Aletho News


The Sudden Koehler Resignation

By Doug E. Steil | Aletho News | June 1, 2010

Yesterday’s surprise resignation, effective immediately, by the German President, who maintained a ceremonial office, is highly peculiar in light of its timing.

An article by the news agency Reuters, referred to controversial comments made by Koehler, prompting criticism, which he then claimed was not sufficiently respectful of his office:

Koehler, in office since 2004, said in a radio interview on his return from a trip to Afghanistan this month that German military action abroad also served economic interests.

A country like Germany with a heavy reliance on foreign trade, Koehler said, must know that “in emergencies military intervention is necessary to uphold our interests, like for example free trade routes, for example to prevent regional instabilities which could have a negative impact on our chances in terms of trade, jobs and income.”

This attitude was regarded as imperialistic and not consistent with the German Basic Law. However, an alternative and more reasonable interpretation of these comments, given German consistency in international diplomacy and lessons learned from history prior to the Second World War might be along the following lines:

Since Germany is so strongly dependent on exporting manufactured goods to maintain its income, a media smear campaign or boycott effort, which the Anglo-American axis would readily instigate against it, if its leaders did not do as they are told, would have adverse consequences. Since the Anglo-American axis has ordered Germany to maintain a stronger military presence in Afghanistan and elsewhere in support of a doomed and senseless effort, we really have no choice but to play along with this highly unpopular policy rather than risk the alternative.

In other words, Koehler was likely sending a coded signal, that the usual suspects were once again blackmailing Germany. These suspects are of course the same policy movers, who insist:

(a) on maintaining a continued military presence of US troops and air bases on German soil;

(b) on Germany’s large gold reserves remaining under strict custody in Manhattan (what good is gold if it isn’t also in your physical possession?);

(c) on Germany making yet additional reparations payments under the perennial war guilt trip;

(d) on Israel getting even more state-of-the-art submarines at giveaway terms;

(e) on Chancellor Merkel obsequiously groveling before the U.S. Congress and its masters to make a public display of who is really in control.

To make up for this indiscretion, opaque and codified though it apparently was, the usual suspects presumably forced Koehler to suffer the consequences, even though the public criticism did not go into this alternative interpretation anyway, which would be strictly taboo. Doing them a great big favor, Koehler, who had just recently been re-elected to a second term in office by the German parliament, pointedly timed his unusual resignation announcement, which of course nobody had anticipated, in a manner that could not have been coincidental.

Koehler’s announcement came after the news, that the Israeli terror attack on a humanitarian ship in international waters just a few hours earlier was already causing a massive public outrage in Turkey, where the incident had been broadcast live, and would surely cause outrage among the public elsewhere, including in Germany. Something very drastic would be necessary, to divert media attention away from the Israeli attack, which was destined to become another self-inflicted public relations disaster. Koehler obliged, and we will surely soon see that he will be rewarded accordingly in his next job.

In the meantime, since German law stipulates the formal selection into office of a new president within thirty days, this sudden predicament will surely distract German politicians and the media for the next few weeks, which of course must have been the intent of this maneuver.

June 1, 2010 - Posted by | Deception


  1. This analysis, to me, is the most consistent with reality and fully explains Koehler’s statement and his subsequent honorable decision to step down Will he, now, come out of the diplomatic closet and elaborate more fully?


    Comment by Inayat I. Lalani | June 1, 2010

  2. Ever heard of Occam’s Razor?

    There is no evidence upon which to base this speculative construct, only wishful thinking.

    “given German consistency in international diplomacy and lessons learned from history prior to the Second World War” – I think you might mean ‘post WW2’ there, but even then, this statement shows a touchingly naive ignorance of (West)German history as an occupied colony of Uncle Sam.

    For example, check out German complicity with CIA in disintegrating Yugoslavia and German Defence Ministry forgery of ‘Potkova’ Plan to build a pretext for NATO warcrime of aggression against Serbia in 1999.
    Or Germany’s breach of its Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty obligations by supplying Israel with launch vehicles designed for a sneak sea-based nuclear missile attack worldwide … namely 3 super-silent Dolphin-class submarines fully fitted out to accommodate Israeli nukes.

    Can you fit these facts into your convenient myth of ‘German international diplomacy’? If anywhere, the consistency resides in Germany breaking the law to willingly service Uncle Sam and his pet Rottweiler, JAZI (Jewish Apartheid Zionist Israel).

    Does anyone imagine a German can make it to head of IMF without being an irredeemably reliable mindslave of U$-Empire? If so, please switch back to the Disney Channel.

    A more simple and therefore likely explanation for Koehler’s sudden dive was that the damned fool forgot his place and shot off his blabbermouth like a member of the U$an Master Race, shamelessly and honestly admitting that their warcrimes are committed for venal economic reasons. This inconveniently broke the unifying taboo of all NATO-conform German prostutnik politicoes, who pay lip service to their Grundgesetz forbidding ‘war emanating from German soil’ while ignoring it in practice.

    It is because he exposed this transparent dirty secret of State at a time when the German population are growling for their misleaders heads on a platter that the puppet must now be replaced by another of equal or lesser quality.

    That’s reality, how to deal with it is the next question.


    Comment by UNF | June 1, 2010

  3. In response to UNF:

    (1) The American Jewish organized boycott of German goods clearly took place prior to World War 2. There was no boycott after the war.

    (2) Since the consistency in German international diplomacy has obviously been in the service of U.S. (i.e. Jewish) interests, regardless which political party the chancellors represented, there is actually no variance between the quoted statement and the purported criticism.


    Comment by D.E.S. | June 2, 2010

  4. 1. OK, so what were the lessons to the Nazi Reich from the US-Jewish boycott of 1933? And how would these be relevant to 2010?

    2. Wrong, there’s an insuperable dishonesty on your behalf: Why call a consistent record of breaking international law ‘international diplomacy’? Do you accept that U$-Imperialist neologism or simply try to shift the goalposts? Is dispatching mafia hitmen to a competitor’s home ‘lobbying’ or ‘lobbing off pier in concrete socks’ i.e. murder? Do words matter or is winning an argument with yourself more important?

    Additionally, by inverting the definition of ‘international diplomacy’ you crumbled the basis for your fantastical construct as to how Koehler’s faux pas should ‘more reasonably’ be interpreted. How about some consistency in your thinking … Chance would be a fine thing, nicht wahr?

    3. “U.S. (i.e. Jewish) interests” – are you saying there are no US interests not determined by ‘jewish’ interest? If so, please explain why US crimes against Cuba, Vietnam, the Phillipines and Colombia are ‘jewish’ as opposed to ‘christian’, ‘caucasian’ or ‘Imperio-capitalist’?

    PS: Remember in drafting your reply to #3 Dr. Blumenbach’s discovery that the Caucasian Race includes Aryans, Semites and Hamites. Also, use of a skull caliper is allowed during this test.


    Comment by UNF | June 2, 2010

    • UNF,

      It seems that you should apprise yourself of the information at this link:

      Are you unaware of the fact that Latin American elites and organized crime are generally associated with international Judaism, Cuba in particular?


      Comment by aletho | June 2, 2010

      • 1. Why should I check your link? ‘It seems’ is not a reason.

        2. ‘are generally associated’ by whom, The Aryan Nation? And why would that matter if there is no causal link? Perhaps you can point to one, rather than tossing some lazy innuendo you just invented?

        3. What is ‘international Judaism’?

        4. Have you heard of the ‘Monroe Doctrine’ and how this affected the crimes of U$ Imperialism and its stooges in LA? Do you also think Monroe was a jew, or that the policy somehow benefited jews disproportionately more than the christian contingent of the North American Imperialist Mafia?


        Comment by UNF | June 2, 2010

        • ‘are generally associated’ by whom, The Aryan Nation?

          Gusanos are referred to as the “Jews of the Caribbean” by Latinos not Anglos.

          What is ‘international Judaism’?

          Get real. Have you not heard of the World Zionist Organization or the IJC??? Do you deny the existence of Jewish internationalism? None so blind…

          Do you also think Monroe … somehow benefited jews disproportionately more than the christian contingent of the North American Imperialist Mafia?

          Hmmm. Who were the financiers in London, New York and Boston??? Give it a shot.


          Comment by aletho | June 2, 2010

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.