding the jungle below with all sorts of anti-personnel munitions. The US (as usual) waged a war classified by many impartial observers—including Lord Russell—as simply sociopathic, in which, besides brutal bombing and wholesale terror, bioweapons were used along with chemical weapons (Agent Orange)..


In the French colonies of Indochina (Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia) and Africa (a good dozen colonies, mainly of France, then also of Belgium and Portugal) important raw materials were stored. U.S. companies wanted to get their hands on them as cheaply as possible. Under Evan Just, the Marshall Plan authority in Paris maintained the "Strategic Raw Materials" department. It explored and inventoried in the colonies of the European colonial powers, for example, manganese and graphite in Madagascar; lead, cobalt and manganese in Morocco; cobalt, uranium and cadmium in the Congo; tin in Cameroon; chrome and nickel in New Caledonia; rubber in Indochina; oil in Indonesia; besides industrial diamonds, asbestos, beryllium, tantalite and columbite.

The Marshall Plan Authority and the State Department organized commodity purchase contracts beginning in 1948, for example, in favor of the U.S. corporations United Steel, Bethlehem Steel, and Newmont Mining. Investment banks such as Morgan Stanley and Lazard Frères formed joint holding companies to modernize mines in the colonies. For the atomic bombs, the U.S. needed even more uranium after the war than during the war anyway.

Finally, finally, conquer Russia? Resistance.

For NATO, the founding was not about defeating "communism", that was only a preliminary stage. It was and is about the U.S.-led conquest and exploitation of Europe, especially Russia, that is, all of Eurasia from Lisbon to Vladivostok (according to U.S. presidential adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski) and regardless of whether it is communist or capitalist.

NATO has been and continues to be an alliance that has principally and permanently violated the UN Charter, Article 1 "Self-Determination of Nations," from its inception. NATO members - and also associate members such as Switzerland and Austria - joined in various ways in the numerous U.S.-led wars of the wrongly so-called "Cold War," beginning with the Korean War and most recently, for example, for two decades in Afghanistan, leaving behind impoverished, devastated countries, with high profits for the arms, energy, supply and private military services industries.

And even under the otherwise somewhat criticized President Donald Trump, NATO's European partners followed NATO's leading power in anti-Russian agitation and rearmament to conquer the Eurasian theater, finally, finally succeeding, if need be again with war, and this time with nuclear bombs.

With the eastward enlargement of NATO the founding lie was continued. The EU membership of the ex-socialist states always followed a few years after the NATO membership. The EU continues to be an appendage of NATO. The relative economic support provided by the Marshall Plan brought only relative prosperity - and it was only a temporary concession. That ended in 1990. The EU, together with U.S. corporations, investors and consultants, has been dismantling relative prosperity ever since, step by step, first in Eastern Europe but, at the latest since the 2008 "financial crisis," ever more rapidly in the "rich" states of Western Europe as well.

The stakes are high. The NATO edifice of lies, nurtured for decades, is more fragile than ever. Resistance to it must and can take on a new strength, on all continents. The legal-political basis has long been clarified with UN international law and UN human rights, which include labor and social rights. And environmentalists can still learn that the military does not only harm the environment.


Werner Rügemer (born 1941 in Amberg) is a German commentator, lecturer and writer. He is considered to be a leading "intervening philosopher".[1]

NATO: The founding lie / by Werner Rügemer
[This article published on 4/23/2022 is translated from the German on the Internet, https://www.nachdenkseiten.de/?p=83181.]

The views expressed herein are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of The Greanville Post. However, we do think they are important enough to be transmitted to a wider audience.


 


[premium_newsticker id=”211406″]


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License

ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL QUOTES BY THE EDITORS NOT THE AUTHORS

Read it in your language • Lealo en su idioma • Lisez-le dans votre langue • Lies es in Deiner Sprache • Прочитайте это на вашем языке • 用你的语言阅读




The Secret U.S.-&-UK War Against Europe

Please make sure these dispatches reach as many readers as possible. Share with kin, friends and workmates and ask them to do likewise.



Eric Zuesse


FDR and Churchil in 1941 meet. US and Uk aristocrats had a natural affinity, facilitating their "special relationship." But Rooselvelt had a different vision for the world, a much more democratic vision than the British would like. His death allowed the anglophiles to take over the empire.


The secret U.S.-and-UK war against Europe is well documented but little known, and some conceptual and historical background is pre-requisite in order to understand that documentation.

Historically, nations that share the same currency don’t go to war against one-another unless one of them is a colony of the other and is (like America’s colonies were in 1776) in a revolution to establish its independence against the imperialist one of them. Having a common currency is therefore a strong factor — but not a decisive one — toward peace between nations.

UK (Britain) has its pound, EU (the European Union) has its euro, and U.S. (America) has its dollar. U.S. (its dollar) and UK (its pound) are now in a war against EU (its euro), so as to help to extend into the future the dollar’s (America’s) existing dominance as the main global reserve currency — the future political and financial dominance by America, heading ultimately to control over all nations by America’s Government, practically obviating the United Nations and its (crippled) role till now as the authoritative source of international law: the laws that govern not within nations but instead between nations — replacing that existing body of international laws, by “the international rules-based order,” in which America’s Government will be setting those “rules.” It’s an international struggle to replace the U.N. and all international laws, by a global dictatorship either by the U.S. and the UK, or else by the U.S. and the EU. All three of those currencies are, however, agreed together, to prevent there ever being control over international laws by the U.N. and its agencies, or by anything OTHER THAN the nations that are in America’s fundamental military alliance, which is the North Atlantic Treaty Organization: NATO. NATO is to be expanded in order to increase the U.S. Government’s (and the U.S. dollar’s) dominance and thereby weaken the U.N.’s authority and its already-crippled and ever-weakening power.

UK’s aristocracy took control of American foreign policies on 25 July 1945, when, at the Potsdam Conference, America’s Anglophile General Dwight Eisenhower seconded Winston Churchill’s hostility against Joseph Stalin by telling the naive new U.S. President Harry Truman (who practically worshipped Eisenhower) that either the U.S. would ultimately conquer the Soviet Union, or else the Soviet Union would conquer America; and, so, the Cold War was then born, on that date, in Truman’s head, by his decision to agree with Eisenhower’s viewpoint and commence what became called “the Cold War” so as ultimately to conquer Russia. Truman then backed General George Marshall’s plan, The Marshall Plan, in 1948, to provide billions of dollars in U.S. reconstruction aid to any European country that would side with America against the Soviet Union in order to establish the planned future all-encompassing U.S. global dictatorship (control of the world by America’s billionaires and their corporations, especially granting them access to all countries’ natural resources).

a secret campaign, to remove the UK altogether from the EU, and to install at 10 Downing Street, Prime Minister Boris Johnson to do Brexit — British exit from the EU — in what Britain’s billionaires saw as being the right way, keeping “the Anglosphere” (U.S. and UK) in control over the world, as opposed to the way in which UK’s then Prime Minister Theresa May was negotiating with the EU, which would have weakened not only America’s control over Europe, but also UK’s control over Europe, which latter (control over Europe) the UK controls only indirectly by virtue of its “Special Relationship” with the U.S. Government, which controls Europe. (For UK to lose its voting privilege in the EU was puny in comparison to UK’s increased power over the EU through being uniquely allied with America’s Government, which controls the EU.) That constitutes the necessary conceptual and historical background, in order to understand the following:


boris Johnson

UK PM Boris Johnson: He looks like a clown and acts like a clown, but behind the exterior sits a more sinister agenda.

On May 15th, [British journalist] Kit Klarenberg at The GrayZone bannered “Operation Surprise: leaked emails expose secret intelligence coup to install Boris Johnson”, and demonstrated from leaked private documents, that an authentic conspiracy by a clique of supremely well-connected individuals within Britain — Britain’s Deep State, answerable only to Britain’s billionaires and hereditary aristocracy — had actually engineered Theresa May’s downfall as Prime Minister and her replacement by Boris Johnson, so that UK would no longer be allied with EU except as being EU’s superior, because of Britain’s unique bonding with its former colony, America.

Here is how the leader of that cabal or conspiracy explained, on 4 October 2019, his strategy to a small group of followers — students, perhaps — which fortunately still remains on youtube:


Prof Gwythian Prins Explains How Global Five Eyes is Threatened by EU's New Military and Intel Plans


https://youtu.be/jafhLS7BQeU?t=183

However, his jargon in that stunningly revealing video (which now must be understood in light of Klarenberg’s 15 May 2022 revelations) requires some additional important historical and terminological background.

"The five-eyes alliance,” that speaker said, “keeps the free world free,” but what does this mean? His “free” is actually a lie; really, it’s the opposite of free; it is the voting and taxpaying publics’ enslavement to the U.S. and British Military-Industrial Complexes (or “MICs”), after the 1991 termination of the U.S.S.R and of its communism and of its Warsaw Pact military alliance that mirrored America’s NATO, and it now means only the U.S. regime’s rule of the world by its aristocracy, who are psychopathic and who control and profit from their armaments-makers while their publics pay for it in taxes and destructions and corpses. It means precisely what the originator of this conspiracy, Cecil Rhodes, had first stated in 1877, and it does constitute the “Special Relationship” that UK and U.S. have had ever since this “Special Relationship” was finally and fully in place and fully functioning, starting on 25 July 1945, when Truman set America onto this fateful path, of conquering the entire world — Rhodes’s vision of the world’s future, and of how Rhodes would create the organization to bring it about. Here is from that historic 1877 statement, by Rhodes (which the speaker in that video was actually — and very skiilfully — representing: this is the original statement of that viewpoint):

I contend that we are the finest race in the world and that the more of the world we inhabit the better it is for the human race. …
Why should we not form a secret society with but one object the furtherance of the British Empire and the bringing of the whole uncivilised world under British rule for the recovery of the United States for the making the Anglo-Saxon race but one Empire. …
What has been the main cause of the success of the Romish Church? The fact that every enthusiast, call it if you like every madman finds employment in it. Let us form the same kind of society a Church for the extension of the British Empire. …
To and for the establishment, promotion and development of a Secret Society, the true aim and object whereof shall be for the extension of British rule throughout the world, the perfecting of a system of emigration from the United Kingdom, and of colonisation by British subjects of all lands where the means of livelihood are attainable by energy, labour and enterprise, and especially the occupation by British settlers of the entire Continent of Africa, the Holy Land, the Valley of the Euphrates, the Islands of Cyprus and Candia, the whole of South America, the Islands of the Pacific not heretofore possessed by Great Britain, the whole of the Malay Archipelago, the seaboard of China and Japan, the ultimate recovery of the United States of America as an integral part of the British Empire, the inauguration of a system of Colonial representation in the Imperial Parliament which may tend to weld together the disjointed members of the Empire and, finally, the foundation of so great a Power as to render wars impossible and promote the best interests of humanity.

This was to be, and is, the foundation-stone of the renewed British Empire’s Deep State. (Here is its full document.)

Rhodes's phrase “the best interests of humanity” expressed actually his racist-cultural viewpoint. It is, ultimately, an allegation that Her Majesty’s Government will be better to rule over international relations than any alternative, such as FDR’s intention for an armed United Nations, could ever be. Though Rhodes wanted international relations to be ruled by Britain’s aristocracy, FDR wanted it to be ruled by a U.N. which would be an armed democracy (federation) of nations. Hitler had his vision of a “Thousand-Year Reich,” but Churchill, who was an ardent Rhodesist, and who had been a protégé of Rhodes, favored, instead, Britain’s version of such an all-encompassing global empire, and this was/is to be achieved by harnessing Britain’s empire to the back of the far stronger American horse. Rhodes knew, even in 1877, that this would be the only way that the British Empire could successfully continue into future centuries.

Right now, the EU is sinking because by adhering to America’s demand to halt importation of gas and oil from the EU’s main supplier, which is Russia, energy-costs throughout the EU will soar and destroy their economy. And this is the strategy of Biden, and of Johnson. Biden, too, is a Rhodesist — just as Obama and Trump and Bush I & 2 and Clinton and Reagan were. The Governments of both U.S. and UK are Rhodesist. This doesn’t mean that in each and every matter, the two dictatorships agree, but that almost always they do; and, that when they don’t, UK’s Government doesn’t prod its American horse to buck and throw off its British rider, because those Brits know that this — riding on the American horse — is the ONLY way that they can continue the British empire to the extent that they have been allowed to do after WW II. The Rhodesists, and their “Five-Eyes Alliance” (Prins also refers to it as “the Anglosphere”, which is yet another phrase for what Rhodes was advocating for) are realists, who are trying to extend for as long as possible into the future their joint and collective aristocratic exploitation of the entire world. This means: keep Europe down, and all other countries out. It’s especially the case with regards to Germany, which is the EU’s industrial giant. As the New York Times reported on 5 April 2022:

Already Germany has reduced its dependence on gas from Russia [from 55%] by 15 percent, bringing it down to 40 percent in the first three months of the year, the energy ministry said.
But industry leaders have pushed back against imposing sanctions on Russian natural gas. Turning off the taps would cause “irreversible damage,” warned Martin Brudermüller, the chief executive of BASF, the chemical producer based in southwestern Germany. Making the transition from Russian natural gas to other suppliers or moving to alternative energy sources would require four to five years, not weeks, he said.
“Do we want to blindly destroy our entire national economy? What we have built up over decades?” Mr. Brudermüller said in an interview with the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung last week.

Already, due to pressure from the Biden Administration, and against German popular opinion and the pleas by German businesses of all sizes not to do it, Germany recently cancelled the recently completed Nord Stream II mammoth gas pipeline from Russia to Germany, which would have reduced gas prices in Europe. Instead, those prices are expected soon to double. And almost all of the EU will be taking a big hit from such decisions by Germany and other EU nations. It is a U.S./UK war against not only Russia but also Europe.

"The five-eyes alliance,” that speaker said, “keeps the free world free,” but what does this mean? His “free” is actually a lie; really, it’s the opposite of free; it is the voting and taxpaying publics’ enslavement to the U.S. and British Military-Industrial Complexes (or “MICs”), after the 1991 termination of the U.S.S.R and of its communism and of its Warsaw Pact military alliance that mirrored America’s NATO, and it now means only the U.S. regime’s rule of the world by its aristocracy, who are psychopathic and who control and profit from their armaments-makers while their publics pay for it in taxes and destructions and corpses.

That is what Gwythian Prins, the leader of their cabal or conspiracy, who speaks in that youtube video, was actually talking about. (Klarenberg’s article says nothing about Rhodes, but what Prins says in this youtube video of him is likewise totally in keeping with Rhodes’s plan, about which the article by Klarenberg reveals lots of private evidence.) And America’s European stooges are doing everything they can to impose American rule, despite the fact that in certain details, UK’s aristocracy are profoundly dissatisfied with the extent to which the EU is not doing everything that UK’s aristocrats want them to do. UK’s aristocrats know that bucking the American horse would cause them to be thrown off of it. So, they choose, instead, to stay on it, and to merely nudge it whenever they want a minor change in its direction. And that is what Prins is advocating for, against the EU, upon his colleagues and students.

And that explains the documentation linked to here regarding the U.S.-and-UK war against Europe. It is their war to keep Europe down, and all the rest of the world out, and only Britain still in the saddle riding the American horse to permanent victory, against the publics everywhere. It is for the continuation of “the Washington Consensus.”

Klarenberg’s article includes lots of fascinating documentation, such as this photo of Prins’s email dated “September 22, 2018 at 4:53 AM” to a certain “Julian Blackwell, addressing his chum as ‘Trooper,’ a reference to the publisher’s SAS special forces background, and thanking him for his ‘hugely welcome and generous willingness to cover my foregone income for effectively the first half of this FY [financial year] [so that Prins would be able to engineer Boris Johnson’s replacing Theresa May].’” It would all be highly incriminating, if UK weren’t a dictatorship and Prins himself weren’t one of that dictatorship’s key agents. Interestingly, the organization at which Prins was speaking, “Veterans for Britain” (of which Prins is a board member) was revealed on 5 December 2017 to be a “Dark Money” group fronting for Conservative Party UK and for Republican Party U.S. financial backers; and the group which revealed that was “Open Democracy,” which itself is funded by mainly Labour Party UK, and Democratic Party U.S., financial backers, but also by some middle-of-the-road (i.e., anti-Trump) U.S. Republican Party financial backers — in other words: “Open Democracy” is funded by billionaires in both America and Britain. In both countries, membership in the dictatorship class (the nation’s aristocracy) requires being a billionaire, or else close to that. The public are merely their suckers, to be manipulated (via propaganda from their media) however at least some of the billionaires want them to be suckered. There is consequently a constant contest between conservative and liberal billionaires, in order to select into national office only politicians who are backed by at least SOME of the billionaires. And one of the things that all of the billionaires are funding is propaganda in favor of keeping U.S. and UK on top, ruling the rest of “The Anglosphere,” and keeping Europe down, and all other countries out.


Investigative historian Eric Zuesse’s next book (soon to be published) will be AMERICA’S EMPIRE OF EVIL: Hitler’s Posthumous Victory, and Why the Social Sciences Need to Change. It’s about how America took over the world after World War II in order to enslave it to U.S.-and-allied billionaires. Their cartels extract the world’s wealth by control of not only their ‘news’ media but the social ‘sciences’ — duping the public.


The views expressed herein are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of The Greanville Post. However, we do think they are important enough to be transmitted to a wider audience.

If you find the above useful, pass it on! Become an "influence multiplier"!

Since the overpaid corporate media whores will never risk their careers to report the truth, the world must rely on citizen journalists to provide the facts that explain reality. Put this effort to use by becoming an influence multiplier. Repost this material everywhere you can. Send it to your friends and kin. Discuss it with your workmates. Liberation from this infernal and mendacious system is in your hands.
—The Editor, The Greanville Post
—The Editor, The Greanville Post


[premium_newsticker id="211406"]




The views expressed are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of The Greanville Post


YOU ARE FREE TO REPRODUCE THIS ARTICLE PROVIDED YOU GIVE PROPER CREDIT TO THE GREANVILLE POST
VIA A BACK LIVE LINK. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License

Did you sign up yet for our FREE bulletin?
It’s super easy! Sign up to receive our FREE bulletin. Get TGP selections in your mailbox. No obligation of any kind. All addresses secure and never sold or commercialised.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL QUOTES BY THE EDITORS NOT THE AUTHORS

black-horizontal




Mariupol: Russia releases footage showing Ukraine troops from steel plant surrendered and evacuated

Please make sure these dispatches reach as many readers as possible. Share with kin, friends and workmates and ask them to do likewise.


Russian Defence Ministry
SHANGHAI EYE

Mariupol: Russia releases footage showing Ukraine troops from steel plant surrendered and evacuated



Dateline: 17 May 2022
NOTE: The official figures mentioned in this presser correspond to yesterday's totals, when the surrender and evacuation of wounded began. The numbers of troops surrendering have since increased.
"The surrender of militants of the nationalist unit Azov blocked at the Azovstal plant in Mariupol began yesterday," Russian Defence Ministry spokesman Igor Konashenkov said at a news briefing. "Over the past 24 hours, 265 militants laid down their arms and surrendered, including 51 seriously wounded," he added. A hospital in Novoazovsk would take the wounded, Konashenkov said. He didn't specify where other Ukrainian servicemen would be placed.


The views expressed herein are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of The Greanville Post. However, we do think they are important enough to be transmitted to a wider audience.


 


[premium_newsticker id=”211406″]


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License

ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL QUOTES BY THE EDITORS NOT THE AUTHORS

Read it in your language • Lealo en su idioma • Lisez-le dans votre langue • Lies es in Deiner Sprache • Прочитайте это на вашем языке • 用你的语言阅读




•The 16 Biggest Lies the U.S. Government Tells America About the Ukraine War

Please make sure these dispatches reach as many readers as possible. Share with kin, friends and workmates and ask them to do likewise.


CovertAction Magazine
Exposing Covert Action Since 1978
"U.S. news outlets are owned by Wall Street billionaire oligarchs who give so-called journalists the script to report, making TV reporters paid actors who know where their bread is buttered."
By Richard Ochs on May 18, 2022
CovertAction Magazine


The 16 Biggest Lies the U.S. Government Tells America About the Ukraine War

In any war, the first casualty is truth. Here are the biggest lies to deconstruct when evaluating the considerations documented in the article:

1. “Ukraine is a democracy”
2. “National sovereignty is sacred”
3. “Putin is a war criminal”
4. “The world condemns Russia’s invasion”
5. “Putin has threatened to use nuclear weapons”
6. “With his back against the wall, Putin will resort to chemical warfare, just like in Syria”
7. “Putin may resort to biological warfare”
8. “Russia is targeting civilians in Ukraine”
9. “Russia will make false-flag attacks”
10. “If Putin prevails in Ukraine, he will attack NATO countries next”
11. “Russia is threatening nuclear power plants”
12. “Russia’s invasion threatens the whole world”
13. “The U.S. has a ‘free press’ while Russia’s news is controlled”
14. “Russia is planning cyberattacks on the U.S.”
15. “Russia is killing children.”
16. “Russia may use tactical nuclear weapons.”

[…]

The 16 Biggest Lies the U.S. Government Tells America About the Ukraine War appeared first on CovertAction Magazine. The above is the summary. Now read the whole article.


[Source: ifunney.co]


1. “Ukraine is a democracy”
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky banned all opposition parties and banned the use of Russian as a second state language. Why did he violate his 2019 campaign promise to stop the genocidal killing of thousands in Donbas, even though they voted for him? Did he lie because neo-Nazis threatened to kill him if he did not do what they wanted? [1] Or is he afraid of the CIA, which has assassinated other leaders, making him their puppet? Are we to trust the judgment of a man who demands a no-fly zone that could cause a global nuclear holocaust? Zelensky oversees the torture and assassination of political dissenters.[2]


2. “National sovereignty is sacred”
When Idi Amin perpetrated genocide in Uganda, the UN violated Ugandan sovereignty to stop it. When Ukraine perpetrated genocide in Donbas and planned to escalate, Russia stopped it. [3] The U.S. violated Cuba’s sovereignty to take the planet to the edge of nuclear holocaust. The U.S. has violated lots of sovereignties in recent wars, killing millions. Given Ukraine’s genocide of a national minority, Ukraine’s sovereignty should not be respected.

Buildings shelled by Ukraine in the Donbas. [Source: cubasi.cu]


3. “Putin is a war criminal”
If he is a war criminal for causing the deaths of civilians, what do we call Ukraine killing 10,000 civilians in Donbas since 2014? [4] Is anyone calling Zelensky a war criminal? Millions killed by the U.S. in other recent wars is hundreds of times worse. Calling Putin a war criminal stops Biden from negotiating with him with the excuse “one cannot talk to war criminals.” That makes it very difficult to stop this war. Evidently, the U.S. wants this war to continue to the last Ukrainian. The plan of the Rand Corporation is to “quagmire” Russia just like the U.S. bankrupted the USSR by starting the al-Qaeda opposition in Afghanistan.


4. “The world condemns Russia’s invasion”
Actually, most of the world does not, including China, India, most of Africa, Israel, half of Latin America and many other countries. The two largest political parties in Russia do not oppose Russia’s intervention, the second-largest party being the Communist Party.

5. “Putin has threatened to use nuclear weapons”
Russia has the same policy as the U.S. On March 22, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said Russia would only use nuclear weapons if its very existence were threatened, Tass news agency reported. [5] Russia had a “no first use” policy until the U.S. refused to do the same, so Russia dropped it. U.S. presidents have threatened to use nuclear weapons several times since the end of WWII against countries not a threat to the U.S. [6]

6. “With his back against the wall, Putin will resort to chemical warfare, just like in Syria
Russia did not use chemical weapons in Syria. Russia negotiated Syrian stockpiles to be destroyed or removed. The chemical attacks in Syria were done by rebels supported by Saudi Arabia and the U.S. [7] If anyone has their back against the wall, it is the Ukrainians and neo-Nazis who are trained in false-flag tactics by the CIA. Like in Syria, the U.S. media are falsely blaming the Russians with no evidence whatsoever. Like in Syria, any chemicals released in Ukraine will probably be the work of opponents of Russia to blame Russia.

The U.S. gave Iraq chemical weapons which were used to kill thousands of Kurds and Iranians in 1982-83 before stockpiles were destroyed by Iraq. The U.S. is the chemical killer, not Russia which prevented it. History is full of U.S. false flags. [8]

[Source: snopes.com]


7. “Putin may resort to biological warfare”
While this charge was propagated by media during the second week of March, since the embarrassing revelation that the Pentagon funded labs in Ukraine, nothing more has been said about it in the media. It was first reported by the U.S. that hazardous specimens had to be destroyed lest they fall into the hands of Russians; later, it was reported that specimens were not dangerous at all, so as not to incriminate the U.S. Which was it? Any false-flag release of pathogens by Ukraine to blame Russia is now probably precluded. The Pentagon is guilty of funding gain-of-function virus research in China after it was banned in the U.S., posing a possible lab release of COVID-19. The U.S. is the bio-killer using a U.S. Army strain of anthrax in October 2001, not Russia.

8. “Russia is targeting civilians in Ukraine”
According to Newsweek, “Putin is not intentionally attacking civilians…Over the course of almost four weeks, missiles fired at Kyiv have been scarce…The destruction is only a small fraction of what is possible.” [9] The alleged massacre of civilians in Bucha, prompting Biden to accuse Putin of war crimes, was perpetrated by Ukrainians who were “cleansing” the town of presumed collaborators after Russian troops had left days before. [10]

The Bucha massacre appears to have been another false flag. [Source: cbsnews.com]


9. “Russia will make false-flag attacks”
There is no evidence that Russia attacked targets and blamed Ukraine. On the contrary, seven days prior to Russia’s incursion, the OSCE Monitoring Mission gave evidence of a Ukrainian false-flag attack on a kindergarten to blame Donbas separatists. [11] None were killed, but Ukrainian shelling of Donetsk increased 100-fold over the next four days, leading to Russia’s incursion to stop it. [12] The attacks on a maternity ward, apartments and concert hall may have been false-flag attacks, staged events, or situations where civilians were held hostage by combatants. It was reported that one maternity ward had Ukrainian snipers shooting from there. Residents of Mariupol who got out testified that Ukrainian combatants were preventing civilians from escaping through the humanitarian corridor in order to use them as human shields.[13]

Debris from shelling in Donetsk. [Source: bbc.com]


10. “If Putin prevails in Ukraine, he will attack NATO countries next”
That is patently ridiculous because Russia is already over-extended and not able to attack anyone else. Russia also does not want a nuclear war. Russia’s goal is to protect Donbas, get recognition of Crimea, de-Nazify Ukraine and prevent nuclear missiles close to Russia’s border. By exaggerating Putin’s goals instead of negotiating these goals, the U.S. is prolonging the war and provoking the destruction of Ukraine.

11. “Russia is threatening nuclear power plants”
Russian soldiers were ordered to “guard and control” these plants to prevent inadvertent or deliberate damage. Photos showed Ukrainians fired the first shot, destroying a Russian tank, whereupon a second tank returned fire. A training building was damaged in the exchange. The fires were not near the reactors. The electricity for cooling was never turned off.  But the hype was spun to scare the crap out of Europe so as to get their intervention into the Ukraine war.[14]

Alleged attack on Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant in Ukraine. [Source: news18.com]

12. “Russia’s invasion threatens the whole world”
If Russia succeeds in keeping U.S. nuclear missiles from being positioned in Ukraine seven minutes’ flight to Moscow, Russia will be doing humanity a big favor. Just as U.S. ICBM fixed missiles are on hair-trigger alert with “launch them or lose them” orders with no cancellations after launch possible, missiles in Ukraine would increase the chance of accident or miscalculation with little warning time to verify. Doomsday would be on pins and needles. That should scare the crap out of everyone. India had an accidental missile launch in March that landed in nuclear-armed Pakistan with no warhead. [15] Putin warned in 2019 that any incoming missile would be presumed to be nuclear, requiring a retaliatory launch by Russia before the incoming missile hit so Russia’s deterrent force would not be destroyed. [16]

The U.S. and NATO are threatening the planet, not Russia. Here are the facts:

  1. President Reagan rejected President Gorbachev’s offer to give up deployment of a “Star Wars” missile defense system in space as a condition for both countries to eliminate all their nuclear weapons.

  2. President Clinton refused President Putin’s offer to cut our massive nuclear arsenals to 1,500 bombs each, and to call on all of the other nuclear-armed states to negotiate the elimination of all nuclear weapons, in exchange for the U.S. not placing missile sites in Romania.

  3. President George W. Bush walked out of the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty and put a missile base in Romania. President Trump placed another missile base in Poland.

  4. President Bush in 2008 and President Obama in 2014 blocked any discussion of Russian and Chinese proposals for a space weapons ban in the consensus-bound UN Committee for Disarmament in Geneva.

  5. President Obama rejected President Putin’s offer to negotiate a treaty to ban cyber war.

  6. President Trump pulled the U.S. out of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty.

  7. From President Clinton through President Biden, the U.S. has never ratified the 1992 Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, while Russia ratified it.

Click to access: “Nuclear Posture Review” by Veterans for Peace. (January 2022)

Click on image to read/download whole PDF


Should there be any question that it is the U.S., not Russia, that is not only threatening the world, but is threatening the entire human race for all eternity?


U.S. naval facility in Redzikowo, Poland, where U.S. ballistic missiles that threaten Russia are stationed. [Source: wikipedia.org]


13. “The U.S. has a ‘free press’ while Russia’s news is controlled”
U.S. news outlets are owned by Wall Street billionaire oligarchs who give so-called journalists the script to report, making TV reporters paid actors who know where their bread is buttered. The U.S. media have proven to be more dangerous and warlike than the Pentagon, as shown in past U.S. wars (Vietnam, Iraq, Syria, Gaza, Yemen, Afghanistan). Now, these billionaires are censoring social media, so we are censored in doing personal research. The U.S. has shut down Russian media like Tass and Russia Today (RT) to prevent Americans from hearing the other side and making up our own minds about who is lying and who is telling the truth. What is the U.S. afraid of if they are telling the truth? According to Carl Bernstein, Pulitzer Prize journalist, the CIA has captured The New York Times and The Washington Post:
https://www.carlbernstein.com/the-cia-and-the-media-rolling-stone-10-20-1977

14. “Russia is planning cyber attacks on the U.S.”
Russia remains open for dialogue and cooperation on information security with all states, and the United States is not an exception,” the Kremlin’s Andrey Krutskikh told Newsweek. “Moscow’s vision of such a multilateral cyber scheme includes a set of obligations not to use ICTs as a weapon.” A potentially key meeting was in April when Krutskikh sought to work with Washington in the digital realm. [17]

15. “Russia is killing children.”
The numbers are being exaggerated like all the other exaggerations by Ukraine to get NATO into the war. Any child deaths are accidental, not like the deliberate murder of children by the U.S. and Israel. When Madeleine Albright was asked if the half million children starved to death in Iraq from U.S. sanctions were worth it, she answered “yes.” [18] During Israel’s 2014 “Operation Protective Edge,” Israeli military forces killed 2,200 Palestinians, more than 80% of whom were civilians, and nearly one-quarter of whom were children.[19]

16. “Russia may use tactical nuclear weapons.”
Russia could have flattened Kyiv with conventional explosives, but did not, so why would they use nuclear weapons?


Richard Ochs is a board member of Maryland Peace Action. He has published articles in the Baltimore Sun, Baltimore Chronicle, and the website: www.freefromterror.net. He is past president of the Aberdeen Proving Ground Superfund Citizens Coalition, member of the Depleted Uranium Task force of the Military Toxics Project and a member of the Chemical Weapons Working Group. In the 1960s, Richard was a founding member of the Students for a Democratic Society at the University of Maryland, College Park. He accumulated ten arrests for equal accommodations with the Congress of Racial Equality and was resident printer for the D.C. Black Panther Party. He has been arrested about 40 times, protesting various U.S. wars, since the 60’s. In 1978 he was elected Shop Steward in IUMSWA Local 24, representing 150 burners and welders at the Bethlehem Steel ship repair yard in Baltimore. Ochs was a Green Party candidate for Maryland State Delegate in 2006.

Richard can be reached at rjochs@comcast.net.


Notes


  1. Trying to de-Nazify Ukraine, Zelensky knows the biggest threat against him—and from what had always been prohibiting him from complying with the Minsk II accords. “The Nazis had always made clear that they’d kill him if he did any such thing.”
    https://www.globalresearch.ca/why-did-vladimir-putin-probably-save-volodymyr-zelenskys-life/5773835

  2. https://thegrayzone.com/2022/04/17/traitor-zelensky-assassination-kidnapping-arrest-political-opposition/

  3. “In recent days, the number and intensity of shelling on the territory of the Republics by the Ukrainian army has sharply increased. The units of the People’s Militia are forced to constantly suppress the firing points of the Armed Forces of Ukraine in order to prevent the death of the civilian population.” Published on February 21, 2022.

    https://ugetube.com/watch/firefight-ukraine-army-039-s-plan-to-attack-donbass_wmIf7NNHXvOCqNV.html?msclkid=f3d55ab0ab2a11ec9d8c68334c4999d6

  4. The map below shows two-thirds of Donbas was occupied by Kyiv forces before the Russian rescue mission on February 24, 2022. The line of conflict between the blue and brown areas indicates a third of the population of Donbas was in the target zone, suffering 10,000 civilian casualties.

  5. President Vladimir Putin ordered Russia’s nuclear forces to be put on high alert. U.S. nuclear missiles have been on hair-trigger for decades. In line with the order, Russia’s defense ministry said on February 28 that its nuclear missile forces and Northern and Pacific fleets had been placed on enhanced combat duty, the Interfax news agency reported. United Nations Secretary General Antonio Guterres said on March 14: “The prospect of nuclear conflict, once unthinkable, is now back within the realm of possibility.” Since most Americans seem to have been oblivious to this existential threat, perhaps Putin did us a favor to remind us of the need for universal nuclear disarmament, which the U.S., not Russia, has been sabotaging.

  6. The United States threatened to use nuclear weapons in Korea, Vietnam, China, Russia and Afghanistan after dropping atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
    when did US consider using nuclear weaons? – Search (bing.com)

  7. Weapons inspector refutes U.S. Syria chemical claims

    Weapons Inspector Refutes U.S. Syria Chemical Claims – Consortium News

  8. History of U.S. false flags for war:
    1. Sinking of U.S. battleship Maine in 1898 to start war against Spain for Cuba, Guam, Puerto Rico and genocide in Philippines.
    2. Deliberately sending the Lusitania to be sunk in war zone despite warnings, creating a preext for the U.S. entry into WWI.
    3. “Operation Northwoods” conspiracy proposed by U.S. Joint Chiefs to JFK to crash U.S. plane and blame Cuba.
    4. Assassination of JFK by deep state cabal, blaming alleged communist despite evidence of the real gunman.
    5. Since 9/11, tons of evidence suggest it was an inside job by Dick Cheney and Saudi Royal Bandar bin Sultan.
    6. One month after 9/11, anthrax from a U.S. Army lab with letter falsely blaming Islamic zealot stampeded war.

  9. Putin’s Bombers Could Devastate Ukraine but He’s Holding Back. Here’s why – Newsweek

    https://www.newsweek.com/putins-bombers-could-devastate-ukraine-hes-holding-back-heres-why-1690494?fbclid=IwAR1eVGkFmmNgnDLzkUdLXj0BAJpoHDUmqIvegtv2-fFmLVUIgdE24G_q0sE

  10. https://consortiumnews.com/2022/04/04/questions-abound-about-bucha-massacre/

    https://standpointzero.com/2022/04/07/the-anatomy-of-a-russian-massacre/

  11. Ukraine attacked a kindergarten, blaming Donbas separatists.

    Report of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE)

    The Monitoring Mission’s report on the kindergarten incident:
    “On 17 February, the Mission followed up on reports of damage to a working kindergarten in the north-western part of Stanytsia Luhanska (government-controlled, 16km north-east of Luhansk), located about 4.5km north-west of the north-western edge of the disengagement area near Stanytsia Luhanska.”

    Comment by munitions expert:

    “So the kindergarten was 4.5 kilometers inside Ukrainian-held territory. The monitors were denied access to the site by Ukrainian authorities and were only able to see it from a distance (very suspicious).  Also suspicious is that the mission was told that “20 children had been in the kindergarten at the time of the incident but reported no injuries.”  Really?  An artillery shell bursts through a classroom wall, and no one was injured?  More likely, they had been warned to get out ahead of time and evacuated before the shell was fired.

    “But there is no doubt whatsoever about how far away the tank (or artillery piece) was. The impact was dead on, and not from a descending shell. And the surrounding buildings mean that whoever fired at the kindergarten was situated in that very small open space right next to it.  And we know it was a dummy shell, because of the unbroken windows.  If there had been an explosion, they would have been shattered.  Someone took deliberate aim from only a few hundred yards away and carefully fired a single shot on a flat trajectory. They probably weren’t interested in causing “collateral damage,” but just wanted a propaganda photo. How convenient that the damage was to a kindergarten and not to one or another of the anonymous buildings surrounding it.”

  12. The Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE)
    reports each day on the security situation with daily reports:

    https://www.osce.org/ukraine-smm/reports

    Wed., Feb. 16  number of explosions: 5 in Donetsk and 71 in Luhansk = 76

    Thurs., Feb. 17  Kindergarten hit by Ukraine’s false-flag attack

    Thurs., Feb. 17 number of explosions: 128 in Donetsk and 188 in Luhansk = 316

    Fri., Feb. 18      number of explosions: 135 in Donetsk and 519 in Luhansk = 654

    Sat., Feb. 19     number of explosions: 553 in Donetsk and 860 in Luhansk = 1,413

    (An increase in Kyiv’s shelling of Donbas by a factor of 20 within four days of kindergarten false flag)

  13. https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/03/28/ukraine-kyiv-russia-civilians/ 

    Increasingly, Ukrainians are confronting an uncomfortable truth: The military’s understandable impulse to defend against Russian attacks could be putting civilians in the crosshairs. Virtually every neighborhood in most cities has become militarized, some more than others, making them potential targets for Russian forces trying to take out Ukrainian defenses. 

    “If there is military equipment there and [the Russians] are saying we are launching at this military equipment, it undermines an assertion that they are attacking intentionally civilian objects and civilians,” said Richard Weir, a researcher in Human Rights Watch’s crisis and conflict division, who is working in Ukraine. 

    “Over the past month, Washington Post journalists have witnessed Ukrainian antitank rockets, antiaircraft guns and armored personnel carriers placed near apartment buildings. . . Every day, it’s like this,” said Lubov Bura, 73, standing outside the apartment building where she lived that was destroyed two weeks ago.”

    The Ukrainian military has “a responsibility under international law” to remove their forces and equipment from civilian-populated areas, and if that is not possible, to move civilians out of those areas, Weir said. “If they don’t do that, that is a violation of the laws of war,” he added. “Because what they are doing is they are putting civilians at risk. Because all that military equipment are legitimate targets. 

    “Ukraine cannot use civilian neighborhoods as ‘human shields,’” said Schabas, adding that he was not suggesting this is what is happening.

    “In other militarized neighborhoods, residents also expressed concern about hearing outgoing rockets and artillery. “It’s scary,” said Ludmila Kramerenko. “It happens three or four times a day.” 

  14. The caption under the third photo in the link below says that Ukraine forces fired the first shot. Russians retaliated only after one of their tanks was destroyed. Hence, Ukraine forces started a battle at the nuclear power plant, which was not very smart. https://www.npr.org/2022/03/11/1085427380/ukraine-nuclear-power-plant-zaporizhzhia?utm_campaign=wp_the_daily_202&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&wpisrc=nl_daily202

  15. https://warontherocks.com/2022/03/the-curious-case-of-the-accidental-indian-missile-launch/

  16. https://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/russia-warns-incoming-missile-nuclear-72232054?msclkid=8fd1c9b6b1e911ecad991b729498b410

  17. See “As Biden Puts U.S. on Alert, Russia Seeks Talks to Help Prevent Cyber War” in Newsweek Magazine. Vladimir Putin had drawn up a four-point proposal for cooperation on cybersecurity in September 2020, one that in many ways echoed the arms control treaties of the Cold War era.

    The main tenets of the plan involved creating a “full-scale bilateral and regular interagency dialogue on key questions” of cybersecurity, communicating through existing bodies dealing with nuclear and computer readiness. It also included the establishment of new rules of the road mirroring U.S.-Soviet agreements on avoiding maritime incidents while securing mutual “guarantees of non-intervention into internal affairs of each other.” By Tom O’Connor, March 22, 2022. https://www.newsweek.com/biden-puts-us-alert-russia-seeks-talks-help-prevent-cyber-war-1690673

  18. Then-Secretary of State Madeleine Albright’s quote, calmly asserting that U.S. policy objectives were worth the sacrifice of half a million Arab children.
    https://fair.org/extra/we-think-the-price-is-worth-it/

  19. Israel’s 2014 “Operation Protective Edge,” when Israeli military forces killed 2,200 Palestinians, nearly one-quarter of them children and more than 80 percent civilians.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Gaza_War


The views expressed herein are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of The Greanville Post. However, we do think they are important enough to be transmitted to a wider audience.


 


[premium_newsticker id=”211406″]


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License

ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL QUOTES BY THE EDITORS NOT THE AUTHORS

Read it in your language • Lealo en su idioma • Lisez-le dans votre langue • Lies es in Deiner Sprache • Прочитайте это на вашем языке • 用你的语言阅读