Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Germany has become Europe’s political wasteland

By Timofey Bordachev | Vzglyad | November 18, 2024

Germany is a political void in the center of Europe, even though it contributes significantly to the global economy and is influential in trade.

It’s also the Western country with which Russia has had the most historical, cultural and, until recently, economic contacts. A week ago the government in Berlin collapsed, and so far the leading German parties have agreed that early parliamentary elections will be in February 2025.

It’s very likely that the next government will be led by the main opposition force, the Christian Democratic Union (CDU).

At the start of the election campaign, CDU leader Friedrich Merz publicly announced that – if he wins – he’ll issue an ultimatum to Moscow over Ukraine. He’s promised that if this ultimatum is not accepted within 24 hours, his government will provide the Kiev regime with cruise missiles to attack Russian territory. The consequences of such a decision for Russian-Western relations are obvious. It is not surprising, therefore, that our main reaction was astonishment at the irresponsibility of such a high-ranking member of the German elite. There are even fears that Merz and those behind him intend to drag Germany into a destructive military conflict with Europe’s largest country.

But all this German talk means nothing in practice. Without US authorisation, or direct orders from Washington, the leaders in Berlin are not only incapable of starting a major war in Europe, they are incapable even of adjusting their shoelaces. Any statements by German politicians, the fall and rise of governing coalitions there, should only be seen in the context of how the Berlin establishment is trying to find a role in the shadow of total American dominance.

It’s deeply symbolic that Chancellor Olaf Scholz took a decisive step towards the collapse of the governing coalition on 6 November, the day on which the domestic political balance of power in the United States changed radically. In the context of significant changes at the center, the peripheral political systems must react as sensitively as possible: at the level of how a branch of a large corporation reacts to a change in its general management.

Berlin’s international position is defined by its crushing defeat in the Second World War, which ended any hope of determining its own future. Germany, like Japan and South Korea, is a country with a foreign occupying force on its territory, albeit under the NATO flag. The German elite, both political and economic, is, with few exceptions, even more integrated with the US than the British elite. To say nothing of those running France, Italy or other European countries.

Germany has no autonomy in determining its foreign policy, nor does it aspire to have any. It’s no coincidence that over the past two and a half years of the Ukraine crisis, it’s been Berlin that has provided the largest amount of military and financial aid to the Kiev regime. Almost ten times more than, say, France, whose president likes to make bellicose speeches.

Naturally, the representatives of the German establishment look like pale copies of what we used to consider real politicians. And this is a natural product of the loss of any possibility of determining their own destiny.

Of course, Berlin can still set the parameters of economic policy for the weak countries of the European Mediterranean. States such as Greece, Italy or Spain are given to Germany to ‘feed’ within the framework of the European Union and its single currency. But even Poland, which has a special relationship with the US, has managed to avoid tying itself to Germany’s industrial grip. France is resisting slightly. But it is gradually sinking to the level of southern Europe. The UK has left the EU, but retains its position as the main representative of the US in Europe.

It should be noted that such a state of affairs for Germany did not come about overnight. Even during the Cold War, the Federal Republic (FRG) was led by bright personalities. Under chancellors such as Willy Brandt (1969-1974), the Moscow Treaty was signed between the FRG and the USSR on the recognition of post-war borders in Europe. In the early 1970s, German politicians and business were able to persuade the US to allow Germany to establish energy cooperation with the Soviets. In our time, Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder (1998-2005) pushed for European energy security based on German-Russian cooperation. But all this came to an end with the global economic crisis of 2008-2013, after which the US began to tighten the screws on its allies. In the spring of 2022, Olaf Scholz, who had previously been committed to dialogue with Russia, fully supported the military-political confrontation created by the Americans over Ukraine.

Now German politicians are not free to choose their own future. For most of them, with the exception of the non-systemic opposition, this is quite obvious. Why appoint bright personalities to the highest positions if nothing depends on their decisions? Gradually, the entire political system and the mood of the electorate are adapting to these conditions.

The differences in the parties’ platforms are becoming blurred. Observers are already talking about the likelihood that the government will be formed by the Social Democrats and their main opponents from the CDU. This means that disagreements on fundamental issues are a thing of the past. Only the technical aspects of forming a government need to be agreed upon, and the main goal of all efforts is to hold on to power as such.

The united and sovereign German state existed for 74 years (1871-1945). Its revival as such is not possible: even if Russia and China would look favourably on it, the Anglo-Saxon world will not allow it for several reasons at once.

Firstly, both German attempts – in the First and Second World Wars – to play a leading role in the West came close to succeeding. So nobody will give them a third chance. Just to be on the safe side. It should be borne in mind that the West takes order within its own community even more seriously than it does the defence of its privileges against the rest of humanity.

Second, Germany’s position at the center of Europe, its huge industrial base and its industrious population make it an ideal partner for the US and Britain, the maritime trading powers. Politically insignificant, Germany can economically control much of the rest of Europe, but cannot dictate the substance.

Third, the revival of visible German independence is in the interests of Moscow and Beijing because it would split the ranks of the consolidated West. A small front of countries like Hungary, Slovakia or even one a little larger cannot create such a split. And the unity of the West under the leadership of the US is a fundamental obstacle to the implementation of the plans for a multipolar world order promoted by Russia and China.

Germany is now a political wasteland in the heart of Europe. Tiny shoots of reason are, of course, breaking through the decades-old system based on pandering to the interests of American patrons. With some very obvious exceptions, the representatives of the non-systemic German opposition are talented people. But their prospects are still very dim because of the way things are manage.

In the future, we can expect to re-establish some economic ties with Germany but we must treat it as a political colony of the US, rather than thinking about try to establish full inter-state relations with Berlin.

Timofey Bordachev is the program director of the Valdai Club.

This article was first published by ‘Vzglyad’ newspaper and was translated and edited by the RT team.

November 18, 2024 Posted by | Illegal Occupation, Timeless or most popular | , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Scholz desperately tries to prevent Germany from being seen as open enemy by Russia

By Lucas Leiroz | November 18, 2024

The recent phone call between Olaf Scholz and Vladimir Putin has caused a lot of controversy in Western politics. The German leader has been criticized for his relatively diplomatic stance, since most Western politicians believe Moscow should be treated as an “international pariah”. However, the moves made by the US, France and the UK shortly after Scholz’s call may be the main explanation for his contact with the Russian president.

Recently, the German Chancellor called the Russian President and held a conversation lasting about an hour on sensitive topics in bilateral relations. Commenting on the details of the conversation, Scholz explained that this was an opportunity to reaffirm the German and European stance and to make it clear to Putin that support for Kiev will not wane. He also said that he considers it important to maintain dialogue with Russia, despite his publicly pro-Ukrainian stance on the conflict, and emphasized the necessity of European leaders participating in the diplomatic process. In addition, Scholz surprisingly promised to call Putin again in the future.

“The conversation was very detailed but contributed to a recognition that little has changed in the Russian president’s views of the war – and that’s not good news (…) It was important to tell him [Putin] that he cannot count on support [for Kiev] from Germany, Europe, and many others in the world waning (…) There are those in Germany who consider the lack of negotiations with Putin a good idea, but I am not one of them (…) Soon I will talk to the president of Russia again (…) In my view, it would not be a good idea if there were talks between the American and Russian presidents and the leader of an important European country was not also doing so,” he said.

The reaction to Scholz’s initiative was extremely negative. Vladimir Zelensky said that the German leader had opened a “Pandora’s box” by starting a dialogue with Putin. Zelensky emphasized his unrealistic desires for victory, stating that there will be no “Minsk 3.0” and tacitly promising to take the war to its ultimate consequences.

“Chancellor Scholz told me that he was going to call Putin (…) Now there may be other conversations, other calls (…) We know how to act. And we want to warn: there will be no ‘Minsk-3’. We need real peace,” Zelensky said.

In fact, the conversation between Scholz and Putin seemed at first to be yet another move in the direction of Europe’s attempt to take a leading role in an alleged “peace process” that some EU diplomats have been trying to promote since Donald Trump’s victory. However, the recent announcement that the US has lifted restrictions on “deep” strikes against Russia may be an interesting key to understand the real purpose of the phone call.

On November 17, several Western media outlets announced that Joe Biden had lifted restrictions on the use of American long-range weapons against targets in Russia’s “deep” territory. In addition, shortly after the announcement, rumors emerged, which have not yet been officially denied, that France and the UK had followed the American example and also authorized such operations by Ukraine.

As Russian officials have repeatedly stated, this is an irreversible escalation of the conflict, as it substantially changes the nature of the war. Long-range weapons are not operated by Ukrainian military personnel, but by NATO specialists illegally sent to the battlefield. Until now, Moscow has been tolerant of the use of such weapons inside the New Regions, since the West considers them Ukrainian territories. However, long-range strikes inside the territory that the West recognizes as Russian would mean incursions by NATO itself into the Russian Federation, which would legitimize, in accordance with recent changes in Russian military doctrine, a nuclear response.

Joe Biden is apparently using his final days in the White House to destroy the entire global security architecture and then give to Donald Trump a world at open global war. US’ main military allies in Europe, the UK and France, are following this same path and co-participating in the Biden-led catastrophe. However, Scholz seems cautious. Germany has so far not supplied Ukraine with long-range missiles, with Scholz saying “Germany has made a clear decision about what we will do and what we will not do,” and that “this decision will not change.”

Of course, significant decisions are not made in a hurry. The authorization of the strikes was certainly planned for a long time and Biden chose precisely the current moment, during the G20 Summit in Brazil, to lift the restrictions without causing a major political and media impact, hoping that the world would be distracted by the event bringing together the main global leaders in Rio de Janeiro.

In this sense, it is possible that Scholz knew in advance of what was about to happen and decided to talk to Putin beforehand to make it clear that Germany would not send long-range weapons and, therefore, would not be participating in the escalation promoted by Biden. In this way, Scholz hopes to spare Berlin from the possible devastating consequences that an unrestricted war between Russia and NATO would cause.

There are two facts that advocate this assessment. Scholz recently blamed support for Ukraine for the crisis in his government. The coalition backing the German chancellor has collapsed and he now appears worried about the future of his position. This may be driving him to act desperately to avoid even more negative consequences for his government.

Furthermore, on the same day that the restrictions were lifted, German defense minister Boris Pistorius made a public statement emphasizing Germany’s position not to send long-range Taurus missiles to Ukraine, stating that such a move would mean direct German involvement in the conflict.

“The Taurus would not be a game changer. Our mission is different. We now have to ensure that Ukraine continues to receive sustainable supplies (…) It would only be tenable to deliver [these weapons] if we determine and define the targets ourselves, and that is again not possible if you don’t want to be part of this conflict,” he said.

It is difficult to believe that all these moves are mere coincidence. Scholz has acted irresponsibly since the beginning of the conflict, but he seems completely incapable of dealing with an uncontrolled escalation. The chancellor is afraid of what the war could bring to Germany and to himself if the point of no return is crossed. His call to Putin was a desperate attempt to free Germany from the consequences of the war. It remains to be seen whether he will have enough political strength to resist the pressure from his own Western “partners” from now on.

Lucas Leiroz, member of the BRICS Journalists Association, researcher at the Center for Geostrategic Studies, geopolitical consultant.

You can follow Lucas on Twitter and Telegram.

November 18, 2024 Posted by | Militarism | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Germany’s AfD Urges UN to Investigate Nord Stream and Potential Government Role

Sputnik – 15.11.2024

The right-wing Alternative for Germany (AfD) party has called on the United Nations to prosecute an inquiry into the Nord Sream pipelines explosions and find out whether government officials were aware of this incident, party’s co-chair Tino Chrupalla said.

“We believe that the incident needs to be thoroughly investigated, and those responsible must be held accountable. In particular, we need to find out if members of the German government were aware of this incident before or after it occurred. We have called for the establishment of an inquiry commission in the European Parliament and are now calling for a UN investigation,” Chrupalla told Turkish newspaper Aydinlik.

The Nord Stream and Nord Stream 2 gas pipelines, built to deliver gas under the Baltic Sea from Russia to Europe, were hit by explosions on September 26, 2022. Germany, Denmark and Sweden have not ruled out deliberate sabotage.

The Russian Prosecutor General’s Office has opened an investigation into it as an act of international terrorism. Russia has repeatedly requested data on other countries’ investigations into the explosions, but never received it, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has said.

November 15, 2024 Posted by | False Flag Terrorism | | Leave a comment

European lackeys in panic mode as Trump signals detente with Russia

By Finian Cunningham | Strategic Culture Foundation | November 12, 2024

It’s early days yet. However, there are signs that President-elect Trump is moving toward a detente with Russia over Ukraine.

One good sign is that Trump will not invite Mike Pompeo or Nikki Haley to join his cabinet when he is inaugurated as the 47th U.S. president on January 20. Both of these figures were rabid anti-Russia hawks during Trump’s previous administration. There were suggestions that Pompeo and Haley might return with senior posts in his second administration. But Trump has announced the pair will not be offered new positions.

Another positive sign is from people close to Trump’s inner circle who are letting the Kiev regime know – rudely – that the U.S. military aid spigot is being turned off.

Donald Trump has yet to hold a phone call with Russian President Vladimir Putin, according to the Kremlin. But both leaders have already expressed a willingness to negotiate a peaceful settlement over the Ukraine conflict.

Another promising sign of potential detente between the United States and Russia is the sheer panic among European leaders. The news of Trump’s election last week has caused most European elites to scramble like scared children on hearing “boo!”.

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and French President Emmanuel Macron are consoling themselves by urging Europe to “come together” in the wake of Trump’s stunning election victory. The collapse of Germany’s coalition government of Chancellor Olaf Scholz is an early casualty of the Trump impact.

European leaders fear that if Trump pulls the plug on military aid to the Kiev regime they will be left holding the can to fund the proxy war against Russia, which the weak European economies have no chance of sustaining.

It’s no secret that the main European states were betting on Democrat candidate Kamala Harris winning the race to the White House. Harris would have ensured the continuation of NATO’s backing for the Kiev regime. With Trump becoming president, all bets are off.

The political price will be ruinous for European leaders who have invested huge political capital in waging war to “defend Ukraine from Russian aggression.” Trump has shown skepticism toward that false narrative. He has told Europe to go it alone if it wants to. And the European Russophobes know they can’t do that.

If Trump follows through on his election promise to negotiate with Putin on a settlement in Ukraine, then the Europeans are going to be left with serious amounts of egg on their faces.

One thing about Trump that is of concern to the Europeans is his frustration with them as being, in his view, freeloaders on American protection. Another is Trump’s vindictive streak. He’s not going to forget that most of the European leaders wanted him to lose the election.

Take Britain’s Prime Minister Keir Starmer. His Labour Party sent volunteers over to the U.S. to advise Harris on winning the election. The British Foreign Secretary David Lammy has also been reminded that he previously disparaged Trump as a racist “sociopath.”

Trump’s election is bad news for Britain and there is no doubt that Starmer is now trying to repair post-Brexit relations with Europe as a hedge against the expected chill from Washington during the next four years.

When Britain pulled out of the European Union after its 2016 Brexit referendum, there were high hopes that it could negotiate a special trade deal with the U.S. That deal didn’t work out and looks even less likely now. Hence, Starmer has been busy since taking office in Downing Street trying to restore relations with the EU.

This week, the British leader attended the Armistice ceremony in Paris to commemorate the end of the First World War. The last time a British leader honored that event in Paris was in 1944 when Winston Churchill visited the French capital following its liberation from Nazi occupation.

Macon invited Starmer to lay wreaths in the Champs-Elysee and the Arc de Triomphe.

The choreographed caper of European unity is a reflection of the panic gripping European leaders in the aftermath of Trump’s return to the White House.

But everything is up in the air for the European politicians. Starmer was bending over backward to renew relations with Germany as a way to forge a warmer connection between London and the European Union after years of post-Brexit bitterness, only for that to be thrown into doubt.

Last month saw a landmark security deal between Britain and Germany in which German arms maker Rheinmetall would open a new factory in Britain, and the German Luftwaffe would be able to fly warplanes from an RAF base in Scotland. The deal was touted as “a sign of joint European security in the face of Russian threat.”

With the collapse of the government in Berlin over the unbearable financial costs of the Ukraine war to the German economy, the British security treaty may not materialize. That means a big setback to Starmer’s reset plans with Europe.

Hungary’s Viktor Orban and Slovakia’s Robert Fico are in the minority of European politicians who genuinely welcomed Trump’s election as an opportunity to wind down the NATO proxy war in Ukraine against Russia.

On the other hand, the ardent NATO warmongers in Europe, including Britain, Germany, France, Poland and the Baltic states now face a desperate dilemma. Along with EU leaders like Von der Leyen and the Dutch NATO chief Mark Rutte, they have all nailed their colors to the mast for continuing the reckless proxy war against Russia.

Trump seems to be showing good sense in calling off that proxy war and finding a way to negotiate sensibly with Russia on detente. Moscow wants its long-term security demands to be met. That means no NATO membership for Ukraine, an end to the NeoNazi regime in Kiev, and recognition of its historical lands in Crimea and the Donbass.

This is all eminently negotiable, and Trump might just be ready to cut a deal to avoid World War Three, as he has repeatedly indicated he would do. That would mean Trump dumping the false narrative that Biden, Harris and the Democrats – and their European vassals – contrived about “defending Ukraine”.

That would leave the European lackeys in a disastrous lurch. How will they explain to their electorates the three-year slaughter in Ukraine? How will they justify the tens of billions of Euros and Sterling wasted on pushing a war that not only destroyed millions of lives but their economies as well?

The stupid European leaders are in panic mode, and that’s a good thing.

November 13, 2024 Posted by | Militarism, Russophobia | , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Threats to Provide Ukraine With German Cruise Missiles Are Merely ‘Paper Tiger’ Moves

Sputnik – 12.11.2024

CDU party leader Friedrich Merz, who seeks to become Germany’s new chancellor, has boasted that, if he gets the job, he would present Russia with an ultimatum: cease all combat operations in the Ukrainian conflict zone in 24 hours or Kiev gets German Taurus cruise missiles along with permission to use them to strike deep into Russian territory.

Merz’s bellicose rhetoric seems to be a product of the current political instability in Germany where the ruling coalition collapsed amid a “deep economic recession” and the loss of “residual hopes of good transatlantic relations” due to Donald Trump’s victory in the US election, says Paolo Raffone, a strategic analyst and director of the CIPI Foundation in Brussels.

“Merz understands that the heavyweights of Germany are the financial-industrial conglomerates who are openly against the war against Russia in Ukraine and the crazy sanctions against Russia and China. However, Merz must appease the war-minded Green [Party] who are also ideologically anti-Russian and anti-Chinese, to embark them in a possible government coalition,” he explains.

However, forming a new government might necessitate forming a coalition with the SPD, who, Raffone points out, “would not support Merz’s intent to lift restrictions on long-range armaments supplied to Ukraine and even less the idea of issuing an ultimatum to Russia.”

“Merz’s harsh rhetoric is a paper tiger – a desperate attempt to have a role in Ukraine after Trump’s win – that would probably also irritate the new US administration that has signaled the intention to de-escalate the confrontation,” the analyst remarks.

NATO support of Merz’s ultimatum initiative also seems unlikely as it would require unanimous approval of the military bloc’s members who would probably first wait for the United States, their “real ‘tutor’,” to weigh in on the matter.

“Trump (as also his predecessors and some EU leaders) is not a fan of NATO playing any direct concrete role in the war or post-war in Ukraine. Even Poland, that is genetically anti-Russian, would be very careful to support any Ukrainian capacity to strike inside Russia with West-provided missiles,” Raffone suggests.

He also warns that, with all the serious “domestic confusion” in Germany, “anything that any German leader says may just be reversed in the blink of an eye.”

“Moreover, the US, that is still occupying Germany with military bases and personnel and nuclear capacities, would not like to be dragged in any direct military confrontation with Russia,” Raffone adds. “None of the EU countries can be taken seriously without the consent of the US.”

November 12, 2024 Posted by | Militarism, Russophobia | , , , | Leave a comment

Stunning Revelations in Massive Robert Koch Institute Leak

Breathtaking November 2 presentation in the German Parliament

By John Leake | Courageous Discourse | November 9, 2024

A massive leak of internal e-mails and memos from Germany’s Robert Koch Institute (federal agency and research institute for controlling infectious disease) reveals that the institute’s scientists understood that virtually every aspect of the COVID-19 pandemic response was NOT guided by science, but by political machinations to spread fear, control the population, and promote the experimental vaccines. On November 2, 2024, Professor Stefan Homburg gave a presentation on the leaked documents in the German Parliament.

Since the beginning of the pandemic, I have suspected that governments throughout the world were committing the greatest organized fraud in history, but I still found Professor Homburg’s presentation to be absolutely breathtaking in the sheer ruthlessness of the lies and manipulation revealed in these leaked documents. Perhaps the most perfidious is a memo from September 28, 2020.

Translation: 28.09.2020: FDA approval [of COVID-19 vaccines] before the US Elections is not desired, also not by European authorities.

In other words, both U.S. and European public health authorities were afraid the COVID-19 vaccines—which had been heralded as the forthcoming saviors of mankind—could help to get Donald Trump elected if they were approved before the election. And so they found it expedient to withhold approval until after the election, even though they claimed the vaccines could save millions of lives.

I strongly encourage everyone to watch the video presentation (in German with English subtitles) and to share it far and wide.

A whistleblower obtained 10GB from Robert-Koch-Institute, the German CDC. This so-called RKI-Leak reveals that Covid was a scam from start to finish. The presentation took place in the second largest room of the German Bundestag, which is actually intended for committees of inquiry. Recorded 2 November 2024 in Berlin, English subtitles provided by the speaker.

Internet sources:

The RKI-Leak The Federal Ministry of Health has confirmed the authenticity of the leak. You can download the entire material anonoymously and free of charge from https://rki-transparenzbericht.de/

Here is a convenient search tool: https://www.rkileak.com/

Lauterbach‘s Post on X: https://x.com/Karl_Lauterbach/status/…

Lauterbach and political independence https://www.bild.de/politik/inland/rk… Spahn: Test, test, test https://www.aerztezeitung.de/Politik/…

CNN reporting emergency authorization https://edition.cnn.com/2020/12/11/he…

RKI-Grapah Influenca like illnesses (ILI) https://influenza.rki.de/Wochenberich…

WDR-Graph vaccine development https://www.quarks.de/gesundheit/medi…

Lauterbach on the unvaccinated https://www.welt.de/politik/deutschla…

Citation Dr. Brigitte Keller-Stanislawki https://www.berliner-zeitung.de/gesun…

Steinmeier, Merkel, Scholz, Lauterbach, Spahn were allegedly vaccinated https://www.bundespraesident.de/Share… https://www.aerzteblatt.de/nachrichte… https://www.spiegel.de/politik/deutsc… Lauterbach on child vaccination https://x.com/Karl_Lauterbach/status/…

RKI risk levels (deleted, only available from the internet archive) Go to https://archive.ph and type:https:/www.rki.de/DE/Content/InfAZ/N/Neuartiges_Coronavirus/Risikobewertung.html Intensive care unit occupation https://infektionsradar.gesund.bund.d…

November 10, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular, Video, War Crimes | , , , | Leave a comment

Israel über alles

By Ricardo Nuno Costa – New Eastern Outlook – November 8 2024

“Germany has only one place, and that’s on Israel’s side,” said German Chancellor Olaf Scholz in the Bundestag, justifying the delivery of arms to Tel Aviv.

One wonders if this partial stance is what is expected of a country that claims to be the leader of the European project, with geopolitical ambitions in an increasingly multipolar world. For the global majority, the answer is no, but in Germany, the subject is thorny and shrouded in taboos. To top it off, the Federal Republic has just passed a law to prevent it from being debated.

Berlin’s inability to call Tel Aviv to account on its international obligations only confirms Germany’s increasingly secondary role in the international arena. If the “engine of Europe” is constrained in its military role, it could at least be a diplomatic power, making use of its economic status. But its role is diminishing. Why is that?

In his latest book, “Krieg ohne Ende?” (War without end?), international political scientist Michael Lüders masterfully summarises the hypocrisy surrounding Germany’s involvement in the Zionist project from the beginning to the present day. The author suggests, in the form of a subtitle, “why we need to change our attitude towards Israel if we are to have peace in the Middle East.”

Germany is losing the credibility it has built up over decades in the eyes of the global majority. Today, the country is no longer seen with the same seriousness that we have become accustomed to in recent decades, but rather as a mere instrumental piece of the US in international relations. This is also the visible result of the “feminist foreign policy” that Annalena Baerbock has pursued as foreign minister over the last three years.

Defence of Israel is ‘Staatsräson’ of the Federal Republic

Germany has adopted the defence of Israel’s existence as ‘Staatsräson’ (raison d’État). It was during a visit by Chancellor Merkel to the Israeli Knesset in 2008 that this concept was first mentioned.

In the above-mentioned bestseller, it becomes clear that this principle is no accident, as it corresponds to the fact that Israel’s ‘raison d’État’ is the Holocaust, for which Germany is to blame. According to Mr. Lüders, the Jewish state used the Eichmann case to launch its ‘raison d’État’, while many other Nazi officials responsible for the persecution of the Jews had passed into the new Bonn nomenclature without being called to account. The most notorious case was that of Hans Globke, the eminence grise of the new regime, a key player in the USA’s fight against the USSR. He had previously drafted the Nuremberg race laws and was now Adenauer’s number two, protected by the new BND intelligence services and the CIA.

The SS officer Adolf Eichmann, kidnapped in Argentina by the Israelis, symbolically bore all the blame for Germany’s 1933-45 National Socialist’s period. After his hanging in 1962 for crimes against the Jewish people during the Holocaust, in the only judicial execution carried out in Israel to date, the FRG finally officially recognised Israel in 1965, after years of collaboration (since 1952). This marked the beginning of a complex relationship that remains opaque to this day.

An important part of this relationship has been the multi-billion dollar military industry within the Atlanticist framework. The most significant case, again unclear, was the corruption scandal over the sale of three nuclear-capable submarines and four corvettes sold during the Merkel governments to the Netanyahu government in 2016 for almost 4 billion euros, which ended up being paid for in part by German taxpayers.

In a current example, political scientist Kristin Helberg, who specialises in the Middle East, expressed her surprise on the public channel in October that Berlin was not helping Israel with defensive weapons against a hypothetical Iranian attack – which in her view would be legitimate – but by delivering ammunition to be used on civilian populations, contrary to the Geneva Convention.

Germany involved in a genocide

With its arms support for Israeli attacks on civilians in Gaza and Lebanon, Germany is not only committing an international offence that is costing it the current cases opened at the ICC and ICJ, but is also seeing its reputation stained in the biggest international forums by the global majority, on which its industrial export model depends.

On 14 October, German Foreign Ministry spokesman Sebastian Fischer said at a press conference in Berlin that the German government “sees no signs that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza” and that “Israel undoubtedly has the right to self-defence against Hamas”, and two days later Chancellor Scholz said loudly in the Bundestag that “there will be more arms deliveries – Israel can always count on that.”

Criticising Israel will be banned

In its increasingly radical philo-Zionist course, the German political class passed a new resolution “to protect, preserve and strengthen Jewish life in Germany”, to which only the parties of the governing coalition and the CDU/CSU were called, without consulting the AfD and BSW. The controversial and non-transparent resolution promises to pursue “increasingly open and violent anti-Semitism in right-wing and Islamist extremist circles, as well as a relativising approach and the rise of Israel-related and left-wing anti-imperialist anti-Semitism.”

The document mentions that “cases of anti-Semitism have increased” since the Hamas attack on Israel a year ago, but fails to mention that German law has since come to consider anti-Semitic the manifestation of various expressions in favour of the Palestinian cause such as the slogan “From the river to the sea Palestine will be free” among other slogans, chants, insignia or even posts published on the internet, which are now considered and counted as punishable anti-Semitic crimes.

“The German Bundestag reaffirms its decision to ensure that no organisation or project that spreads antisemitism, questions Israel’s right to exist, calls for a boycott of Israel or actively supports the BDS movement receives financial support,” the document goes on to say.

Recently, the rector of the Berlin Institute for Advanced Study, Barbara Stollberg-Rilinger, complained that the freedom of study of the scientific community is under massive threat. “What distinguishes antisemitism from legitimate criticism of the Israeli government?” she asked. “And above all, who defines what antisemitism is? This is not at all clear. The definition is vague and leaves enormous room for legal uncertainty,” she asserted.

The divorce between the political class and public perception

It’s clear that the text of the new law aims to exclude the AfD from public debate, using the magic buzzword of the “far right”, but it also weighs heavily on the BSW, where the Palestinian cause and the multipolarist vision are obvious. A recent study by the Forsa research institute for Stern/RTL corroborates the clear rift between real and institutional Germany. Whilst the former doesn’t want the country to be involved in the Middle East war, the political class has guaranteed its indispensable support for Israel as a ‘national interest’. Voters from all German parties are therefore unequivocally opposed to further arms deliveries to Tel Aviv. The BSW electorate (85 per cent) is in the lead, followed by the AfD (75 per cent), but also 60 per cent of SPD voters, 56 per cent of CDU/CSU voters and 52 per cent of FDP voters. Interestingly, the Greens’ electorate showed a 50-50 tie. In the national total, this corresponds to 60 per cent of the citizenry, with the difference in the east being more significant (75 per cent against).

The case of the AfD is more curious because as a party that was born out of contestation with the system on the issues not only of immigration, but also of foreign policy and others, and its electoral base is clearly critical of Berlin’s pro-Western policy, its leadership also has a disproportionate presence of the philo-Zionist element, which is no different from the rest of the political class.

According to another poll also from October, by Infratest Dimap for public television ARD and WELT daily, only 19 per cent of AfD supporters consider Israel to be a reliable partner, a noticeably lower percentage than in the CDU/CSU (34 per cent) the SPD (36 per cent) and the Greens (38 per cent).

AfD distances itself from the Zionist consensus

Probably because he knew how to interpret this discrepancy between leadership and base, AfD co-leader Tino Chrupalla called for an end to aid to Tel Aviv and Germany’s ‘one-sided’ relationship with the Jewish state. “By supplying arms to Israel, you are accepting the dehumanisation of all civilian victims on both sides. They are not contributing to détente, but rather throwing fuel on the fire”, he said. It is “time to take a critical and objective look at the Israeli government”.

These statements come at a time of a clear move towards multipolarity within the party. Moreover, the principle of neutrality is the AfD’s official line. Its 2024 European electoral programme states that “the supply of arms to war zones does not serve peace in Europe”. At the risk of becoming just another political party, the AfD seems to want to meet the feelings of the majority of Germans and its social support base on foreign policy issues, which are now much debated by the general public.

It seems clear that after decades in the room, the elephant can no longer be hidden in the German political debate.

November 8, 2024 Posted by | Book Review, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Militarism, War Crimes | , , , | 2 Comments

Ukraine aid program responsible for political crisis in Germany

By Lucas Leiroz | November 8, 2024

The political crisis in Germany does not seem to be coming to an end in the short term. The collapse of the government is worrying the country’s authorities, and there is also an unbalanced social scenario that puts the entire German stability at risk. In a recent speech, Olaf Scholz acknowledged that the situation in Ukraine is the main reason for this crisis, particularly due to the systematic support provided by Berlin to the Kiev regime.

The German Prime Minister stated that the main reason for the country’s political crisis is the lack of consensus among the authorities on military backing for Ukraine. He blamed former Finance Minister Christian Lindner for refusing to approve a budget plan to further boost funding for Kiev. According to Scholz, Lindner’s position created polarization among officials and broke up the coalition of the government.

Scholz recently dismissed Lindner from his post, creating strong friction between the different groups supporting the government. Lindner is also the leader of the Free Democratic Party, which is one of the three parties that make up the pro-Scholz coalition. His firing caused discontent not only among the party members, but also among the Social Democrats and the “Greens”, creating an atmosphere of distrust among Scholz’s team.

The rivalry between Scholz and Lindner started as a dispute over how to establish a policy of support for Ukraine consistent with Germany’s financial situation. The two officials had a bitter and possibly disrespectful discussion during a meeting in which Scholz tried to force Lindner to approve a new economic plan that would allow further military aid to Ukraine, thus ignoring some of Germany’s major social problems, such as economic decline and deindustrialization.

Scholz tries to disguise the nature of his economic plan by claiming that it includes efforts to promote the development of clean energy and investment in the automotive industry. However, the Ukrainian issue is the central factor in the proposal. Scholz says that it is necessary to expand aid policies for Kiev, considering that winter is coming, and Ukrainians will increasingly require international help to overcome the difficulties of the season. The chancellor also says that, with Donald Trump’s victory in the US, the main responsibility for supporting Ukraine will come to Germany and the Europeans, which is why he hopes that an economic plan establishing clear assistance for Kiev will be approved.

“The finance minister shows no willingness to implement this offer in the federal government for the benefit of our country. I do not want to subject our country to such behavior any longer,” Scholz said.

Scholz is currently in a critical political situation. His followers have become a minority in the government, as Lindner’s dismissal has also encouraged the resignation of other ministers and officials. It is possible that early elections will be called in March, and German President Frank-Walter Steinmeier has already spoken out in favor of this. Clearly, Germany is going through one of the most critical moments in its post-Cold War history, no longer being the stable, peaceful and developed country so praised by European social democrats in previous years.

Moreover, Scholz’s political opponents are pressuring the remaining officials in his government to establish a different agenda from that of the chancellor. For example, according to German media, Lindner has asked the Defense Ministry to impose new limits on military aid to Ukraine, justifying his request based on economic calculations that prove Germany’s inability to continue boosting assistance. Berlin has already halved its aid to Kiev, but Lindner and other realist politicians say that it needs to be cut further to overcome the country’s billion-dollar deficit.

In the end, it is clear how the conflict in Ukraine is responsible for the German political crisis. Olaf Scholz himself admits that the lack of consensus on the Ukrainian issue led to the collapse of his government, which seems to be reason enough for Berlin to rethink its policy towards Ukraine. Instead of firing ministers who think differently, Scholz should pay more attention to the calculations that expose the German reality, recognizing that it is not viable for the country to continue backing the Ukrainian regime in the long term.

If Scholz does not change his strategy on Ukraine, he will be defeated in new parliamentary elections. Furthermore, the political cost of his efforts will be in vain because German aid to Ukraine is not capable of changing anything in the conflict scenario. In the end, the Scholz government is likely to become yet another of the many European governments that have collapsed amid the crisis that has affected the continent since 2022.

Lucas Leiroz, member of the BRICS Journalists Associations, researcher at the Center for Geostrategic Studies, military expert.

November 8, 2024 Posted by | Economics, Militarism | , | Leave a comment

The repercussions of the colonization of Europe by the United States

By Eduardo Vasco | Strategic Culture Foundation | November 7, 2024

Former European Central Bank chief Mario Draghi recently presented a comprehensive report to the European Union that demonstrates how Europeans are falling behind Americans – and even Asians – on key issues of economic development.

While in 1990, GDP per capita in the United States was 16% higher than in the eurozone, by 2023 that gap had already grown to more than 30%. This means that Americans are increasingly richer than Europeans.

But the gap between the richest men in the United States and Europe is also widening. Only 10% of high-tech entrepreneurs in the top 30 and top 500 of the market capitalization rankings are European. By comparison, 73% in the first and 56% in the second are American.

These new figures once again reveal the economic devastation of Europe. And its origins are directly linked to American power.

By the 1930s, the United States had lost all the advantage it had gained over its European competitors at the end of World War I. Europe was devastated and Washington had emerged as the world’s great economic superpower. However, the 1929 crisis brought this strength to an end. The Great Depression seemed to have put an end to the American dream.

Just as World War I was a dispute between imperialist powers over the world market, the future World War II needed to be unleashed so that the Americans could regain control – partially lost to Germany and Japan in the wake of the 1930s crisis. Franklin D. Roosevelt led the reorganization of the American economy, vastly expanding federal spending and making large public investments thanks to a dictatorial centralization of economic power in the hands of a small corporate monopoly.

The result was an unimaginable increase in industrial production – focused almost exclusively on the war. Pearl Harbor came in very handy: it was the excuse the regime needed to eliminate opposition to its entry into the conflict. Between 1941 and 1944, U.S. war production more than tripled, and by 1944 its factories were producing twice as much as Germany, Italy and Japan.

American industrial production served two intertwined strategic objectives: to destroy Europe and to rebuild it in its image and likeness. The U.S. equipped Britain with the weapons needed to confront Germany, and both carried out an intense bombing campaign with the explicit intention of destroying the German economy, the industrial engine of Europe. Almost 2.7 million tons of bombs were dropped on Germany and the Nazi-occupied regions of other countries, particularly France and Belgium (completing the industrial heartland of Europe). American and British aerial bombings killed 305,000 Germans, injured almost 800,000, totally or partially destroyed 5.5 million homes, and left 20 million without essential public services.

It was genocide. Added to the immediate slaughter of 330,000 civilians in Japan by the atomic bombs of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the U.S. bombings took the lives of 635,000 people.

The U.S. destruction of Europe was a big deal that benefited the United States decisively in securing its total supremacy in the new postwar world order. The deficit of foreign countries in 1946-47 was more than $19 billion. The U.S., which was intact, offered loans to begin the reconstruction of Europe as a soft form of colonization, while at the same time punishing those countries severely. In the words of the unsuspecting establishment historian Arthur S. Link, “the American government, even during the bitter days of Reconstruction, had never taken such terrible revenge on former enemies.” The German people and institutions were reformed “in the image of the United States.”

The Truman Doctrine and, mainly, the Marshall Plan, were the pillars of the U.S.’s post-World War II policy of colonizing Europe: the first transformed all of Western Europe and part of its southeast into a huge American military base, through NATO, policing the politics of these countries. The second began as a clientelist policy, granting handouts to starving Europeans (11 billion dollars) that were later returned with interest, beginning the process of economic, political and social dependence on Europe. Between 1948 and 1951, another 12 billion dollars had been spent in this regard.

Combating the false threat of the Soviet Union was the excuse found by the American government to capture Europe. “The greatest nation on earth,” declared the Republican Arthur Vandenberg before the Senate, “will have to justify or abandon its leadership.” This was how the United States managed to overcome a crisis of overproduction and sell its goods and weapons, while at the same time leaving the Europeans hostage to their accumulated debts. American products invaded Europe and NATO began to control the national armies.

On the one hand, the post-World War II subjugation of Europe resulted in relative well-being for the population, which resulted in social stability. However, following the second major American colonization strategy – deindustrialization with the imposition of neoliberal policies in the 1980s and 1990s – this welfare state was dismantled, leaving Europeans completely hostage to the United States.

In all countries around the world, the main body responsible for scientific research and development is the armed forces. However, Europe’s armies have become vassals of the United States through NATO and their capacity has been reduced to increase that of the American forces on the continent. The report commissioned by the EU from Draghi highlights the harmful consequences of this subjugation for Europe.

According to the report, Europeans spend half as much as Americans on research and development in relation to GDP, and many European businesspeople prefer to migrate to the United States to develop these activities. R&D spending relative to GDP in the European Union is also lower than that of China, the United Kingdom, Taiwan and South Korea. The EU has already been overtaken by China in the number of articles published in leading scientific journals, and Japan and India are hot on its heels – while the U.S. remains ahead. Europe’s economic capacity for innovation also remains below that of the U.S. and Japan. It has already fallen behind in the development of digital technology.

Draghi suggests a series of “drastic measures” to combat the growing gap between the U.S. and Europe, according to Politico. However, these measures are unlikely to have any effect, since the EU’s policy remains absolutely aligned (i.e. dependent) on that of the United States and no significant measures have been adopted recently that indicate a different path from that taken in recent decades.

This is why there is growing discontent, not only among ordinary people in the bloc’s countries, but also among influential sectors of the European political and economic elites. The growth of the far right in Germany, France, Italy, the Netherlands, Austria, as well as the quest by the governments of Hungary and Slovakia for greater sovereignty, are clear reflections of this trend.

November 7, 2024 Posted by | Economics, Militarism, Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Germany is a ‘banana republic’ – Zakharova

RT | November 7, 2024

The collapse of Chancellor Olaf Scholz’s government just hours after Donald Trump was elected US president is a sign that Germany has become a “banana republic,” Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said on Thursday.

The coalition collapsed on Wednesday, prompted by disagreements over the budget deficit and further aid to Ukraine.

“The … coalition breakdown has exposed the main problem of Germany’s political system: it is a classic ‘banana republic’,” the spokeswoman wrote in her Telegram channel. According to Zakharova, Berlin failed to maintain good economic relations with Russia, the supplier of cheap natural gas, which was “vitally important for its citizens and industry.”

Scholz’s government also could not keep the national economy afloat and allowed its industries to “emigrate” to the US, the spokeswoman stated, adding that it was all apparently done to “please Washington.”

Last month, the newspaper Sueddeutsche Zeitung reported that the German economy is expected to contract for a second year in a row as it struggles to keep up with soaring energy costs after cutting itself off from Russian gas. The nation’s industrial output dropped by 4.6% in September year-on-year as orders for domestic-made goods have also plummeted, according to official data released this week.

“Berlin stopped even pretending that the German government had any sovereignty and … was not just proxies for the American neoliberals in the EU,” Zakharova added.

Scholz fired Finance Minister Christian Lindner, the head of the business-friendly Free Democratic Party (FDP), late on Wednesday. The FDP was one of three parties comprising the German government coalition together with the chancellor’s Social Democrats and the Greens.

In response to the dismissal, the FDP announced its withdrawal from the government and formally ended the three-way coalition. The development left Scholz with a minority government consisting only of his own party and the Greens.

On Thursday, Scholz admitted that aid to Ukraine had become a major point of contention during talks the previous day during which the coalition members failed to find common ground.

According to the chancellor, he put forward a four-point plan that included “increasing our support for Ukraine” among other things. Lindner rejected the proposal and reportedly suggested calling for snap elections instead.

Earlier, Lindner had reportedly asked the Defense Ministry to limit military assistance to Kiev, citing budgetary difficulties. The government is still seeking a way to plug a multibillion-euro hole in next year’s budget and to revive the struggling economy.

November 7, 2024 Posted by | Economics, Illegal Occupation | , | 1 Comment

Brussels’ persecution of Hungary and war against X could spark ‘yuge’ retaliation

Remix News | November 5, 2024

Today, voters head to the polls to decide who will run the United States for the next four years. If Trump should win, relations with the EU could become extremely tense, as a Trump administration could begin to wield powerful sanctions against countries — and even Brussels itself — it deems to be in violation of democratic principles and protections of free speech.

For one, Brussels has been hitting Hungary with sanctions, freezing billions owed to Budapest over “rule of law” and generally working to oust the ruling government. Viktor Orbán has openly come out in support of Trump, and both of them enjoy a warm relationship, and more importantly, they share the same ideology on many key issues, including migration and a pro-peace path in Ukraine.

It will likely not be business as usual if Trump comes back to power. Countries like Hungary would no longer be facing the full weight of the Western left. In fact, Trump could very well start playing hardball, issuing sanctions, travel restrictions, and new executive orders to prevent democratic backsliding in Europe. Notably, the rule-of-law sanctions being wielded by Brussels against member state governments it deems undesirable would likely be viewed from Washington as an anti-democratic form of blackmail. In turn, the U.S. could quickly counter such moves, including with “rule-of-law” sanctions of its own against Brussels.

If Germany moves to ban the Alternative for Germany (AfD), a Trump administration could move to counter this as well, including with sanctions against Germany due to democratic backsliding. Many may have already forgotten about the commando raid on a German publisher and journalists’ home over the summer. The German government, without so much as a court order, shut down an entire publication overnight. The publisher of Compact magazine, Jürgen Elsässer, was splashed across newspaper and television stations across the country in his bathrobe surrounded by officers in ski masks.

This is not normal behavior for a democratic country, and Trump’s administration may take action if further attempts are made to persecute journalists and shut down the free press in Germany.

https://twitter.com/RMXnews/status/1813205996531003470

What actions could Trump’s administration take in such a scenario? With Germany cut off from its traditional source of Russian gas, a move to restrict energy exports to Germany would be devastating. In other key areas, Germany and Europe are far more dependent on the U.S. than on vice versa.

Obviously, such a move would come with serious risks, including for the global economy, and potentially sparking a trade war. However, the U.S. would have most of the leverage in such a scenario. Europe needs U.S. energy, end of story.

The EU’s plan to restrict free speech and throttle X with fines could also result in sanctions on European companies, tariffs, and other forms of retaliation. Trump will likely be very willing to defend free speech across the world, especially after his own experience facing censorship across social media, and willing to use U.S. might to ensure this fundamental right on the web. His backers, most notably Elon Musk, will have a strong voice in the administration, and should Trump suddenly grow cold feet, he will face withering pressure from Musk and others.

Under Trump, free speech would still have a chance on platforms like X and others, even if free speech is already limited on those platforms. In turn, European conservatives, libertarians, and those opposed to mass immigration will be allowed to voice their opinions and influence the political debate in the coming years.

There are, of course, many open questions about how relations between Trump and the EU would develop, but it may obviously be a pointless thought experiment. In a matter of hours, days, or even weeks, Kamala Harris may be the decided winner. In such a scenario, the globe can also expect X to be shut down within a year or two, buried under fines and violations of the EU’s Digital Service Act. Brussels will continue to attack conservatives with its powerful sanctions mechanism. New forms of harassment and persecution, including arrests of politicians, journalists, and academics who support the “wrong opinion,” are likely as well.

https://twitter.com/RMXnews/status/1852324197084668098

The majority of Europeans may not like Donald Trump. As polling shows, Europeans, most notably Western Europeans, are very much opposed. Only a few countries from the east, such as Hungary, Bulgaria, and Serbia, support the former president, but in the end, he may be the only thing between a free web and a closed web, especially on the most important topics Europeans are increasingly not allowed to talk about. Furthermore, as opposition to mass immigration grows and other left-liberal agendas, there is no telling where European sympathies will likely be in the coming years.

In short, much is at stake for Europe in the outcome of this vote. The deck remains stacked against Trump. The U.S. voting system is in shambles, with votes being counted for days and weeks after election day, with ballots stuffed in drop boxes weeks before the election, and with ballot harvesters collecting ballots outside of any real oversight. Even basic safeguards like voter ID are nowhere to be found in many states. It will be a miracle if Trump wins, but we’ll know the results soon enough and will have to deal with the outcome — for better or worse.

November 5, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , , | 1 Comment

Expert questions narrative about Ukrainians being behind Nord Stream blasts

Andromeda sailing yacht pictured docked in Dranske, Germany on March 17, 2023. © Sean Gallup/Getty Images
RT | November 4, 2024

A narrative pushed by the Western media about a small team of Ukrainian divers being behind the sabotage of the Nord Stream gas pipelines in September 2022 is hard to believe, Dr Sven Thomas, a renowned German diving specialist, has told Bild over the weekend.

Damage sustained by the Russian undersea pipelines suggests that much more powerful explosive charges and a much larger vessel were used to render them out of commission, he said, adding that a small yacht the media keep reporting about would never suffice.

American and German media have repeatedly claimed that the blasts were linked to a small Ukrainian crew that rented a leisure yacht called Andromeda at a German port and set off armed only with diving equipment, satellite navigation, and open-source maps. The operation was reportedly given a green light by Ukraine’s then-commander in chief, Valery Zaluzhny.

Multiple media outlets reported in August that the German authorities had issued an international arrest warrant for a suspect in the case, a Ukrainian diver identified as Volodymyr Z.

“There must have been at least one more team to cause the huge explosions,” said Sven Thomas, who heads a state-backed life-saving service in the German city of Halle. The specialist, who leads a crew of professional divers and underwater archeologists, added that he had “serious doubts” about the whole story linking the incidents to just a six-member Ukrainian crew using a 15-meter-long leisure yacht.

According to Thomas, divers working at a depth of just 34 meters in a lake would need at least four anchors chained to a vessel to keep their equipment stable. Andromeda had only one 25-kilogram anchor and a 100-meter-long chain, while its crew supposedly dived at the depth of between 80 and 90 meters in the sea. That is just “impossible,” according to Thomas, who has been conducting diving operations for years.

The total weight of the equipment needed for such an operation would be about four tons, the expert said, adding that seismic records of the explosions show that at least several charges equivalent to 400 kilograms of TNT were used to blast the pipes.

“They cannot drop such bomb charges into water without a crane and a counterweight, the vessel would just capsize otherwise,” Thomas said. According to the specialist diver, the fact that the pipelines were “crushed like a tin can” suggests that the damage was caused by powerful explosions nearby rather than small charges planted directly on the pipelines.

Thomas believes that it points to military-grade bottom mines with a yield equivalent to around 1260 kilograms of TNT. Such mines can only be planted by a large vessel with a crane onboard, the expert told Bild. Andromeda could have been behind only one of four blasts, which was likely caused by a small explosive charge planted directly on one of the pipelines, he added.

Moscow dismissed the Western media reports implicating Andromeda as implausible. President Vladimir Putin has maintained the view that the explosions were carried out by professionals supported by “the full might of the state, which has certain technologies,” noting that the US was “probably” behind it. Last month, Danish media reported that US Navy warships had been operating near the Nord Stream pipelines shortly before the explosions.

November 4, 2024 Posted by | False Flag Terrorism | | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »