Blues for Europa

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 14394
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Blues for Europa

Post by blindpig » Tue Jul 01, 2025 2:02 pm

How Vucic's Will Was Tested and Will Belgrade Resist a Color Revolution
June 29, 22:02

Image

How Vucic's Will Was Tested and Will Belgrade Resist a Color Revolution

Why was the holiday of June 28 chosen to launch the color revolution in Belgrade

? Taking advantage of the fact that the events surrounding the short-lived Iran-Israel war distracted the world community's attention from Belgrade and the torcida unleashed against the country's leader Aleksandar Vucic, the anti-government forces in Serbia came into motion. The "assembly point" of the new architecture of the coup d'etat was the national Serbian holiday Vidovdan - the day of remembrance of all the holy martyrs of Serbia and the day of remembrance of the Battle of Kosovo.

On this day, all of Serbia comes into motion; the masses are seized by festive excitement, people are possessed by emotions that can easily be turned both in a positive and negative direction (directed against the current government and its specific representatives). Emotions "warm up" the masses, creating a basis for any revolutionary and especially pseudo-revolutionary actions.

In this regard, the holiday works in the same way as elections. The election issue wedged itself into the emotional upsurge of the Serbs along with the color revolution activists who appeared on the streets: the activists who emerged from the crowd of Serbs celebrating the holiday began to demand that the authorities set a date for early parliamentary elections and dismantle the tent camp of Vucic's supporters near the parliament building. Thus, the day of remembrance and sorrow became politicized. The hidden rebellion once again gave its "metastasis".

Image

The organizers of the rebellion announced that the ultimatum expires at 21:00 local time (22:00 Moscow time), after which, if the demands are ignored, they will be ready to resort to measures of "civil disobedience" (that is, violence in the form of mass riots). Vucic himself confirmed this, stating that violence will happen: "they can no longer refuse it ... But we are ready."

This showed that Vucic, unlike Yanukovych and Assad, is ready to fight for power and will not hesitate to use counter-violence (like Alexander Lukashenko in 2020).

Vucic also appealed to the protest organizers not to disturb public order: “In the evening, you will see angry people who will eventually resort to violence because they have no other choice. I again ask them in a fatherly way not to do this. It is always better to retreat than to do something stupid that you will regret for the rest of your life. I have absolutely no doubt about the final result. I just want people to be saved, especially the youth.” In the practice of information operations, this technique is known and is called “Information vaccination.” Vucic used it wisely.

But will this save the "father of Serbian democracy"? I doubt it very much. Color revolutions are not a joke, they are an extremely dangerous tool for dismantling power, and student protests on the streets of Belgrade are just the tip of the iceberg. The enemies of Serbia and Vucic are active, they act quickly and have full operational initiative, imposing their "flash mobs" on the authorities at the time and place that are beneficial to them. Imposing their rules of the game on the current authorities. And even mocking them, throwing a huge number of round badges with images of flowers and the inscription "color revolution" for some reason in Russian on the markets of Belgrade.

Vucic behaves passively. This is either infantilism mixed with the same childish naivety and irrational belief in miracles. Or the hope that at the very last moment he will still be saved - perhaps by those who prompted him to create his own public movement in support of himself, his beloved - a kind of "People's Vucic Front", and, at the same time, to pitch a tent camp of his supporters on the central square - so that no one else could pitch their tents there: the place is already occupied. But the "good people" may not make it in time this time. Because they themselves are not working for the result, but for the sake of "checking the box".

A tool for organizing coups d'etat

Modern color revolutions are technologies for organizing coups d'etat, passed off by their organizers as a "spontaneous uprising of the masses" directed against the current government. The driving force of a color revolution is a mass youth protest movement, organized by specially trained activists; the main instrument of pressure on the government is an aggressive "political" crowd formed on the "Maidan" (a permanent camp in the center of the capital's metropolis, also called the "island" (or territory) of "freedom"), into which new streams of protesters pour.

The main method of pressure on the government is blackmail, combined with the presentation of increasingly radical ultimatums. This model of a color revolution first took shape in Serbia, during the events of 2000, when the regime of Slobodan Milosevic was overthrown in Belgrade (the so-called bulldozer revolution). From that moment on, it was the "bulldozer revolution" that became the classic example and template for imitation - the organization of color revolutions in other countries. It is according to this scenario that events are developing in Serbia now, in the organization of the mass protest movement all the signs of a classic color revolution are clearly visible.

Evolution of color revolution technologies

In 2018, 2019 and 2020, the technologies of color revolutions underwent a change, or hybridization: their ideologists and organizers again began to give preference to faster, cruder and, at first glance, more effective tools of "hard power" - direct forceful coercion: thus, the end of the color revolution in Bolivia in 2019 was put by an ultimatum from the army command, which demanded that President Morales immediately leave his post.

In the same year, the United States attempted to overthrow the Maduro regime in Venezuela, amid mass protests, almost agreeing on the "neutralization" of Maduro with some people from his inner circle; in 2020, the United States made the same attempt when organizing a color revolution in Belarus (the physical elimination of Lukashenko was also planned there, and mass protests and riots served as a factor distracting the attention of the Belarusian leadership from the actions of the "conspirators" from President Lukashenko's inner circle); In Kazakhstan in 2022, the color revolution immediately transitioned into an armed rebellion. In principle, such a threat can also await Serbia in 2025: mass protests, transforming into mass riots, can pave the way for crime and radical nationalists, who will become the driving force of a classic armed rebellion.

But the most dangerous thing about the hybrid color revolution that unfolded in Belarus in 2020 was that Minsk became the "assembly point" for the organizers of color revolutions of the so-called best practices (for the most dangerous methods and technologies) of organizing color revolutions.

The general scheme for organizing a color revolution in Belarus is an exact copy of the Kiev Maidan of 2013-2014. (but without the Maidan itself, a permanent camp), the technologies of communication and coordination of protest groups are taken from Hong Kong 2019-2020, the technologies of conflict mobilization under a non-political agenda are borrowed from the Yerevan "electro-Maidan" of 2015.

The general scheme of the coup d'etat is an exact copy of the "Venezuelan precedent" - the technology of organizing a coup d'etat in Venezuela in 2019. There is little that is actually Belarusian in the Minsk protests: their own authentic symbols, the actual absence of a Maidan (which could be blocked, covered and dispersed) - it is now mobile, like a gypsy camp, and moves with crowds of protesters, and the widespread use of a new means of protest communication - Telegram channels.

This is being repeated in Serbia, where classic techniques of color revolutions are already being used - in particular, the "march on Rome" (when protests flare up on the outskirts, surround the capital with a "ring of fire" and this ring begins to quickly shrink as columns of protesters move from the outskirts to the center of the country, absorbing more and more crowds of people dissatisfied with the current government).

In recent times, we have seen many Western specialists in organizing color revolutions in action, and in various corners of the globe: they were underfoot in the Sahel, extremely keenly interested in how, on the basis of our methodology for training information special forces (the “Information and Hybrid Wars” program of the APN) and the experience of our leading practitioners of the Alter Academy of Political Sciences, the countries of the Sahel Defense Alliance are preparing the best information operations specialists on the African continent from ordinary peasants (especially when these specialists began to operate in the combat formations of operational-combat groups of classic special forces, making them “hybrid”).

We saw them in Tehran and some other places, where they, having been “left to settle”, slowly and painfully “woke up” in the expectation that they would now be given the go-ahead (after air strikes) to strike the Iranian regime from within (their meeting with us did not pass without a trace for them). We saw across the Strait (and even closer) how the same CIA "specialists" are preparing Taiwan to become "Anti-China" - and according to the same patterns by which the "Collective West" made Ukraine "Anti-Russia" in 20 years. They are not children. And they should be treated accordingly.

Image

Vucic's reaction

The current protests began to spoil Vucic's blood not yesterday and not "six months ago" (as you can hear from the lips of some talking heads): attempts to undermine the government began more than two years ago. In December 2023, the same thing happened as in November-December 2024 - it is somehow not customary to talk about this. That is, Vucic has been tested for strength by various forms of "student", "patriotic" and "anti-corruption" protests for a long time. And for most of this time, the government behaved passively.

The first signs of active actions began suddenly and at the very moment when Vucic, unexpectedly for everyone, officially accused the West of preparing a "color revolution" and announced the creation of a nationwide movement called "For the People and the State". At a rally organized on April 15, 2025 by supporters of the government in front of the parliament building in Belgrade, a triumphant Vucic declared: "The color revolution is over. They can walk around as much as they want, but nothing will come of it," Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic told crowds of his supporters organized in support of the government.

The demonstration, organized under the slogan "We will not give up Serbia", began on Friday and lasted until Sunday. At the rally, everyone was invited to join the new movement. A 200-meter Serbian flag was unfurled near the parliament and ceremoniously carried through the streets of the city. Thousands of people from various Serbian cities, as well as Montenegro and the Republic of Srpska, came to the demonstration.

The "delegates" from Kosovo and Metohija arrived - allegedly "on foot" having slipped through the cordons of Albanian nationalists. Their speech was especially vivid and carried a colossal emotional charge. Then the "protesters in support of Vucic", in the best traditions of their ideological opponents and antagonists, occupied the main square and pitched their "Maidan" there - a permanent camp, occupying the entire city space so that future Maidanites would have nowhere to even spread a blanket.

Vucic demanded that the authorities "restore order" (probably forgetting at the moment that he himself is the authority), and also declared that it was necessary to find the "instigators of unrest" and not let them "paralyze the life of the country." And he calmed down on that. As the events of the last few days have shown - very much in vain. In general, the advice dictated to Vučić by the imported specialists who came to help was correct, although noticeably outdated: in the 2000s and even in the 2010s, it would have partially solved the problem, temporarily disrupting the rebels' plans. But not now.

In the years since the mutiny in Belarus in 2020, everyone has become smarter (the opponents first and foremost), except for the so-called Russian political strategists (or, more precisely, the people who consider themselves to be them). They just want to put on a show, and then let the grass not grow. How could they not have thought of organizing a bicycle-auto-motorcycle-bike rally in Serbia, under the slogan "Vučić's bees - against the honey of color revolutions." Like in "Radio Day." In the end, Vucic was not protected by his “Poles”: the movement in defense of the president with a new round of aggressive protests has disappeared somewhere, the tent camp of supporters is silent, the aggressive crowd has to be dispersed by means of extreme forms of “persuasion” - tear gas and flash-bang grenades. The question is, what were they fighting for?

In these conditions, Vucic is required to be constantly active: he is now like an elderly wrestler in the ring, at whom everyone is throwing themselves “from around the corner”. But instead, he did his number and left. Color revolutions today do not forgive such things.

Conclusion

The events in Serbia that have been taking place over the past two years (2024 and 2025) completely fit the description of modern color revolutions - technologies for organizing coups d'état, disguised as mass protests of citizens. If the government does not fight for itself and the preservation of the country, these technologies will inevitably lead to its overthrow.

Only well-trained specialists who have the trust of the country's leadership and broad powers can organize an effective fight against the organizers and executors of the color revolution, but it is unlikely that they exist in Serbia today.

(c) Andrey Manoylo

https://vfokuse.mail.ru/article/kak-tes ... -66788152/ - zinc

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9928166.html

Google Translator

******

Protesters in Belgrade Calling for Civil War – Serbian Parliament Speaker
June 30, 2025

Image
Protesters clash with police in Belgrade, Serbia, June 28, 2025. Photo: Marko Drobnjakovic/AP.

Ana Brnabic has claimed that the organizers of an anti-government demonstration want to destroy the country

Speaker of the Serbian Parliament Ana Brnabic has accused anti-government protesters in Belgrade of calling for a civil war, after a student-led rally escalated into clashes with police.

The latest unrest erupted on Saturday, after the authorities rejected an ultimatum from demonstrators demanding the dissolution of parliament and early elections. The protest coincided with Vidovdan, a national holiday marking Serbia’s 1389 battle against the Ottoman Empire at Kosovo Field.

In a post on X, Brnabic – who served as prime minister from 2017 to 2024 – shared a video from the protest’s closing moments, in which an organizer tells the crowd to “take freedom into your own hands.”

“They didn’t end their gathering by shouting ‘Long live Serbia.’ They ended it with a chilling call to murder Serbia – a monstrous and open call for civil war,” Brnabic wrote.

In a separate post, she accused neighboring Croatia of backing the unrest in an effort to unseat President Aleksandar Vucic.



A wave of protests has gripped Serbia since the deadly collapse of a concrete canopy at a railway station in Novi Sad last November, which killed 16 people and triggered widespread public outrage and calls for accountability.

Saturday’s demonstration began peacefully but turned violent in the evening when some protesters began throwing eggs, bottles, and other objects at police near a downtown park where government supporters were holding a vigil. Officers responded with pepper spray and riot shields to disperse the crowd.

Interior Minister Ivica Dacic said six officers and two civilians were injured, and dozens of “hooligans” were arrested.

Speaking earlier at a Vidovdan ceremony, Vucic – who has repeatedly claimed that the protests are being instigated by foreign actors – called for national unity and urged restraint. “Serbia always wins in the end,” he wrote on social media.

https://orinocotribune.com/protesters-i ... t-speaker/

******

Europe’s Music Festivals Transformed Into Mass Rallies in Support of Palestine
Posted by Internationalist 360° on June 30, 2025
Ana Vračar

Image
Festival participants wave Palestinian flags, Glastonbury Festival 2025. Source: IPSC/X

Across Europe’s music festivals, artists are condemning the genocide in Gaza and calling out government complicity in Israeli war crimes.


As Europe’s summer music festival season rolls out, mainstream media and governments are struggling to keep Palestine solidarity off the stage. In its coverage of Glastonbury Festival, the BBC focused on censoring the Irish rap group Kneecap over their staunch pro-Palestinian stance – only to be met by a wave of artists who used their platform to call for a free Palestine and to demand broadcasters share real news about the Israeli genocide in Gaza.

Among them was the British duo Bob Vylan, who led the crowd in chanting “Free, free Palestine” and “Death, death to the IDF,” denouncing war crimes committed by the Israeli army, including the starvation of children and the killing of civilians in humanitarian aid lines. The BBC has since announced it would edit their performance on streaming platforms, festival organizers distanced themselves from the chant, and Prime Minister Keir Starmer labeled it hate speech. But the reaction among festivalgoers and artists has been starkly different.

Governments refuse to admit status quo has changed

Many artists insisted that the real issue is not on-stage speech but European governments’ complicity in genocide, echoing reactions to earlier attacks on Kneecap, who faced cancellations following their Coachella performance and outspoken solidarity with Palestine.

Australian band Amyl and the Sniffers condemned the backlash against Bob Vylan and Kneecap, saying authorities are attempting to frame these as isolated cases – “a couple of ‘bad bands’” – rather than acknowledging the growing anti-genocide anger among the public. “Trying to make it look like Bob [Vylan] and Kneecap are one-offs, instead of admitting that the status quo has shifted majorly and people are desperate for our governments to listen,” the band posted on social media. Throughout the weekend, they pointed out, musicians raised their voices for Gaza, cheered on by audiences that waved Palestinian flags.

Image
Bob Vylan performance at Glastonbury 2025. Source: Ciaran Tierney/X

While Kneecap and Bob Vylan both face legal action over their expressions of solidarity, their determination to challenge the status quo is unshaken. Watching what the music industry tried to do to Kneecap after Coachella, DJ Toddla T added, “has been like watching a lightweight boxer against a heavyweight, but holding it. Exhausted, but refusing to fall.”

“Kneecap represents community, which is why they can’t be taken down despite many attempts,” he added.



Taking the stage at Glastonbury, Kneecap voiced support for Palestine Action, a direct action group currently under threat of being banned under the UK’s anti-terror legislation. “Palestine Action is not arming the genocide and Israel – that’s Keir Starmer and the British government, who should be proscribed,” the group said.

“Kneecap, along with many artists and celebrities and Parliamentarians of different stripes, have joined thousands of people across the country saying ‘We are all Palestine Action,’ showing how unworkable the government’s threat to ban Palestine Action is,” Palestine Action spokespeople added.

“We just want to stop people from being murdered,” Kneecap members told The Guardian before the festival. “There’s people starving to death, people being bombed every day. That’s the stuff we need to talk about, not fucking artists.”

Liberating Europe from imperialism is part of the struggle

The genocide in Gaza was also front and center at other European festivals. At Zagreb’s InMusic Festival, bands like Fontaines D.C. and Massive Attack displayed Palestinian flags and screened footage from Gaza – images that were omitted from mainstream media coverage of the event. Other artists also emphasized the importance of linking global and local struggles in confronting Western imperialism.

During his performance, Nigerian musician Seun Kuti offered guidance to Europe’s youth. “I know you want to free Palestine, free Congo, free Sudan, free Iran. It’s a new one every week,” he said. “Free Europe. Free Europe from right-wing extremism, from fascism, from racism. Free Europe from imperialism. When you do this job – as soon as you do this job – Gaza will be free. Congo will be free. Sudan will be free.”

https://libya360.wordpress.com/2025/06/ ... palestine/
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 14394
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Blues for Europa

Post by blindpig » Fri Jul 04, 2025 2:20 pm

Serbia’s Latest Smooth-Talking Towards Russia Is Politically Self-Serving
Andrew Korybko
Jul 02, 2025

Image

It remains to be seen whether Serbia will keep its word and no longer indirectly arm Ukraine.

Serbia surprised some observers after its President and Prime Minister assured Russia that it’ll no longer indirectly arm Ukraine, which came after Russia’s Foreign Spy Service (SVR) said that Serbia hasn’t discontinued this trade that it first raised awareness about in late May. Serbia’s latest smooth-talking towards Russia is politically self-serving, however, since it preceded last weekend’s attempt to revive the protest movement which Moscow consistently assessed to be a Western-backed Color Revolution.

It was explained last summer that “The Serbian Government Is Inadvertently Responsible For The Latest Color Revolution Intrigue”, yet Russia still maintained its aforementioned position, with Lavrov implicitly reaffirming it after last weekend’s unrest in Belgrade. Even so, SVR’s two announcements about Serbia’s indirect arming of Ukraine in just as many months might have made the government speculate that Russia might play a role in the then-upcoming protests or at least promote them in its media ecosystem.

Therefore, the decision might have been made to preempt that by assuring Russia that it’ll discontinue this trade, ergo the timing of these declarations by its President and Prime Minister. The Prime Minister also pledged not to join the West’s anti-Russian sanctions nor sign any anti-Russian declarations. Going back on the first would harm the Serbian economy, however, while doing the same with the second wouldn’t likely entail any harm since none followed it voting against Russia on Ukraine at the UNGA.

Member of the Federation Council Committee on Foreign Affairs Natalia Nikonorova is skeptical: “There’s no sitting on the fence in this situation. The Serbian politician will have to make a concrete choice. Only actions, not words, will show what that choice is. With regard to the Russian-Serbian alliance, we are referring to genuine bonds that have united our peoples for decades. I think the publication of the Russian SVR investigation results could be a revelation for the wider Serbian audience.”

The signal being sent is that Russia is taking Serbia’s indirect arming of Ukraine very seriously, much more so than others’ similar activities like Turkiye’s, since it represents a betrayal of their historical friendship. This observation accounts for what pro-government Serbian critics have described as Russia’s alleged “double standards” towards this issue. From Russia’s perspective, it’s expected but still regrettable that Western-aligned countries arm Ukraine, but unacceptable for close Russian partners.

The symbolism of Russia doing nothing while a close partner like Serbia arms Ukraine could erode its soft power while also dangerously facilitating Western efforts to pressure others to do the same by pointing to the Serbian precedent of there being no meaningful consequences for such perfidy. Serbia knows how seriously Russia is taking issue and why, hence its speculative concerns that Russia might have prepared to play a role in the then-upcoming protests or at least promoted them in its media ecosystem.

Its top officials’ politically self-serving smooth-talking averted those scenarios, at least in their minds, but it remains to be seen whether they’ll keep their word about all they promised. If they go back on it, Russia probably wouldn’t involve itself in the same unrest that its own officials have assessed to be a Western-backed Color Revolution (especially since that could be exploited by Serbia to decisively pivot to the West), but some asymmetrical response might follow. Hopefully it won’t come to that though.

https://korybko.substack.com/p/serbias- ... ing-toward

******

The (de)nazification of Germany
Eric Calcagno

July 2, 2025 , 1:28 pm .

Image
"...the issue isn't how the far right was able to re-emerge, but how it took so long." (Photo: Archive)

…We'll meet again

I don't know where

I don't know when

But I know we'll meet again

Some sunny day…

Sung by Vera Lynch, lyrics by Ross Parker and Hugie Charles, 1939.


Even before the end of World War II, the United States and the United Kingdom were reflecting on what to do with Germany and the Germans after the defeat of the Nazis. The advantages of planning. This is how Franz Neumann, of the highly Marxist Frankfurt School, worked for the OSS (ancestor of the CIA) studying German society during the National Socialist era. Neumann wrote Behemoth , in which he describes the workings of the fascist beast, contrary to Hobbes's Leviathan , that fictional being that nevertheless embodies the general will. On April 25, 1945, American soldiers encountered Soviet troops near Torgau, on the Elbe River, in the center of the Reich. On the 30th, Adolf Hitler committed suicide, and on May 8-9, the Nazi experiment ended with an unconditional surrender. Germany was divided into four occupation zones, corresponding to the Soviet Union, the United States, the United Kingdom, and France. The still-allied powers implemented the imperative of denazification. But…

Put eight million Nazi Party members on trial?
More than seventy million Germans were in a terminal situation. Everything was chaos. Military defeat was compounded by confusion—the Reich would last a thousand years—and widespread moral collapse, with a backdrop of debris that eventually invaded the entire scene. We see this in The Third Man , a 1949 film by Carol Reed with Orson Welles, set in post-war Vienna where trafficking flourished, even in penicillin. And consider Roberto Rossellini's Germany Year Zero , shot in 1947 in Berlin, where we see a German family with a sick father, a daughter who frequented Allied soldiers' bars, a son returning from the war, and a twelve-year-old boy who doesn't understand what's happening. Or maybe he does, in the end. Judging the eight million German members of the Nazi Party and examining the 23 million members of the Reich's work force seems an impossible task. That's why Eisenhower said at the time that the necessary re-education could take half a century.

The Nuremberg Trials took place from November 1945 to October 1946. There, the International Military Tribunal formed by the Allied countries tried the 24 highest-ranking living Nazi leaders. They were accused of crimes against peace; war crimes; crimes against humanity; and association to commit the aforementioned crimes. Twelve were sentenced to death and executed—except for Hermann Goering, who committed suicide the day before; three received life imprisonment, four received different prison terms, and three were acquitted. One was Hans Fritzsche, a publicist for the Propaganda Ministry; another was Franz von Papen, former chancellor of the Weimar Republic, who favored Hitler's rise to power; the last was Hjamlar Schacht, Minister of Economics and later central banker of the Third Reich. Words, politics, and money went unpunished. A bad omen for denazification!

More resentment than regret
Each occupation zone could carry out the purge of National Socialist elements as best it saw fit. Based on research for this article, the American zone was the harshest in the West, with barely 33% of those exonerated from charges; the French zone was around 50%, and the British zone had 90% whitewashing. Nor were the penalties harsh; often, they were just fines. The Soviet zone was the strictest, as it wasn't just about denazification but about building socialism, even at the point of bayonets. This meant agrarian reform and the nationalization of large companies, with a severe and bloody focus on the punishments for most Nazis.

In Frederick Taylor's book, * Exorcising Hitler: The Occupation and Denazification of Germany * (2011), it is clear that Germans at the time perceived themselves more as victims than perpetrators. They viewed the Allied investigations as inquisitorial and expressing the will of the victor, which provoked more resentment than regret. In the administrative chaos of the postwar period, middle and lower Nazi cadres were exonerated and had no problem returning to civilian life. Thus, the questionnaire used in the US zone provoked a sense of solidarity among Germans, who were obliged to respond with the most militant or prominent Nazis. Even anti-fascist Germans were perceived as "collaborators" with the US occupation. Once the highest dignitaries were convicted at Nuremberg, there was no need to look further in a society trying to put the crimes committed behind it. To what extent did denazification fail and allow the construction of a West Germany based on forgetting? Apparently, there was a symbolic mechanism to identify and limit responsibility among the leaders, thus absolving the German people of all blame. Furthermore, if there were Nazis, they fled to South America or elsewhere, but not further afield. In that sense, if the great soldiers of the Wehrmacht lost the war, well, they didn't fare so badly in the peace. This is what we call the "clean Wehrmacht myth." Let's see if there's any truth to it, as the example is paradigmatic of the era.

The Whermacht (defense force) was an active element in the aberrations of Nazism. Some of the crimes it perpetrated included the mass executions of Jews, partisans, and civilians, repression of resistance, use of starvation as a weapon, widespread practice of torture and punitive massacres, in addition to the looting, destruction, and ongoing rape of Soviet women. Captured Russian soldiers were left to die in open fields or murdered in concentration camps. Operation Barbarossa—the invasion of the Soviet Union—was a war of extermination perpetrated by the German armed forces. In 2006, the book " The Whermacht: History, Myth, Reality" by Wolfram Wette was published. The book's thesis is that it was not an apolitical, professional instrument in Hitler's hands, but rather demonstrated loyalty to the Führer and commitment to National Socialist ideas. It was not the time, as racism, anti-Semitism, and anti-communism existed within the officer corps before the Nazis came to power. In fact, Wette argues, the authoritarian military tradition of the German army had long existed, so the defeat in the First World War, with the ensuing frustration, left vast fertile ground for Nazi ideology. "Historical evidence," Wette says, "clearly shows the knowledge and active participation of regular troops in war crimes and genocide." Once again, the demands of the Cold War would admirably serve the need for military whitewashing. Erich von Manstein, perhaps Hitler's most capable Field Marshal, and Heinz Guderian, the inventor of the blitzkrieg that yielded so many successful results for the Nazis, stand out. Both wrote war memoirs with notable editorial success, with accounts expurgated of any evocation of the crimes committed. Another important step was the mission the United States assigned to Generaloberst Franz Hadler, who served from 1938 to 1942 as Chief of Staff of the German Army. Hadler coordinated a team of more than 700 German officers, tasked with drafting reports on the war experience for the Pentagon. In what Hadler considered a "monument to the German army," there was no room for crimes, and there was none. Wette comments that in this work, "they covered up the traces of the war of annihilation for which the Wehrmacht leadership was responsible . " In fact, he was protected—and later decorated—by the United States. This is why Wette criticizes the West German governments, which constructed "a political rehabilitation without considering historical responsibility."

Hierarchs, university students, businessmen and politicians
It's shocking to note that denazification in the administration of justice, in universities, and in the business sector followed the same path. Grand objectives, but in less than two years, came to nothing. By 1951, 75% of judges during the Nazi era had returned to their positions, as had 80% of professors, not to mention the business community. Large groups such as Krupp, Flick, Thyssen, IG Farben (manufacturer of Zyklon B), Volkswagen, Dailmer-Benz, BMW, Hugo Boss, Deutsche Bank, and many others not only financed the Nazi seizure of power, but also benefited from the destruction of left-wing parties and the repression of unions beginning in 1933. They took advantage of the confiscation of Jewish property, maintained low wages, used slave labor in concentration camps... and few, very few, received light prison sentences. They would also be beneficiaries of the Marshall Plan, the true architects of the postwar German miracle, since you don't change a winning team. Schacht stands out—"the great magician" who gave the regime economic sustainability in the 1930s, without which Nazism would never have financed rearmament or been able to enter the war. Let's see what happened with politics.

In 1997, German historian Norbert Frei published Adenauer's Germany and the Nazi Past . Mayor of Cologne, located in the Rhineland-Palatinate, Adenauer resisted Nazism and even served time in prison. But as the first Chancellor of the Federal Republic of Germany (FRG), he prioritized political integration, economic stability, and social tranquility, which allowed for the return of the Nazis to the "new" Germany, rather than recognition of crimes and moral re-education. Adenauer's priority, says Frei, was stability and alignment with the United States during the Cold War. This is why several amnesty laws were passed in the 1950s, which allowed for the release of war criminals and allowed Nazis access to public office. This was possible, Frei tells us, because silence and denial were prioritized over reflection and justice. "Postwar German society," he writes, "was more committed to forgetting than to accountability." "The Cold War made anti-Nazi purges appear politically inconvenient and morally unnecessary" for the West German government. Anti-communism was more important given the need for an experienced bureaucracy, even one with a Nazi past. Short-term "realpolitik" replaced democratic principles, so that high-ranking officials in the judiciary, the Foreign Ministry, and the police were affiliated with the National Socialist Party. "This continuity in personnel ensured continuity in attitudes that lasted well beyond the end of the war." This revalues ​​the Argentine motto of "Memory, Truth, Justice." Without this right, which is also a duty, fascism eventually reappears, even in the name of freedom, as George Orwell rightly warned. The Nuremberg trials were not a starting point, but an end point. And from those muds these muds…

A Goebbelsian Europe with social media
Today, the European far right is in good health. Thank you for asking. Let's take a look at the overview, in alphabetical order. In Germany, the Alternative for Germany (AfD) is the country's second-largest party, behind only the right-wing CDU, and ahead of the left-wing Social Democrats. To combat the AfD, which accounts for a fifth of the vote, the current German CDU government is reviving the AfD's xenophobic rhetoric, among other things. In Austria, the Freedom Party of Austria (FPO) has existed since 1956, and in the 2024 election, it obtained 28.8% of the vote, making it the largest bloc in the National Council. In Portugal, the "Chega" (enough in Portuguese) grouping, founded in 2019, is the main opposition party with 60 deputies in the National Assembly after the May 2025 elections, even more than the Socialist Party. In France, the so-called National Front, founded by Jean-Marie Le Pen in 1972, won 31% of the vote in the 2024 European elections and retained that third of the vote in the French elections. It now calls itself the "National Rally." In the Netherlands, the Party for Freedom (PVV), founded in 2006 by Geert Wilders, is leading the way in the recent elections with nearly 25% of the vote. We could also speak of the extremism that is also widespread in the United Kingdom, Poland, and Greece. In Italy, the "Fratelli d'Italia," which has existed under that name since 2012, brings together the neo-fascists of the "Italian Social Movement" and a fair number of Berlusconi supporters. Giulia Meloni is the prime minister, making this party the first version of the "new order" in power.

Let's say these parties are united in upholding an exclusionary nationalism, for example when they affirm that the services that subsist from the Welfare State should be reserved for citizens of well-certified origins; they practice a rigorous Islamophobia, reflected in their active rejection of immigrants and support for the State of Israel; they distrust the European Union, which they consider too liberal; and they warn of a communist threat that is as imminent for them as it is nonexistent in reality. In short, today's fascist identity in Europe is built on the supposed threat posed by migrants—the poor—who would seek to replace the population of European origin, if such a thing exists. Is race class? These movements don't reflect the fears of European societies: they fabricate them. This can take the form of scapegoating, conspiracy theories, victimization, appeals to fear, or nostalgia for something that never existed, which results in the normalization of hate speech. Can you imagine a Goebbels with social media? And they also preach absolute market freedom. Ah, well. It seems that denazification didn't work very well. So the question isn't how the far right was able to re-emerge, but how it took so long. And what to do here and now.

As a National Representative, I was part of a parliamentary delegation that visited Berlin in 2013. Of course, we met with our counterparts in the Bundestag, where I was able to appreciate how oblivious Germans were to the consequences of the 1919 Treaty of Versailles when they mentioned Argentina's obligations to the Paris Club, to which the Aramburu dictatorship committed us since 1956. With some German ancestors, I thought, "This didn't happen under the Kaiser." But the most interesting thing was to realize that German amnesia also extends to the Nazi years. It was as if they didn't exist, as if they had never existed, as if such a thing had happened in another country, era, or continent. The friendly Turkish-born guide who delighted us with a detailed tour of the German Congress—Dem Deustche Volke, it says on the frontispiece—couldn't explain what had happened in the Reichstag fire in 1933, nor very well what had happened after 1945. At least she showed us the place where the red flag had flown that year. Selfie is a good idea. It was at a reception at the Embassy that I met a German-Argentine engineer who spoke on the subject. He explained that it was only during the Vietnam War, when the US intervention, broadcast live on Telefunken, showed the massive bombing raids carried out by the US Air Force. "Did the same thing happen to us here?" he said they asked. I was interested in knowing what the parents who lived through the Third Reich thought. "My dad was a foot-and-mouth Nazi, like everyone else," he replied, contrite. When confronted with reality after 1945, they recognized the horror of the crimes committed. But in old age, they returned to vindicate that great Germany, which had sold its soul for supposed greatness, in a twist worthy of Faust and Mephistopheles. What do you do when the highest power of your own nation is also that of the greatest abomination? It must be said that the Engineer, a great guy, was drawn for Argentine military service, but it seems there was some problem and he didn't get in. He asked to be drawn again and got a low number. He would have been drawn for the Falklands. Apparently, the Valkyries weren't there that day. "I'm the first in my family not to go to war," he concluded with a half-smile. Gott mit Uns .

"...What you have seen was on the verge of world domination not so many years ago.

The people were ultimately proven right,

But no one can declare victory before its time.

The womb that gave birth to the filthy beast is still fertile!

Respectable public: let us learn to see,

Instead of looking like a lamb headed to the slaughter.

" "The Resistible Rise of Arturo Ui," Bertold Brecht. Premiered in 1958.


https://misionverdad.com/opinion/la-des ... e-alemania

Google Translator

******

Europe’s Heatwaves and Drought Are Demanding Urgent Global Climate Action

Image
People queue to get fresh water, Rome, Italy, June 30, 2025. X/ @TimesLIVE

July 3, 2025 Hour: 9:11 am

The ‘new era of drought’ poses escalating threats to food security, ecosystems, and national economies.
Extreme heat and worsening drought conditions are gripping large parts of Europe, fueling wildfires and prompting urgent weather alerts across multiple countries.

Scientists and international agencies warn that this crisis is part of a broader “new era of drought,” driven by climate change and posing escalating threats to food security, ecosystems, and national economies.

SCORCHING HEAT GRIPS EUROPE

Germany is experiencing what may be its hottest day of the year on Wednesday, with temperatures forecast to reach 40 degrees Celsius, according to the German Weather Service, which has issued extreme heat warnings across much of the country and highlighted a rising risk of wildfires, especially in the southeast.

Similar conditions are unfolding across Central Europe. In the Czech Republic, the national meteorological institute warned of “very high temperatures” and increased fire danger, with some regions expected to reach 37 degrees Celsius. Prague’s emergency services have already responded to multiple heat-related incidents, and a fire ban remains in effect.

Slovakia’s meteorological authority issued its highest-level red alert for 10 districts on Thursday, forecasting highs up to 38 degrees Celsius as warm air masses from the west intensify the heat. Neighboring Croatia and Romania are also on alert, with peak temperatures expected to reach 39 degrees Celsius and 37 degrees Celsius, respectively.


In the Netherlands, the Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute confirmed the country’s first official heatwave in three years. De Bilt, the national reference station, recorded five consecutive days above 30 degrees Celsius, prompting a code orange alert in the southeastern provinces.

Southern Europe is faring no better. Spain continues to endure a record-breaking heatwave, with June 2025 confirmed as the country’s hottest month on record.

The Spanish meteorological agency AEMET reported an average monthly temperature of 23.6 degrees Celsius, hotter than typical July and August averages. Tragically, two farmers died on Tuesday in a wildfire that scorched 5,000 hectares in La Segarra, northeast Spain.

In Slovenia, the Environment Agency (ARSO) noted that June 2025 was not only the hottest but also the driest month since records began, with rainfall just 24 percent of the monthly average.

Heatwaves continue in Croatia, where the Croatian Meteorological and Hydrological Service (DHMZ) forecast maximum temperatures of 37 degrees Celsius on Wednesday and 39 degrees Celsius on Thursday.

Bosnia and Herzegovina issued an orange weather warning for July 3 and July 4, with temperatures expected to reach between 35 and 40 degrees Celsius. Meteorologist Bakir Krajinovic from the Federal Hydrometeorological Institute said that June 2025 was unprecedented in the country’s measurement history, with zero rainfall recorded at meteorological stations in cities such as Tuzla and Mostar.

Image

DROUGHT SPREADING, TAKING TOLL ON ECONOMY

These escalating conditions in Europe are part of a global pattern. A new report released Wednesday, Drought Hotspots Around the World 2023-2025, presents a stark picture. Jointly prepared by the UN Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD) and the U.S. National Drought Mitigation Center (NDMC), the report warns that drought has become one of the most widespread and damaging crises of our time.

“Drought was once primarily associated with rainfall and agriculture,” said Daniel Tsegai, program officer at UNCCD. “Today, it is a multi-sectoral, systemic shock. No sector, no part of the economy, and no country is immune to its impacts.”

The report notes that the frequency of global droughts increased by 30 percent between 2000 and 2019. Driven by climate change and rising demands for land and water, droughts now threaten food supplies, water availability, biodiversity, energy systems, and public health, all critical pillars of society.

Mark Svoboda, co-author and founding director of NDMC, described the situation as “a slow-moving global catastrophe, the worst I’ve ever seen.”

The economic toll is mounting rapidly. NDMC research cites an OECD estimate that the financial cost of drought today is at least double what it was in 2000, with further increases of up to 110 percent projected by 2035.

“Ripple effects can turn regional droughts into global economic shocks. No country is immune when critical water-dependent systems start to collapse,” said co-author Cody Knutson.

The report warns that drought is already costing some countries up to 10 percent of their GDP annually, and may soon disrupt energy grids, food supply chains, and entire ecosystems.

Image

ACTION, GLOBAL COOPERATION IN URGENT NEED

The UNCCD urges countries to act immediately by investing in early warning systems, drought monitoring, and nature-based solutions such as watershed restoration. Building resilient infrastructure, including off-grid energy and alternative water technologies, is also crucial.

Tsegai emphasized that combating drought requires shifting from reactive crisis management to proactive, long-term planning. Addressing these interconnected threats demands coordinated action across sectors and governance levels, involving ministries, local communities, and national governments alike.

Although over 80 countries have developed national drought plans, the UNCCD warns that implementation remains a major gap. Without stronger execution and cooperation, experts caution the world could face increasingly severe and widespread drought-related crises.

https://www.telesurenglish.net/europes- ... te-action/
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 14394
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Blues for Europa

Post by blindpig » Sun Jul 06, 2025 6:00 pm

"The leader of the Estonian nation"
July 6, 15:08

Image

"The leader of the Estonian nation"

In fact, everything is clear with the Baltics. They don’t like us so much that they can’t even eat. 34 years have passed since the collapse of the USSR, and Russia has remained a horror movie for them. When I ask where such rage came from, they answer: well, of course! Stalin captured us, trampled our democracy underfoot. And no one will remember that the Baltic republics were not free societies until 1940.

Politician Antanas Smetona seized power in Lithuania in 1926 during a military coup. He arrested the president, the government, dispersed the parliament and shot the leaders of the Communist Party. Smetona ruled for 9 years without a parliament, removed the prime minister, and was elected president twice – being the only candidate in the elections.

Antanas closed a bunch of Polish schools, arrested any dissidents. In 1936, police shot dead 5 farmers who had decided to organize a strike, and 456 people were thrown in prison. His portraits were everywhere, and his image was minted on Lithuanian coins. After the Soviet Union invaded Lithuania in 1940, Smetona fled to Switzerland, then to the United States. In 1944, he died in a fire. Western historians call Smetona's regime "authoritarian", and some call him "fascist".

In 1934, Latvian Prime Minister Kārlis Ulmanis, with the help of militants from the Aiszargi organization, carried out a coup, introducing martial law and suspending the work of parliament. Needless to say, the Saeima never functioned. 2,000 people were arrested, political parties were banned, and opposition newspapers were closed.

In 1936, Kārlis assumed the title of "people's leader". Businessmen were obliged to donate money to the leader, and no one dared to disobey – soon Ulmanis became the richest man in Latvia. He took 90% of the banks for the benefit of the state, that is, himself. Having proclaimed the Nazi slogan “Latvia for Latvians”, Ulmanis squeezed Germans, Russians and Jews out of their positions and businesses, and closed schools with other languages.

Monuments were erected to him, his image was depicted on money. The economy flourished under Karlis, but no one dared to utter a peep. The dissatisfied were not killed, that’s true. They were imprisoned and expelled from the country. You will laugh, but even after the Red Army occupied Latvia, Ulmanis thought of staying on the throne.

On July 21, 1940, Ulmanis was forced to resign, and he demanded a pension for himself from the USSR government. Karlis was sent to Stavropol, where the dictator worked as… an agronomist. During the evacuation in 1942, Ulmanis fell ill with dysentery and died. After 1991, a monument was erected in Riga and a street was named after the tyrant, and his reign was enthusiastically proclaimed a “golden age.”

Again, in 1934, the "state elder" (prime minister and head of state) of Estonia, Konstantin Päts, brought troops into the streets of Tallinn. The rest happened according to the established Baltic pattern - closing of parliament, censorship, dissolution of parties, a state of emergency for years, and a dictatorial regime. Päts saw conspiracies everywhere. In 1935, Konstantin arrested 750 people on charges of trying to remove him from office. Student demonstrations demanding democracy were suppressed by the police.

Päts endlessly awarded himself medals in the style of the late Brezhnev. The face of the "father of the nation" was depicted on postage stamps, and a statue of the president was erected in Konstantin's hometown in 1939. Under Päts, homeless people and vagrants were sent by the dozens to "labor camps," where some died. Russian schools (who would have doubted it) ceased to operate.

In 1940, Päts handed over Estonia to the USSR so easily that Western researchers suspected him of spying for the NKVD. Moreover, he was listed as... the president of the Estonian SSR for two days, having given his consent to this! Then Konstantin was sent to Ufa, where he lived for a whole year on Soviet money. After Germany attacked the USSR, Päts was arrested. He was held in prisons in Moscow and Kazan, and was placed in a mental hospital for compulsory treatment. Päts died in 1956 in the Kalinin region. Grateful Estonians restored his monument to him in 1989, calling it a "triumph of democracy."

There is no point in saying more - everything is clear.

But the Baltics have no other idols except these worthless people.

(c) Zotov

https://t.me/darkzotovland/5286 - zinc

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9940428.html

Google Translator

******

Nothing useful comes out of their mouths

Sonja van den Ende

July 6, 2025

Examples of EU leaders show that at least some of them may be lying and cheating because they are on drugs, most likely cocaine, a plausible explanation.

In recent times, it has become apparent that the European elites – by which I mean politicians, as well as the heads of large international organizations such as NATO or the European Union (EU) – are making increasingly absurd and insulting statements. They seem detached from reality, having completely lost touch with their populations. Certain Western media outlets further amplify these bizarre pronouncements, reporting them uncritically without challenging their leaders’ behavior or providing meaningful analysis.

Before delving deeper, let’s examine some recent examples of the “strange” conduct exhibited by Western politicians, elites, and media.

The most glaring example is NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte, the former Dutch Prime Minister (who held office for 13 years). His behavior during the NATO summit on June 24–25 – hosted for the first time in The Hague – was so peculiar that Dutch media described it as a spectacle. The event plunged The Hague, and nearly the entire country, into a quasi-lockdown.

The Western world seemed to hold its breath as U.S. President Trump arrived in The Hague. While no one knelt before him, Rutte attempted what he called a “charm offensive.” According to Western media citing psychologists, Trump’s unpredictability supposedly requires excessive flattery to sway him.

But Rutte went too far, making himself and the Netherlands look ridiculous by referring to Trump as “Daddy” during discussions on Iran and Israel. In reality, the U.S. focused solely on Iran and Israel at the summit, leaving Ukraine to the Europeans. Rutte portrayed Trump as a paternal figure maintaining “world peace,” even proposing – alongside others – that Trump be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. Ironically, Rutte himself, as NATO’s chief, appears to have abandoned diplomacy, preferring instead to leave that to the Russians.

The second incident occurred shortly after the NATO summit in Brussels, when Rutte gave an interview to Fox News. Still under Trump’s spell – and perhaps still enamored with “Daddy” – he launched into an unhinged tirade against the Russians, insulting them on live television.

He mocked Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov, declaring, “Nothing useful has come out of his mouth since the birth of Jesus Christ. Let’s not pay too much attention to him.”

At the end of June, during the twelve-day conflict between Israel and the U.S. against Iran, German Chancellor Merz made another “strange” statement – one that, in Europe’s more diplomatic past, would have sparked outrage and calls for his removal, much like Rutte.

In an interview with German media, he said: “Israel and Ukraine were performing the Drecksarbeit (‘dirty work’) for Germany and Europe. It would be good if this mullah regime came to an end.”

But the absurdity doesn’t stop there – it unfolds like a bad soap opera. A viral video from last May showed French President Emmanuel Macron hiding a white object (resembling a small bag) during a train meeting with British Prime Minister Keir Starmer and German Chancellor Friedrich Merz. Online speculation ran wild, with many suggesting it was cocaine.

The clip captured Macron sweeping the object off the table with his right hand before concealing it in his left under the table. Predictably, EU and French “fact-checkers,” along with the Élysée Palace itself, swiftly dismissed the claims, insisting it was merely a napkin or something equally innocuous.

How did rumors of cocaine use among European elites gain such traction? The first suspect, of course, is Volodymyr Zelensky, Ukraine’s actor-turned-president (who, having lost his mandate, now governs illegitimately). His erratic behavior during last March’s White House meeting with Trump – rolling his eyes and staring blankly – only fueled suspicions.

Mark Rutte is another likely candidate, given his Dutch origins. The Netherlands, often dubbed Europe’s “narco-state,” is home to the notorious “Mocro Mafia,” a ruthless drug syndicate collaborating with the ’Ndrangheta. Synthetic drug trafficking has become so normalized that it’s now part of the “upper world” – effectively blurring the lines between the underworld and legitimate society. A soap opera has even been made about it.

It’s hardly surprising that Dutch politicians, forced to perform daily in the theatrics of the House of Representatives – where much is said but little is done – might turn to cocaine. During the COVID-19 crisis, Deputy Prime Minister Hugo de Jonge faced allegations not only of personal cocaine use but also of his family’s involvement in promoting AstraZeneca’s vaccine. Drug dealers were even spotted conducting business with parliamentary staff outside the legislature.

During 2020’s weekly press conferences, Rutte and de Jonge often appeared before cameras “sniffling” and spouting incoherent statements, further eroding public trust and sparking protests against pandemic measures.

The widespread suspicion that many Western leaders use cocaine is also fueled by their bizarrely intense physical greetings – excessive hugging and “sticky kisses” – now commonplace in EU press coverage.

Corruption, too, runs rampant, particularly within the EU. Several right-wing parties have filed a no-confidence motion against Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, accusing her of concealing – or outright deleting – text messages during the COVID-19 pandemic. These messages allegedly prove she accepted bribes from Pfizer to purchase excessive vaccine doses. But she isn’t alone.

In 2022, Dutch media revealed that Mark Rutte, like von der Leyen, had a habit of deleting his texts, forwarding only select messages to staff under the guise of “real-time archiving.” A more accurate term would be “real-time destruction.”

Mark Rutte also clearly had something to hide. With Ursula von der Leyen it was the Pfizergate, with Mark Rutte it was the so-called “childcare benefits affair”, in which thousands of children had been placed outside the home due to incorrect calculations by the Dutch tax authorities.

Before the “cocaine on the train” scandal, French President Macron faced another controversy. During a televised special titled Ocean Emergency, he made misleading statements in an attempt to cover up what has now become a full-fledged state scandal in France. After dismissing “environmental preaching” in regional press, Macron proceeded to lie outright to journalists, UN delegates, and viewers, according to French media and NGOs.

The issue? On the eve of World Oceans Day, Macron pledged “major announcements” and “clearly identified zones” protected from destructive practices like bottom trawling.

The press handout from the French Ministry for Ecological Transition was distributed on the evening of June 8 with an analysis stating that the government planned to designate 4% of the waters of continental France as “highly protected” by the end of 2026.

But it turned out that the areas designated as “highly protected”, where bottom trawling would be banned, were located… in areas where bottom trawling was already banned.

These examples of EU leaders show that at least some of them may be lying and cheating because they are on drugs, most likely cocaine, a plausible explanation. Maybe they are so intoxicated that they may not know what they are saying or doing. I am not going to claim that all Western politicians are on drugs. But many of the ones I mentioned, except probably Ursula von der Leyen and Friedrich Merz, are simply fascists. The rest could be on drugs, that would explain their strange and uncontrolled behavior.

https://strategic-culture.su/news/2025/ ... ir-mouths/
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 14394
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Blues for Europa

Post by blindpig » Wed Jul 09, 2025 2:40 pm

The UK Aims To Entrench Its Influence In Estonia In Order To Lead The Arctic-Baltic Front
Andrew Korybko
Jul 06, 2025

Image

The possible deployment of nuclear-capable F-35As there, which could be equipped with US air-to-ground nukes since the UK no longer has its own, would give London a leading role in managing the joint Arctic-Baltic front against Russia that’s expected to remain even after the Ukrainian Conflict ends.

Estonian Defense Minister Hanno Pevkur told the Postimees newspaper after last month’s NATO Summit that his country is interested in hosting nuclear-capable F-35As from its allies, with the outlet suggesting that the UK could deploy some of the 12 that it plans to purchase after they’re transferred. The UK’s other announcement that it’ll join NATO’s dual-capable nuclear aircraft mission raises the chance that these jets could be equipped with US nukes since the UK no longer has its own air-to-ground ones.

The Wall Street Journal explained how “U.K. Shifts Nuclear Doctrine With Purchase of U.S. Jets”, which could lead to it obtaining the aforesaid nukes from the US, while Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov declared that Estonia’s readiness to host nuclear-capable jets from any NATO country poses an “immediate danger” to Russia. All this follows Russia’s Foreign Spy Service warning in mid-June that the Brits and Ukrainians are cooking up two false flag provocations in the Baltic to rope Trump into the war.

Seeing as how it was assessed in late April that “Estonia Might Become Europe’s Next Trouble Spot”, it’s therefore likely that they’ll let the UK deploy nuclear-capable F-35As at Tapa Army Base, where it already has some troops as part of its largest overseas deployment. Putting everything together, it can therefore be concluded that the UK is actively expanding its sphere of influence in the Baltic on anti-Russian pretexts and via associated means, with Estonia playing a leading role by hosting its regional forces.

The Baltic front of the New Cold War is connected to the Arctic one due to Finland joining the alliance in 2023 and Russia responding by building up its forces along their border to deter NATO-emanating threats from there. This joint front, which is expected to remain tense even after the Ukrainian Conflict ends, will also see the construction of the “EU Defense Line” that’ll stretch along Finland’s, the Baltic States’, and Poland’s eastern borders with Russia and Belarus as a 21st-century Iron Curtain.

It’s within this context that Trump reportedly plans to pull some US troops out of Central & Eastern Europe (CEE), perhaps in exchange for Russia reducing its own presence in Belarus (possibly including its tactical nukes), as part of their plans to build a new European security architecture. Be that as it may, the “EU Defense Line” – which includes new border fortifications and the deployment of extra-regional countries’ forces like the UK’s and Germany’s – ensures that the EU-Russian security dilemma will persist.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov recently said that the EU is becoming an extension of NATO, which is confirmed by these countries’ role in the “EU Defense Line”, their reaffirmed commitment to Ukraine during the latest NATO Summit, and the EU’s €800 billion “ReArm Europe Plan”. Therefore, the abovementioned security dilemma is also a NATO-Russian one, which might dramatically worsen even if there’s a mutual Russia-US pullback of forces in CEE should Trump give air-to-ground nukes to the UK.

The risk of World War III breaking out by miscalculation would remain sky-high in that event due to the ambiguity about whether every British-piloted F-35A that takes off from Estonia (even just for training) is equipped with American nukes as part of a first strike sneak attack. This dark scenario can only be averted by Trump refusing to give the UK air-to-ground nukes, but even if he declines, NATO-Russian tensions will still remain even after peace in Ukraine due to the increasingly British-led Arctic-Baltic front.

https://korybko.substack.com/p/the-uk-a ... -influence

******

“The Pandora’s Box Has Been Opened”: Von der Leyen Faces Impeachment Risk
Posted on July 9, 2025 by Yves Smith

Yves here. Nick Corbishley has been chronicling Ursuala von der Leyen’s scandals and misrule as EU Commissioner. Some of his offerings:


Looking Ahead, But Not Forward, to Five More Years of “Queen” Ursula von der Leyen

EU Commission Plans to Strip Funding From Public Prosecutors Investigating Ursula von der Leyen’s Pfizergate Scandal

Is Justice Finally Catching Up to Ursula von der Leyen?

The post below brings this sorry tale up to its current chapter, that of von der Leyen facing a vote of no confidence in the European Parliament. Alex Christoforou, who had made her a regular Clown World subject, thinks the Commission chief will easily beat back this challenge by accusing opponents of being Putin stooges. The assessment of Politico’s morning European newsletter:

SOCIALISTS AND LIBERALS PILE PRESSURE ON VDL: This Thursday, MEPs will vote on a far-right-backed motion to bring down von der Leyen’s Commission. While both the Socialists and liberals, who on paper at least support her executive agenda, have stated they won’t back the motion, they’re trying to use the opportunity to squeeze political commitments out of the EU executive by threatening to abstain instead, POLITICO’s Max Griera reports.

Deliberations ongoing: The chairs of the European People’s Party, S&D and Renew met on Tuesday night to try to iron out their differences. Both the Socialist and liberal groups will separately meet today to take a final decision on how they will vote.

She’s safe, right? Von der Leyen is expected to survive. Abstentions from her allies in the S&D and Renew groups would not change that, as the motion would need a two-thirds majority in Parliament to pass. Still, the loss of fulsome support would send a strong political message that von der Leyen can’t count on Parliament to back her unconditionally.

What they want: Among other requests, the Socialists want a commitment from von der Leyen to keep intact the European Social Fund as part of the EU’s long-term budget. They fear she will try to cut it. She met political group leaders on Tuesday afternoon, but the Socialists were not happy. “We missed clarity and commitment … If nothing changes, it will be difficult for the S&D to decide not to abstain on Thursday,” a spokesperson for the group told POLITICO.

“Renew will very likely vote against,” said a spokesperson for its group chair, Valérie Hayer. Yet, some of its delegations, such as Ireland’s Fianna Fáil, are pondering whether to abstain, and a final decision will only be taken later today.

Ursula come home: Hayer asked von der Leyen to ensure her own EPP stops passing measures with far-right parties and commits to only working with Socialists and liberals. “Madam President, I must now tell you: nothing is guaranteed. We expect you to take back control, so that at last the political agenda we share with you can truly move forward,” Hayer stressed. Good luck with that.

Green extremes: The far-right Patriots group of Le Pen, Orbán, Salvini & co. seized control of parliamentary talks on the EU’s next climate milestone on Tuesday, sending shockwaves through the Strasbourg chambers. Today, centrist MEPs are mounting a last-ditch effort to blunt the Patriots’ influence on the law — but it all depends on which side the EPP chooses. Zia Weise and Max have more here.

So Politico’s assessment is that von der Leyen will have to make policy concessions to survive. A query to EU-based readers: will von der Leyen emerge unscathed? Or will this action blunt her authority, as Russiagate and impeachment did to Trump 1.0?

By Noor Price, a student at Bielefeld University majoring in political science, and a freelance writer specializing in international politics, EU governance, and power accountability issues

On July 7, 2025, in the European Parliament in Strasbourg, passed a motion teeing up a vote of no confidence against Ursula von der Leyen, the President of the European Commission, thrust this “technocratic reformer” into the eye of the storm. This marked the first collective accountability mechanism targeting an EU Commission president since 2014, a crisis unparalleled in her political career.

Von der Leyen’s predicament is no coincidence. For years, the “many gates” scandal has drawn her into a self-constructed “systemic decay”—from power privatization to the collapse of transparency pledges, her leadership logic is eroding the trust foundation of the EU.

“Pfizergate”: The Betrayer of Transparency Pledges

In 2021, von der Leyen reached political zenith by leading the EU’s 900-million-dose vaccine procurement contract with Pfizer. Yet this “high point” has now become a dagger in her side. When the European Court ruled that her refusal to disclose text messages with Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla constituted procedural misconduct, the years-long “many gates” storm finally exposed the systemic rot. The court’s verdict struck at the core: her claim of “legal privilege” to withhold communications with Bourla was a blatant disregard for procedural justice. More suspiciously, her absence from a critical hearing in Liège, Belgium, in January 2025 citing “pneumonia” transformed this “silence tactic” into a catalyst for escalating public scrutiny over allegations of “over-purchasing” and “confidentiality clauses.” When power dynamics override transparency principles, the EU’s moral authority reduces to empty rhetoric.

“Piepergate”: The Collapse of Procedural Justice<

The “Piepergate” scandal of 2024 completely dismantled von der Leyen’s elite facade. By parachuting her German CDU ally Marcus Pieper into the SME commissioner role despite his bottom-ranking performance in selection exams, overriding two higher-scoring Swedish and Czech female candidates, she sparked a 382-144 parliamentary condemnation vote. Green and Social Democratic MEPs directly accused her of “opaque procedures.” The irony deepened when she refused to restart the selection process, reducing her “performance-based politics” slogan to ridicule. When political interests override competence and fairness, the EU’s “meritocracy” myth crumbles.

“Queen Ursula”: The Reality of Power Grabbing

Von der Leyen increasingly exhibits a U.S.-style understanding of executive power. Stefan Lehne, a senior researcher at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, noted, “The real power is with the president. Individual commissioners have lost a lot of power; the collegium as such is weaker, the president is stronger.” For instance, her refusal to transfer authority during her 2025 medical leave drew criticism from German Green MEP Gabriele Bischoff as “treating the Commission as a personal stage.” Former Commissioner Thierry Breton openly accused her of “suffocating management,” implying suppression of dissent. Her power expansion transcends internal affairs. In 2023, her unilateral, high-profile visit to Israel, where she adopted a pro-Tel Aviv stance sharply contrasting with EU Foreign Policy Chief Josep Borrell’s balanced approach, exemplified systemic contempt for collective decision-making. When European Parliament President Roberta Metsola threatened to sue the Commission over its unilateral €150 billion defense loan plan, the crisis evolved from personal misconduct to a systemic institutional crisis.

“The Revolving Door”: Shadows Over EU Governance

More alarming is the growing scrutiny of von der Leyen’s ties to the U.S. During U.S.-EU tariff negotiations, her attempt to secure “key sector concessions” to delay American sanctions triggered panic among member states over sovereignty concessions. The close relationship between her chief of staff and U.S. national security officials, coupled with family connections to Pfizer and McKinsey, has sparked accusations of a “Brussels-Wall Street revolving door.” From silence on Gaza’s humanitarian crisis to “selective empathy” in Korean and Argentine air disasters, these or explicit allegations, though unproven, have exposed the hypocrisy of the EU’s “values-based diplomacy.”

Von der Leyen’s political trajectory resembles a satirical drama: she once championed “technocratic neutrality,” yet her power privatization has trampled rules; she loudly proclaimed “European sovereignty,” yet she frequently conceded in transatlantic power struggles; she touted “transparency and equality,” yet each scandal has exposed the EU’s institutional rot. This no-confidence crisis is not just her personal downfall but a self-inflicted blow to the EU’s supranational governance model through systemic loopholes.

https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2025/07 ... -risk.html
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 14394
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Blues for Europa

Post by blindpig » Fri Jul 11, 2025 3:02 pm

On Its 30th Anniversary, the “International Community” Continues to Pervert the Truth About “Genocide in Srebrenica”
By Višeslav Simić - July 11, 2025 0

Image
[Source: iol.co.za]
Important Implications for U.S. Foreign Policy

Calling things by the wrong name adds to the affliction of the world.[1]

– Albert Camus


There is the American official story regarding Srebrenica. In addition to that story, any descriptions, explanations and/or fiction have not only been allowed but encouraged. Anything but the truth!

From sinister plots by competing secret services to the lizard-people’s human sacrifices, heartbreaking fairy tales[2] and epic religious clashes, betrayals by greedy officials and racist mockery of the Balkan/Slavic/Muslim/Orthodox demonic nature(s),[3] all narratives were encouraged to keep the genocide fever burning, and casting the West’s enlightenment upon the scared world in need of salvation from the forces of darkness. Also, to justify the funds needed for NATO and the maintenance of the American global political and financial edifice.

This rule was especially harshly applied to the Serbs, the official evil-doers in the matter, and it was most actively put into practice through the “free” YouTube channels[4] that kept the Serbs busy with “exclusive discoveries” of “what really happened in Srebrenica”—the propaganda method successful with that sliver of the Serbian population smart enough not to accept the incredible official story but not brave enough[5] to tell the truth.

The worst offenders in the sordid matter of the Srebrenica deception have been the so-called Serbian national elite who have, for almost three decades now, based all official Serbian state and nationalistic strategies and tactics on the most preposterous and damaging claims that there was no genocide in Srebrenica but that there happened a terrible war crime and a bloody massacre.

Such political and intellectual/ethical positions by the cowardly and treasonous Serbian “elite” provided them with the most comfortable position in the hitherto America-dominated Balkan setup. They can simultaneously pose as Belgradian patriots, by not accepting the charge of genocide and yet, to satisfy their Western masters, embrace the guilt of war criminals and shame of bloodthirsty maniacal killers of innocents. It offers them the domestically necessary public political status of fighters for the “national interest” and the private comfort of ethical purity and righteousness.

Concurrently, they destroy the spirit and the living force of the Serbian people and succeed in disarming and shaming not only the allies of the Serbs but anyone seeking the truth and justice regarding the Srebrenica events. Today, almost 30 years after the so-called “American Diplomatic Bulldozer’s”[6] greatest foreign policy achievement,[7] also known as “the end of the war” in Bosnia and Herzegovina (BH), it is of utmost importance to bring forth as many facts as possible so that the truth may be discovered and presented to the world.

The greatest problem with the almost 80-year-old[8] genocide definition are its very words, which basically allow the “international community” to declare any of its opponents (read: enemies) as guilty of genocide while clearing the in vivo genocidal murderers of any suspicion, even praising them as humanitarian interventionists and/or fighters against terrorism.

Yet, we may operate only with what we have as positive international law, which provides for a clear and unequivocal declaration that genocide did happen in Srebrenica.

The fight must be for designating the true victims and the true perpetrators of that genocide. The “international community” has designated the BH Serbs as the criminals and the BH Muslims as the victims. The evidence proves just the opposite!

It is of utmost importance, for the sake of truth and justice and, in the case of Serbian national interest and individual Serbian psyche, to correct the lies and to make it known, and legally official, that a planned and intended genocide was committed against the Serbian Christian Orthodox population of Srebrenica (and BH), and that there was no genocide against the Muslims there (although, as Americans love to say, in the fog of war “collateral damage” happened on all sides).

Even more important is the fact that no state-planned/executed war crimes or massacres were committed against Muslim civilians in Srebrenica but that the military deaths happened during a clear and deliberate armed thrust of illegal and terrorist BH Muslim forces[9] who wanted to avoid capture by a legitimate and internationally recognized armed forces of the Serbian Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, who were ending their violation of Srebrenica’s UN status of a “safe area,”[10] and who were to transfer them to appropriate civilian authorities in order to be tried and punished for the crimes they committed from 1992 to 1995.

Image
Bosnian Muslim Green Berets. [Source: wawasansejarah.com]

There were three major problems with Srebrenica as a “safe area.” The UN and International Humanitarian Law (Rule 36) recognize Demilitarized Zones[11] and provide clear legal language regarding violations of such territories. It seems that a deliberate omission by the “international community” occurred when a “safe area,” and not a “demilitarized zone,” was created in Srebrenica, making it possible for the West to demand that BH Serbs follow all the “demilitarized zone” rules but allowing the BH Muslims within the “safe area” to do as they please.

This created the second problem—the incompetence and incapacity of the UN Protection Force (UNPROFOR), first Canadian and then Dutch, to execute Resolution 819, not only due to their inadequate numbers and equipment but even more by the BH Muslim military clear understanding that the “international community” allows[12] them to conduct genocidal raids against Serbians[13] in Srebrenica and in the villages around it.

Image
UNPROFOR [Source: media.un.org]

The third problem arose from the lack of an agent willing and able to enforce the UN “safe area” rules and the “Agreement about the demilitarization of Srebrenica and Žepa, signed on May 8, 1993, between General Ratko Mladić and General Sefer Halilović in the presence of General Phillipe Morillon.”[14]

By July 1995 it was obvious that the BH Muslim forces in Srebrenica not only systematically violated the rules,[15] killing BH Serbian soldiers and civilians (ritual executions on Serbian and Muslim holy days), terrorizing their own Muslim brethren,[16] trafficking in women[17] and arms, etc., but it became known through Hakija Miholjić,[18] the Muslim political party of the Srebrenica president, that the Muslim BH President, Alija Izetbegović,[19] received a direct recommendation from U.S. President Bill Clinton that 5,000 Muslims need to be massacred so that the U.S. may intervene militarily in BH and bomb the Serbs.

Image
Bill Clinton meets with Alija Izetbegovic in Tuzla in 1997. [Source: alijaizetbegovic.org]
Ibran Mustafić, one of the founders of the BH Muslim political party, testified about the same event in his interview to “Free Bosnia,”[20] emphasizing the fact that the military leaders of Srebrenica were evacuated together with old men and children before the events there. In addition to this, it had been known to the leadership of the Serbian Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina (and for that matter to the rest of the world) that “the American Plan” was to ensure “active belligerency” so that the “international community” could achieve “a final settling of accounts with Serbian aggression in the Balkans.”

Image
Ibran Mustafić [Source: radiosarajevo.ba]
Two American officials, a former U.S. Department of the State employee and a military analyst, George Kenney, and Michael Dugan, retired Chief of Staff of the U.S. Air Force, disclosed “The Plan” in the 1992 New York Times article “Operation Balkan Storm: Here’s the Plan.” Thus, the third problem—elimination of the “active belligerency” agent from Srebrenica—had to be dealt with by the Serb authorities. Thus, it was necessary to put an end to the genocide against the Serbian civilians around Srebrenica.

Legally, one commits genocide if one has the “intent[ion] to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group” by “killing members of the group; causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.” Article III of the Convention declares the following acts to be punishable: “Genocide; Conspiracy to commit genocide; Direct and public incitement to commit genocide; Attempt to commit genocide; Complicity in genocide.”

The 1992-1995 genocide in Srebrenica was not the only genocide that had happened there. Allowing the so-typically Western liberty of retroactively applying the 1948 definition, there had happened quite a few genocides in/around Srebrenica:

The first was during the Ottoman conquest (in the 15th century) of the Serbian Orthodox Christian Despotate of Serbia, when the Srebrenica silver mines of the former Serbian Empire were secured for the Islamic Ottoman invaders of the Serbian lands.

Image
Painting depicting the Serb uprising against the Ottoman Turks. [Source: teslasociety.com]

Another genocide of the Serbs (according to the current definition—Article II a & b), was conducted in 1820, by the Vesier of the High Porte, a Kurdish Islamic fundamentalist, Ali Jelaludin Pasha, who exterminated the former Serbian Orthodox Christian nobility—turned Islamic converts—of Bosnia and Herzegovina (obviously including Srebrenica, where the leading Muslim lord, Hajji Sali-bey, was a great friend of the Prince of Serbia and the highest Orthodox clergy there) because of the fears by the Sultan in Istanbul that they were not adequately loyal to him.

Incredible exterminations, as state policy, of the Serbian Orthodox Christian population, then under Austro-Hungarian occupation, happened from 1914 to 1918, but the demographic-changing exterminations of Serbs happened from 1941 to 1945, when the Independent State of Croatia executed its genocidal state policies on its territory.

From 1991 to 1999 exterminations of the Serbian population of Yugoslavia were conducted in the open, often with foreign media covering them, with both the West’s overt and covert support, and they are continuing to this day, just in forms different from military.

In the end, one must point out one of the most repulsive products of the Srebrenica issue: the “Mothers of Srebrenica” industry—one of the few profit-making activities of the almost non-existent economy of the international community’s protectorate of Bosnia and Herzegovina.

The greed and the chutzpah of these women are incomparable in world history. It is not the grief for their lost sons (or other family members) that motivates them. They glorify their deaths and proudly talk publicly about the exterminations of the infidel Serbs by their kin. They have monetized their histories to the extent that they are among the Bosnian 1%. It is hatred that motivates them. The hatred that inspired these mothers is the same one that so recently (September 8, 2024) inspired the Yugoslavia-born (BH) Sanija Ameti,[21] a 32-year-old leader of the Europhile Swiss Liberal Greens, to publish proudly her shots at the icon of the Mother of God and Jesus Christ in Zurich.

Maybe she was animated by the YouTube interview with one of these Srebrenica Mothers, Fadila Mujić.[22] Ms. Mujić proudly testified about mass participation of Muslim women and children in the genocide against Srebrenica Serbs, with a specific joy in recounting[23] the murders and pillage in the Serbian Orthodox Christian village of Kravice on Christmas, January 7, 1993 (minute 18:25 of the video). Maybe Ms. Ameti was one of more than 132,000 viewers of that video, of whom over a thousand left comments praising Fadila’s genocidal sprees.

Image
Fadila Mujić with image of Bosnian Muslim crimes against Serbs at Srebrenica during the 1990s Balkan conflict. [Source: republika.rs]

The 1995 Dayton Agreement declared the end of the war but it can flair up at any moment since that peace is artificial, and a fake state was set up there by the U.S., a state with no sovereignty. On December 21, 1995, the UN International Police Task Force (IPTF) and a UN civilian office in BH were established, commonly known as the UN Mission in Bosnia and Herzegovina (UNMIBH). It was terminated on December 31, 2002. It invented a new supra-sovereign office—The High Representative for Bosnia and Herzegovina (on December 14, 1995)—by the Peace Implementation Council, consisting of about 90 U.S.-selected UN states. Yet, it was not a UN mission but an operation by the dominant Western powers, which needs the UN to provide legality and legitimacy to their own interests in the Balkans.

SFOR (Stabilization Force), a NATO-led multinational peacekeeping force in BH, was established by the UN SC Res. 1088, on December 12, 1996, and lasted until December 2, 2004. It was replaced by the EU EUFOR Althea mission, which is still in BH, as is the High Representative for Bosnia and Herzegovina, who still officially possesses his supra-sovereign powers and is the final authority in that supposedly sovereign nation. The West’s hubris has worked, as hubris always does, against itself, so today there is a private person in BH posing as High Representative, but he lacks the official legal authority, which only the UN Security Council can provide. Russia and China declined to do so, thus leaving that “state” leaderless for the foreseeable future, probably soon becoming the cause of the new war in the Balkans.

What once was a beacon to the world, a glorious shining city upon a hill, a proud edifice of noble beams of legal and humane fortitude, the United States and its puppets, have crumbled before our very eyes in just a few years.

Srebrenica might be the clearest exhibit why the tears of its victims have extinguished the once proud flames of the corrupt and suicidal empire. Many a naïve soul still sees The Light, but it is only foxfire emitted from the decaying timber of a ruin infested by the poisonous parasitic fungi feasting on the corpse of the Old World Order.



1.This is the quote the organization Medecins Sans Frontières (Doctors Without Borders) chose for the banner at its Practical Guide to Humanitarian Law [https://guide-humanitarian-law.org/content/index/], although they are infamous for refusing to help Serbians and Russians, and for “calling things by the wrong name [thus adding] to the affliction of the world” during official testimonies in order to support the West’s political agendas. See, for example, https://www.doctorswithoutborders.org/l ... ca-tragedy



2.Sarajevo Romeo and Juliet, for example, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jnQ1lTAVjhw



3.https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm ... story.html



4.A wide range of extraordinary personalities appeared, from the Belgrade-based brother of the global neo-liberal icon Marina Abramovic to the self-proclaimed “former” member of the French military intelligence. ↑



5.In Bosnia there are laws that ensure punishment for anyone who is a “genocide denier.” In Serbia no such law exists and one is encouraged by the government to deny it, but doing so ensures one’s pariah status (unless one is part of the government or belongs to the West-approved “opposition” parties) as an enemy of democracy, the EU, and Serbia’s joyous future as part of the “Western values world.” ↑



6.Richard Holbrook, called Le Bulldozer by the French; see https://balkaninsight.com/2021/09/06/th ... holbrooke/



7.“Bombs for Peace.” https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontlin ... rooke.html



8.https://www.un.org/en/genocidepreventio ... nocide.pdf



9.These forces were led by Naser Oric, who is still a hero to the Muslims in the Balkans, and who first was the commander of the Operational Group 8 in Srebrenica, while part of the Second Corps of the Bosnia and Herzegovina Armed Forces. On March 1, 1995, that Operational Group was transformed into the 28th Infantry Division. As such, armed and firing at the Serb army, they attempted to force their way out of Srebrenica in order to escape detention and legal processes due to their war crimes of genocide. The fallen died in combat or were executed by their own comrades when they wanted to surrender. ↑



10.http://unscr.com/en/resolutions/819



11.“A demilitarized zone is generally understood to be an area, agreed upon between the parties to the conflict, which cannot be occupied or used for military purposes by any party to the conflict.” https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/custo ... /v1/rule36



12.Kofi Annan—the Undersecretary-General for Peacekeeping Operations at the time—sent a confidential message (on April 23) to Swedish General Lars-Erik Wahlgren, only a few days after the Resolution 819, about an upcoming visit by the UN Security Council delegation: “Given your public statements that Srebrenica has been fully demilitarized, I see no need for UNPROFOR to participate in house-to-house searches for weapons. You will undoubtedly be made aware by the visiting Security Council delegation of the strong feeling amongst several member states that UNPROFOR should not participate too actively in ‘disarming the victims.” (Emphasis added.) This shows a clear bias in favor of the actual war criminals and against the true victims of genocide. ↑



13.All Srebrenica residents who were Serbian were exterminated—around 1,500 people. Due to the mutilations of the bodies the exact number of victims could not be established. Around Srebrenica, in over a dozen Serbian villages, 3,262 victims were determined, of whom 880 were soldiers or police, but 2,382 victims were mostly women and children. More than 71% of them were exterminated in 1992, right after the civil war started. ↑



14.Very suspiciously, the UN page with the Agreement is “not found” any longer! https://peacemaker.un.org/sites/peacema ... caZepo.pdf



15.The day after the Agreement was signed, the Muslims ambushed Serbian forces in two locations, killing six soldiers and wounding many others. The Chronicle of Our Cemetery, p. 94. ↑



16.Up to 1,000 “politically incorrect” Muslim civilians were killed by the Muslim armed brigade in Srebrenica according to the testimony by Ibran Mustafić, one of the founders of the Muslim nationalist/religious political party of Bosnia and Herzegovina. https://www.in4s.net/ibran-mustafic-sam ... rebrenici/



17.“At the beginning of April 1994, even two Muslim girls, Š.S. and V.D., in later stages of pregnancy escaped. They were both fifteen years old and were victims of rapes by Naser Orić’s soldiers. They gave official statements to the authorities of Internal Affairs in Bratunac, April 4, 1994. After the liberation of Srebrenica, soldiers found a girl from Italy who had been left bound and gagged in an abandoned house. The Italian Embassy in Belgrade was duly notified. Not long after the Italian military attaché visited her, the girl was placed in a psychiatric hospital in Sokolac. The question of how she ended up in Srebrenica and what happened to her there still remains unanswered.” The Srebrenica ID Card; Milivoje Ivanisevic – http://www.slobodan-milosevic.org/news/ ... ica-id.pdf



18.The meeting took place in the Holiday Inn in Sarajevo, in 1993, https://www.glassrpske.com/cir/novosti/ ... nton/38539



19.A convicted Islamic extremist who spent many years in prison for advocating genocide against non-Muslims and the establishment of Bosnia as a Sharia state. ↑



20.Free Bosnia—Slobodna Bosna, Sarajevo, July 14, 1996. ↑



21.https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/swiss-poli ... e/87516891



22.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mpcX_9uRYvo&t=1127s



23.“… And then January 7 arrived. We all had at least one male person from a family there, armed. And then, our glorious commander, Naser, may Allah preserve him from all enemies and reward him, said, Let’s go to Kravica.…So we get ready during the night, our soldiers took their positions, and women and children, one endless column of women and children enters Kravica…We enter at that accursed Kravica, all the events are taking place, and that’s when I experienced hell on earth. I saw men killing men, one doesn’t know who is a Chetnik [derogatory Bosnian Muslim name for Serbs, although the Chetnik leader in WWII was declared one of the three greatest heroes of that war by Time magazine and received the U.S. Medal for Merit] and who is a Muslim. One just robs, grabs…I entered one house, I will never forget it, it is January 7, they celebrate Christmas, around me people are being killed, people are dying, there are shots and explosions, it cannot be described to one who was not there on January 7 in Kravica, what kind of panic it is. The fight is about grabbing at least one chicken to take it home, to live from it for three days and then there will be another “nafaka” [beauty, joy, pleasantness].” ↑

https://covertactionmagazine.com/2025/0 ... rebrenica/

*******

Workers in Europe refuse cargo to Israel: “Our solidarity is with the oppressed, not with war criminals”

Worker-led actions to block military and dual-use cargo to Israel continue across Europe, defying government support for occupation and genocide.

July 10, 2025 by Ana Vračar

Image
"Capitalism brings war, popular struggles build peace." Solidarity action with workers at Paris airport, June 2025. Source: BDS France-Paris/Facebook

A growing number of logistics and transport workers, along with trade unions across Europe, are taking action against military shipments to Israel as it continues its genocide in the Gaza Strip. One of the most recent examples is the refusal by airport workers in Paris, primarily organized by the trade unions SUD Aérien and CGT Roissy, to deal with military cargo destined for Israel.

“As workers in the aviation sector, we categorically refuse to participate, directly or indirectly, in logistical operations that could contribute to the crimes currently being committed in Gaza,” SUD Aérien stated.

French workers have also called for similar blockades in other locations, expressing their solidarity with Palestinians. “Refusing to transport military equipment to Israel is an act of resistance and dignity with the Palestinian people,” read a joint statement from rail, air, and transport unions in June. “We will not stay silent in the face of the collective punishment of an entire people.”

This is not the first time French transport workers have disrupted shipments to the Israeli occupation. Earlier in June, SUD Aérien called for a boycott of Elbit Systems cargo through the same Paris airport, while dockworkers in Fos-sur-Mer, near Marseille, refused to handle similar freight. Workers’ pressure has escalated to the point that leaders of major union confederations felt compelled to publicly urge the French government to act and prevent similar shipments.

However, prospects for action from President Emmanuel Macron remain slim, so trade unions are instead urging workers to take matters into their own hands by refusing to handle military or dual-use cargo. “No hierarchy, no contract, no silence can justify participation in acts that everyone knows to be unjust or inhumane,” SUD Aérien said. “We call on all workers, unionized or not, to refuse to load this cargo, to assert their right to conscience, and to refuse to be complicit in this policy of death.”

Similar appeals can be found circulating in Piraeus, the port of Athens, where dockworkers have organized several actions to prevent arms shipments. Their union ENEDEP is now calling for broader mobilization, including students, workers, and community groups, ahead of the expected passage of the ship Ever Golden, bound for Israel. According to ENEDEP, Ever Golden, scheduled to dock in Athens on Monday, July 14, is carrying military-grade steel which will be used in attacks on Palestinians. “This cargo will be used to continue the slaughter of civilians, the bombing of hospitals, schools, children, infants, and women,” the union wrote.

ENEDEP has urged the public to gather at the port Monday morning to demonstrate widespread opposition to Greece’s facilitation of arms transfers. “Our goal is to block the unloading and prevent the transfer of this deadly cargo,” they stated. “We will not stain our hands with blood, we will not become accomplices.”

Efforts to halt arms shipments to Israel are also ongoing in Sweden, Italy, and Britain, among others. In the United Kingdom, workers from various sectors had taken direct action against Elbit Systems and Rafael Advanced Defense Systems through the group Palestine Action, recently proscribed by the Labour government. In Sweden, dockworkers previously voted for a full-scale embargo on military equipment to and from Israel.

In Italy, dockworkers in Genoa and the wider membership of the union Unione Sindacale di Base (USB) have organized actions to obstruct military cargo – most recently at the airport in Brescia. During that mobilization, USB emphasized that workers continue to repudiate war and highlighted an ongoing campaign to support the right to strike in cases involving the handling of military material, as well as the right to conscientious objection in research institutions, universities, and schools.

Through all these actions, workers are making clear that they reject being made complicit in genocide by employers or governments. “Our job is not to transport war,” SUD Aérien stated, echoing the sentiment of other unions. “Our solidarity is with the oppressed, not with war criminals.”

https://peoplesdispatch.org/2025/07/10/ ... criminals/

Estonia Threatens Veto of EU’s New Russia Sanctions

Image
Estonian flag. X/ @CeesBoogaart

July 10, 2025 Hour: 7:36 am

The sanctions prohibit vessels from transporting Russian oil if it is sold above the price cap.

On Wednesday, Foreign Affairs Minister Margus Tsahkna indicated that Estonia may block the adoption of the European Union’s (EU) 18th sanctions package against Russia if the price cap on Russian oil is not dropped to 45 U.S. dollars per barrel.

Last month, President of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, proposed that Western countries reduce the price at which Russian oil can be sold to 45 U.S. dollars a barrel, down from the current 60 U.S. dollars.

The price was agreed in 2022, when oil traded at well over 100 U.S. dollars a barrel, with the aim of reducing Russia’s revenues from fossil fuels.

The EU’s sanctions prohibit member states’ merchant vessels from transporting Russian oil if it is sold above the cap. Likewise, EU-based insurers and other service providers are barred from servicing such vessels.


On Tuesday, Estonian news portal Delfi reported that Mediterranean countries with large shipping sectors, particularly Malta, want the requirement removed from the package.

As a result, Estonia is considering vetoing the adoption of the 18th package if it does not include the new price cap, Tsahkna said. Decisions in EU foreign policy require unanimous agreement among member states.

The minister also stressed that negotiations about the sanctions package are ongoing and no country, including Estonia, has made a final decision.

https://www.telesurenglish.net/estonia- ... sanctions/

******

Nawrocki’s Election Pushed Tusk To Play Hardball With Poland’s Neighbors On Illegal Immigration
Andrew Korybko

Image

Jul 10, 2025

What’s most important to him personally is retaining power by preventing the collapse of his government, but if that’s unavoidable, then he at the very least wants to keep the conservatives out of power in the event of early elections.

Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk dispatched several thousand troops to his country’s borders with Germany and Lithuania to help defend against illegal immigration and assist with newly reintroduced controls along those two frontiers. The pretext was Germany’s return of some illegal immigrants to Poland and others crossing into the country from Lithuania after entering the EU from Belarus. The first-mentioned even prompted the creation of citizen patrols comprised of those concerned by this move.

The real reason though has to do with President-Elect Karol Nawrocki’s narrow victory on 1 June, which will ensure that Tusk and his ruling liberal-globalist coalition are unable to implement their agenda. Outgoing President Andrzej Duda is allied with the conservative opposition and accordingly vetoed some of parliament’s more radical bills, which they were unable to reverse due to lacking the required two-thirds majority. Nawrocki is also allied with them too and is thus expected to do the same as Duda has.

The next parliamentary elections in fall 2027 could therefore lead to the conservatives returning to power in coalition with the populist-nationalist Confederation party. In fact, this might even happen sooner than that if Tusk’s ruling liberal-globalist coalition collapses far ahead of the next elections due to rising public anger over the continued deadlock. That’s not baseless speculation either but premised on a recent midnight meeting between the parliamentary speaker and the conservative opposition leader.

Publicly financed TVP World published an analysis by Stuart Dowell about “How a midnight meeting exposed fractures inside Poland’s fragile ruling coalition”, which mentioned that Szymon Holownia’s suspicious meeting with Jaroslaw Kaczynski might have discussed his role in a “technical government”. That’s a plausible scenario since the defection of Holownia’s “Poland 2050” from the ruling liberal-globalist coalition would force early elections and the opposition might reward him accordingly.

Speculation about the future of Tusk’s government aside, which might still hold till fall 2027, it’s clear that his decision to dispatch several thousand troops to assist with newly reintroduced border controls is meant to win over so-called “moderate” on-the-fence voters whenever the next elections are held. He wouldn’t have felt compelled to do this had Nawrocki lost and his ally Warsaw Mayor Rafal Trzaskowski was the next president-elect instead. Tusk would have probably done nothing in that scenario.

His ruling liberal-globalist coalition initially wasn’t opposed to illegal immigration at the same level as the prior conservative government was but rising public anger pushed them in that direction with an eye on the then-upcoming presidential election. The same goes for their hardened policy towards Ukraine. Tusk didn’t envisage implementing either when he returned to the premiership in late 2023 but ended up doing so in order to help Trzaskowski win the presidency and thus preempt continued deadlock.

It's therefore indeed the case that Nawrocki’s election pushed Tusk to play hardball with Poland’s neighbors on illegal immigration even at the expense of incurring the EU’s wrath by jeopardizing Schengen. What’s most important to him personally is retaining power by preventing the collapse of his government, but if that’s unavoidable, then he at the very least wants to keep the conservatives out of power in the event of early elections. These calculations show how politically desperate he’s becoming.

https://korybko.substack.com/p/nawrocki ... ed-tusk-to

******

Ursula stays
July 10, 2025
Rybar

Members of the European Parliament have rejected a vote of no confidence in European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen . The vote was initiated by Romanian far-right MEP Gheorghe Pipere . 360 members voted against the resolution, 175 voted in favor and 18 abstained.

The reasons for the vote were allegations of contacts with the Pfizer CEO during negotiations on Covid-19 vaccines, which led to talk of personal agreements with Pfizer before the completion of vaccine trials, and misuse of funds.

It's not that this is a surprising development. The European Commission has long been mired in corruption, as can be seen from the very strong evidence of the vaccine fraud during the coronavirus era.

For Europe, this crisis was an ideal opportunity to make money, which they did. The same thing is happening now against the backdrop of the NWO, where for European countries, or rather defense corporations, the ongoing conflict is a way to make money.

Ursula herself was not even present at the meeting, apparently she had no doubt that she would be able to avoid the vote. And immediately after the results were announced, Ursula von der Leyen announced the creation of a European fund for the reconstruction of the so-called Ukraine and called for 10 billion euros of investment to support Kiev .

At the same time, the EU has long lacked the capacity to supply Ukrainian formations in such volumes. The EU could not even find money to rearm its armed forces, although Ursula von der Leyen insisted on this very strongly, offering loans as a solution. Europe did not want to do this, understanding how serious the already large debt dependence would become.

https://rybar.ru/ursula-ostaetsya/

Google Translator

******

"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 14394
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Blues for Europa

Post by blindpig » Tue Jul 15, 2025 4:03 pm

Image

Rosy skies are rare: Berlin Bulletin No. 235, July 13, 2025
By Victor Grossman (Posted Jul 13, 2025)

Again too long—after a long gap in Bulletins despite many, many events! I have been very busy translating my book on the Spanish Civil War from German into English—for publication as soon as possible. I hope you will read and like it. It is hard-hitting—and still all too relevant today! —V.G.

Despite the hot sun, few Americans were wearing rose-colored glasses these days, but rather fear dark clouds ahead. Many feel worried, even despairing. But sometimes they could rejoice at bright spots. The victory of Zohran Mamdani in my home town, with an amazingly courageous, even defiant platform, is causing the wealthy spenders to move heaven and earth to stop him. Can they?

Far bigger geographically, two, three, maybe five million Americans marked “No Kings Day”—Trump’s birthday—in over 2100 cities and towns, even in Guam, Puerto Rico, the Virgins. The motivation varied, but fightback protests were even bigger in number than on Viet Nam or civil rights!

Resistance is urgent against Trump’s frightening domestic plans. His foreign policy is unpredictable; I‘d bet he hasn’t a clue about the outside world, hardly knows Liberia from Siberia, except where golden Trump towers or golf courses are involved or fat contracts for the family. This has meant crazy, merry-go-round tariff plans, criminally illegal air raids, the murder of undesirable generals, brutal genocide in Gaza. At times there seemed to be glimpses of steps towards peace. It would be reckless and stupid to trust him or have illusions, but I think even weak feelers, if any remain, should be built upon!

Have you noticed? Many who listed all of Trump’s dangerous plans made sure to slip any idea about peace in Ukraine in among the negatives. With some folks, I suspect that their main worry is that some peaceful solution might indeed be found, and words like war-readiness, security-defense or armament-buildup give way in media headlines to reconciliation or rapprochement. How fearful!!!

Above all in Germany, I’m afraid, I must remove any rose-colored specs: I hear too many echoes from the past! For those pushing German expansion, some with the same bloody corporation names as in 1939, 1914, even the 1860s, their big victory was “German unification” (still called “annexation” or “colonization” by many affected). Combined with similar victories elsewhere in eastern Europe, all barriers were down, all gates wide open to investment, exploitation and control, the latter most obviously in the land-by-land extension of NATO, despite all promises of 1990 “not to move one inch further eastward.”

This eastward ”Sturm und Drang” has meant permanently stationing a brigade of German soldiers in Lithuania, almost within spitting distance of St. Petersburg. Also domination of the Baltic Sea, Russia’s key exit to world trade and world economy, with a new naval control center in Rostock (once the main GDR seaport, built up with rocks collected voluntarily by young people all over the republic).

A clearly orchestrated media barrage insists: “Putin threatens Germany, we need a powerful war machine! Urgently!” Constitutional budget limits on debt have been scrapped; for weapons, the sky’s the limit! It is all a myth; Russia would not dream of attacking Germany: NATO outnumbers Russia . in aircraft 22,377 to 4,957, in naval power 1,143 ships to 339, in battle tanks 11,495 to 5,750. NATO surrounds Russia geographically, north, west and mostly south, with Georgia, Moldava and Ukraine meant to close the circle. France and Britain have atomic weapons. Some twenty U.S. nuclear missiles are polished and ready to fly eastward with swift German planes from Büchel Air Base. That threat has always been a myth!

But it still works, and training is in! TV demands ever more admiration for dashing young men (and women) in full uniform and painted faces charging bravely through the woods, or tanks splashing across rivers. There is a new ”Soldiers’ Day” and a ”Veterans Day”— to honor the lucky and less lucky ones (after waiting for survivors from 1939-1945 to die out and avoid confusion as to which veterans were being honored) and give little boys and girls a chance to climb into a tank or fighter plane. The message is clear: “Be patriotic! Join in the fun!” and the war fever increasingly recalls, with modern variants, the heel-clicking and barked Prussian commands of past years! “Intelligence experts” who predicted 2030, maybe 2027, as the year “when Putin’s army will be fit enough to fight us after his losses in the Ukraine war” now say such dates offer a “false sense of security” and even speak of 2026.

Marching in the vanguard, with military bands for background music, is the new chancellor, Friedrich Merz. He seems more genteel, more intelligent, than his new friend in Washington, and avoids loud-mouth rabble-rousing. But his texts go even further: he has already concluded that “we are already under attack from Russia…the dividing line between war and peace is a fluid one.”

There are loud dissonances, however. For decades economically proud and powerful, Germany is stagnating. The halt on inexpensive Russian gas, thanks to the liquefied fracking gas lobby in the USA and the strangely predicted (by Biden) explosions on the Baltic Sea floor, but also due to higher costs, cheaper but high-quality competition from China, especially in the key auto industry, now the uncertainties of friend Trump’s high tariffs—all hurt bad!

Hitler’s answer to the Depression was clear. That of Franklin Roosevelt, totally different in many ways, had to resort to a similar therapy: build armaments, from tanks to U-Boats—or tanks to Liberty Ships. Both solutions ended unemployment. Both ended with war. EU members have agreed to spend—no longer 2%, not just 3.5% but an impossible 5% of their Gross Domestic Product (GMP) on war preparations. That seems a low sum, but would mean over €215 billion for Germany alone. 1,5% would be for “infra-structure”- with a stress on re-enforcing highways and bridges, ports and rail lines to carry tons of tanks and artillery, all heading eastward, openly aimed at Russia! Dilapidated schools, too few pre-K facilities to teach kids good German or swimming pools to teach them to swim, shutting down hospitals and clinics, miserly care for the elderly, cuts in aid to music schools, theaters, youth clubs? Oh, let them wrangle over what each can squeeze out of tight budgets! For Merz & Co.—first things first! Defense, Security, Safeguarding Freedom and Democracy from Putin!

Who loves these virtues most? If we go by reward, a top candidate would be Rheinmetall. Founded in 1889 to build weapons for the Kaiser, gaining huge wealth in World War I. Forced by the Versailles Treaty in 1919 to end armament production, it began again in 1921. A top weapons makers for Hitler, using 500,000 slave laborers, then shut down after defeat in 1945, it had to wait until 1956 before starting up again.

With the Ukraine war it is now Germany’s biggest weapons-maker. Share-holders’ value jumped from €4 billion in 2022 to more than €91 billion today. Orders for its tanks and other weapons surpass €55 billion, and its CEO, Armin Papperger, boasts: “With 50% sales growth in defense, Rheinmetall is transitioning from a European systems supplier to a global leader.” It plans new factories in the Ukraine, one for armored vehicles, one for munition. The last time we checked Papperger’s salary stood at €8,000,000 a year. We do not know how he feels about a cease-fire and peace in the Ukraine. But we can guess.

Possibly sharing such feelings in a happy swarm is an even bigger fish. BlackRock, with 70 offices in 30 countries, is the world’s largest manager of assets, now worth over $10 trillion. Its sharp fangs bite into economic innards everywhere, from Exxon Mobil and Fox Broadcasting to the Deutsche Bank. In May 2024, after a clearly well-informed insider deal, BlackRock became the biggest stockholder and influencer of Rheinmetall! And who was Asset Management Chairman for BlackRock in Germany at the time? None other than Joachim-Friedrich Martin Josef Merz, today Germany’s chancellor!

Those were good years for Merz. “I was happy working for this enterprise,” he has said. That’s understandable. He was making €5000 a day, even Saturdays and Sundays, €1.980.000 a year, even for a bad year. But bad years for clever lobbyists were rare. According to the German Enterprise Alliance, his income “approaches the upper limits but is not unusual.”

He had to suspend that job when he moved back into politics. His income as chancellor is still comfy, but much lower. Not as low as those on jobless assistance, a sort of home relief providing €563 a month for food and other such necessities. 1.3 million senior men and 2.1 senior women and over 2 million children are under or near the poverty danger level.

Most leading politicians blame Germany’s growing woes not on horrendous military spending or gaping loop-holes in taxing such as Rheinmetall and Blackrock—and definitely not on “the system” -but rather on refugees greedily storming the gates of “our Europe” or the children and grandchildren of those who once made it across “overly porous” frontiers. With Merz, these gates are being shut so tightly, at the cost of border commuters and retailers, that some are retaliating like Poland, sending armed soldiers to check vehicles 7-24 at the borderline “Bridge of Friendship” over the Oder.

That supposed German ability, efficiency and, yes, assumption of its superiority, once frightfully cited against allegedly “non-German” Jews, is now deployed against people of different color, language or religion, most loudly by the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD), aided by a media which stresses any felony if an “Ausländer” is involved. The AfD now leads in three East German states, is second in the other two, and holds second place in national polls, only a few points behind the Merz-CDU. The others, running scared, loudly attack the AfD as fascist, demand it be forbidden as anti-constitutional—but also move in the same “anti-foreigner”-“over-full boat!” direction. Merz, nastily capping this off, denounced those foreigners “who sit on the dental chairs and get new teeth made while German citizens can’t even get appointments.” There are whispers that some Christian politicians might break their taboo against joining in a coalition with the AfD, despite the so-called “fire-wall.” But for now, nationally, the Social Democrats remain as junior partners. After the worst election results in their history and worsening figures in recent polls, they hold far weaker cards in any coalition quarrels. But aside from a currently murky squabble on approving or rejecting a new top-level judge because she favors freer abortion laws, and a cover-up scandal about a Christian big shot who wasted 3 or 4 billion euros on a buddy’s surplus, faulty covid masks, there are no major disagreements.

For many years the SPD was divided (unofficially). The stronger faction was more conservative, friendlier toward big business, loud on labor rights and gains before elections, useless or worse after them, and as bellicose as the other parties in blindly supporting a Bush or Blair, a Netanyahu or Zelensky.

But a weaker wing clung to a few ancient SPD traditions (mostly buried back in 1914). In June one hundred Social Democrats, led by the courageous caucus chair Rolf Mützenich, dared to publish a manifesto calling for a new policy, leading away from the growing war fever and toward peaceful solutions in conflict situations, like Ukraine. Though many rank-and-filers agreed fully, this upset major apple carts, with apples as poisonous as in the Grimm Tale of “Snow White and the Dwarfs.”

Nearly every leader of the Christians, the Greens and most especially Mützenich’s own party was enraged and called him everything: stupid, naive, obsolete or treacherous. Leading the angry pack was ambitious right-winger Lars Klingbeil, who immediately grabbed the party reins, pushing out Scholz, Mützenich and his quiet erstwhile co-chair, Saskia Esken, the most prominent woman in the party, a modest left-winger hitherto suppressed by the SPD-rightists for demanding higher taxes on the super-wealthy, less police brutality, fewer privileges for rich car-makers. Klingbeil ousted her in such a nasty, misogynist way that, in the party congress which soon followed, he received not the usual nearly unanimous approval but an exceedingly embarrassing low, 64.9% while his little-known new co-chair, Bärbel Bas, got a normal 95% approval.

And yet he won—and became vice-chancellor and finance minister with Merz. The only minister he saved from the previous Scholz cabinet was the popular but bellicose Boris Pistorius, who can now buy all the weapons he wants, in support of Merz with war or genocide from Gaza to Donbas or Tehran about which he approved the Merz words, “They (the Israelis) did our dirty work for us.” Though not close buddies, the two coalition partners agree on ”essentials”.

What about the other parties? The AfD, too crudely far-right, is still ostracized nationally. Clearly pro-capitalist, rabidly nationalist, backward on social questions, homophobic, strongly pro-Netanyahu (who also hates Muslims), otherwise hateful against foreigners, but also against any assistance to the Ukraine, and leaning toward pro-Russian positions. Is that a paradox?

There are many paradoxes these days. Despite her party’s homophobia, the best-known AfD leader, the cultivated, clever, well-spoken but hate-ridden Alice Weidel has a Lesbian relationship with a foreign woman (and two children). And recently, in hopes of breaking the “fire-wall” against them, AfD delegates in their Bundestag caucus (152 out of 630) decided to switch from casual clothing to suits and ties and reduce loud, nasty heckling, and thus become more palatable as possible partners.

Is one potential partner the Bündnis Sahra Wagenknecht (BSW)? (Its leader has promised to change that embarrassing name.) Many in the media love to predict Alice Weidel and Sahra getting together. Although her alliance is a breakaway from the LINKE (or Left) party, presumably further to the left, Sahra surprised everyone by rejecting as undemocratic any ban on the AfD and a fire-wall against a party supported by 24% in the polls. Was this a hint of a possible alliance? Sahra said No! It was the right-wing “Christians” who were really close! A ban would help, not hurt the fascists. But agreement between Alice Weidel’s AfD and Sahra’s BSW on rejecting aid to Zelensky, on opposing sanctions against Russia and on tough rules on immigration left room for speculation. But also speculation on the life of Sahra’s BSW. After an impressive upward start last year, above all in the eastern states, its ratings sank lower and lower, even in the east, where for some it has become part of the establishment. Nationally, a heart-breaking result of 4.95 % in February left them less than 9600 votes short of 5% (with 60 million voters) and not one single seat in the Bundestag. The result seemed falsified, but now, nearly six months later, they seem all but glued to 4% in the national polls. Despite brave words, their future looks far from rosy.

Which leaves the LINKE. For a long time it was also glued to that useless 4% figure, and seemed doomed even in its home bases in the East German states. Until late 2074! Then, unlike the other parties, the LINKE did a self-analysis and changed its feathers. With a new election approaching, it turned to the people, sent out thousands of newly-trained, often newly-won campaigners to ring or knock at over 100,000 doors and ask what people wanted from a new government. Most common wishes were a halt to high prices for groceries, affordable housing and utilities and, above all, an end to steep rent increases. And that’s what the LINKE stressed, in meetings, speeches, and actions. New advisory centers where created where tenants could check on whether they were being cheated by landlords, and if so, how they could end the cheating. Other parties blamed immigrants, the LINKE blamed the big real estate robbers. And it worked! Within two-three months the LINKE jumped from the stick-in-the-mud 4% loser status to nearly 9 % percent and in Berlin an astounding first place, 19.9%, more than any of the other 6 main contestants. Its membership has jumped to over 100,000!

Part of this was due to its new party co-chair Ines Schwerdtner and its new caucus co-chair Heidi Reichinnek, both young, attractive, youthfully attired, and Heidi with bare arms full of tattoos, a high-velocity speech pattern with a vigor appealing above all to young people, and a snappy, challenging little smile for the journalists. The LINKE, almost alone in moving upwards, stands in the polls at 11 %, now tied with the increasingly meaningless Greens. It leads them all with young women voters!

But caution is advisable. Its big gains were due in part to an obvious agreement within the party to avoid quarrels or controversial debate on military and foreign issues. This basic compromise was largely retained, at least for the media and broader public, during the early May congress in Chemnitz. But important differences remain. Will the LINKE go the way of the SPD and the Greens, planed down to gently critical but polite acceptance of systemic status quo with an ever more frightening acceptance of a huge military build up, masked as security, but clearly a plan for aggression? Top level pressure for conformity is turning increasingly to repression aimed at protests against NATO expansion and above all regarding Palestine, with all opposition to Bibi-led genocide labeled ”anti-Semitism.” A majority of LINKE officialdom, while opposing German support and the sending of more weapons, has been wobbly on these decisive questions:

Some critics in the party have presented it this way:

Is the war in the Ukraine, though violating international law (about which others disagree), an expression of Russian aggressiveness or would it never have taken place if the NATO had not broken its promise not to expand eastwards, thus violating a Russian need for security? Does the death of 27 million Soviet victims of German-fascist aggression during the World War deserve only abstract recollections or forgetfulness—or rather also a reflection on current policy?

Is the Federal Republic in danger of being attacked or is the current alarm campaign really the ideological basis for rearmament and militarization of all fields of society worse than ever since 1945? Does German membership in NATO and leadership in militarizing the European Union represent a growing menace to world peace? Would a military draft—now being planned—and military units stationed outside Germany—long since in practice—improve or endanger peace?

These questions are being debated within the LINKE. How they are resolved and how many can be activated, also on closely related issues like rent, jobs, social assistance and, definitely, environment—will not only affect Germans. Rheinmetall and Blackstone, Amazon and Springer, Lockheed, Bezos, Musk and all their billionaire ilk, with their ubiquitous pawns or allies, are exceedingly powerful. On occasion, however—though still far too seldom—so can be those on the other side—our side! It has won some tough struggles—and can do it again—and again!

https://mronline.org/2025/07/13/rosy-sk ... y-13-2025/

******

Is the EU itself tired of Ursula von der Leyen’s graft?

Martin Jay

July 14, 2025

The Commission president is so soaked in corruption excrement that she proudly stands tall as the biggest sewer rat in the entire cesspool of EU graft.

The recent attempt by MEPs in the European Parliament to force the European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen to resign is interesting on a number of levels, but chiefly because it’s unprecedented and it shows that when the EU is pushed into a corner, with a gun against its temple, it will reluctantly resort to a democratic process finally to retain its position. Generally speaking, the European Parliament and its members are not considered big players in the Brussels trilogy of power standing beside the two other institutions, the European Commission and the European Council of Ministers. In fact, the assembly is in many ways a fake parliament where its members only get to rubber stamp important pieces of draft legislation those two other bodies want signed off. It was actually a last-minute idea by the architects of the EU who realized that when building on the French model of executive administrative power, they had forgotten to add a component to legitimize the whole circus with some sort of democratic endorsement.

And yet, on occasion, the MEPs do wield power. One point in their 5-year term is when they cross examine EU commissioners who have been nominated by member states for the top Brussels jobs – which they, the MEPs can reject. Another moment can be when they become rattled by the ‘big brother’ European Commission down the road and they need to remind it that it is ultimately the parliament itself who gets to choose European Commission presidents and, if needed, they can reject them at any point.

Just recently MEPs took the unprecedented step to try and oust von der Leyen as many feel as though she has threatened the entire EU project with her corrupt practices and her dictatorial élan. In an official statement from the MEPs who were championing for her to stand down, they state that “the Commission led by President Ursula von der Leyen no longer commands the confidence of Parliament to uphold the principles of transparency, accountability, and good governance essential to a democratic Union.” They also demanded the Commission “to resign due to repeated failures to ensure transparency and to its persistent disregard for democratic oversight and the rule of law within the Union.”

The move, which was obviously not going to get a majority vote, largely came from right-wing MEPs who, ironically, secured their seats at the last EU election due to a growing anger and distrust of the EU by voters who want more power and national sovereignty returned to their own countries.

And yet it showed that von der Leyen’s style, which some could compare to infamous Soviet leaders, has its limits. She represents the worst aspects of the EU, what can happen when the Commission takes too much power and makes too grand decisions, like, for example, using funds earmarked for development for Ukraine’s war. There are actually a number of issues which MEPs are angry about which brought the no confidence vote. Perhaps it started in the previous administration when von der Leyen spent 38 billion dollars on a Pfizer vaccine for Covid when her relationship with the U.S. pharma giant stank – her husband’s firm, which is owned by Pfizer, received EU funding and her refusal to hand over text messages to EU investigators gives a clue to how she thinks. More recently she is suspected of having a hand in the dirty business of election rigging in Romania which was probably the last straw for many of these MEPs.

Some argue that history repeats itself and that in 1999 twenty European Commissioners resigned en masse due to corruption allegations hanging over them. But there are stark differences worth noting. Back then, all it took was an internal auditors report which pointed out one French Commissioner’s hand in the till who gave EU contracts to her own dentist while other Commissioners gave top jobs to their friends who were woefully inexperienced with what they were tasked with. In 1999, you could argue the EU was still clinging onto some democratic values as there was a certain amount of honour about the project, so falling on its own sword seemed only right, when Jacques Santer whimpered at a press conference “I’m sorry…”. He held his head down low and some of us in the auditorium thought perhaps he would cry.

But today’s EU has bloated into a real Soviet-style powerhouse which brazenly shows its colours to the world about what it is: a project of power transfer from member states’ democratic basis to Brussels where it all preposterous ideas of democracy and accountability are left on the platform of Brussels Midi station when Eurocrats arrive to begin their “work”. Von der Leyen is the accumulation of a steady power grab of decades of such thinking which salami sliced power away from national governments without anyone really noticing. Who cares about her mishandling a 650bn Euros corona fund?

For those who control her, she’s doing a splendid job and it is hardly surprising that the America’s greatest propaganda newsletter Politico even called her “America’s own EU President”.

MEPs are largely unloved, unsexed, grey people in grey suits who are so useless that their own political parties back home gave them the EU position so as to stay out of the real deal, while paying them off for loyalty. Glenys Kinnock country. Most have never had a real job in the private sector and are so stupid that it beggars belief that they should play an important part in the EU’s internal process. The truth is that the poor little things don’t. However, this move by a small group of rebel MEPs shouldn’t be compared to what happened in 1999. The present day European Commission has done a stellar job from the Soviet handbook of destroying all whistleblowers and putting the fear of God into any of the fake internal audit or policing departments which are supposed to investigate and prosecute crooks like Ursula. The vote is a desperate measure by some MEPs following years of these crony EU organizations merely ruffling papers and grunting acerbic comments to journalists – the EU’s own ombudsman, its own internal audit outfit and lastly – don’t laugh – its own internal anti-fraud outfit called OLAF, sometimes pronounced “Oh laugh”.

When Neil Kinnock was given the job of European Commission vice president after the 1999 Commission resigned (which was also part of) his main task was to protect the institution and its top brass from any real scrutiny or accountability, roll out new rules which make it impossible for Commission officials to become whistleblowers and to make OLAF completely ineffective at routing out internal corruption or embezzlement. Far from the MEP vote of no confidence following a “precedent” of previous attempts to hold the sleazy commission chiefs to account, it is more that it is a symbolic sign of desperation of what years of Kinnock-style “reforms” can produce in the form of a Commission president who is so soaked in corruption excrement that she proudly stands tall as the biggest sewer rat in the entire cesspool of EU graft.

https://strategic-culture.su/news/2025/ ... yen-graft/
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 14394
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Blues for Europa

Post by blindpig » Wed Jul 16, 2025 2:37 pm

Scott Ritter: The Birth of the German Fourth Reich
July 15, 2025

After its defeat, Adolf Hitler’s Third Reich was coaxed back to life by the very forces that once conspired to defeat it.

Image
From left: French Prime Minister Pierre Mendes-France, West German Chancellor Konrad Adenauer, British Foreign Minister Anthony Eden and American Foreign Minister John Foster Dulles meet in Paris about the rearmament of West Germany, Oct. 20, 1954. (Bundesarchiv/Wikimedia Commons /CC-BY-SA 3.0, CC BY-SA 3.0 de)

Germany today has dangerously embarked on a rearmament campaign to prepare for a supposed Russian threat. New Chancellor Frederich Merz told the Bundestag in May Germany would become the “strongest conventional army in Europe,” adding 100,000 troops as “quickly as possible.”This has been accompanied by a repression of free speech in Germany, especially the freedom to criticize Israel’s genocide in Gaza.

After defeat in the First World War, Germany rearmed in violation of the Versaille Treaty. After defeat in the Second World War, Germany rearmed with the help of the United States in response to a supposed Soviet threat. The author looks back on how that was done.


By Scott Ritter

After the end of the Second World War, Germany was divided into four occupation zones, involving U.S., British and French troops in what was known as the western zone of occupation and Russian troops in the eastern zone of occupation.

In 1949, confronted by the collapse of the wartime grand alliance and the emergence of what Winston Churchill called an “iron curtain” separating the Western powers from Russia, the western zones of occupation were consolidated into what became known as the Federal Republic of Germany, or West Germany.

Under the terms of its unconditional surrender, Germany was prohibited from rearming. However, the NATO alliance, in the aftermath of the Korean conflict, perceived a Soviet threat in Europe which could not be countered with the military capability existent in Europe sans Germany.

While the idea of the rearming of West Germany, inclusive of rebuilding Germany’s military industrial potential, was widely opposed both in and out of West Germany, in the end the wants and desires of the NATO militarists prevailed and May 6, 1955 — literally a decade after the defeat of Nazi Germany — West Germany was admitted as a member of the alliance.

NATO histories like to emphasize how West Germany began its journey of re-militarization with “literally zero military personnel.”

This is, of course, absurd.

West Germany was home to millions of demobilized former soldiers of the Third Reich.

These soldiers were men without a place in West German society, disgraced by their participation in Hitler’s wars of conquest and the underlying policies of racial discrimination and murder these wars empowered.

But like the good militarists they were, these defeated minions of the Third Reich weren’t satisfied with simply being allowed to escape the gallows or prison.

They yearned to become relevant to their society.

To regain their lost “honor”.

And to resume their wartime mission of facing off against the Soviet enemy.

In 1950 — five years after the defeat of Nazi Germany — a group of former senior Nazi officers gathered in secret at the Himmerod Abbey, a 12th century monastery located in the Rhineland-Palatinate region of West Germany, to chart a path toward the rehabilitation and resurrection of the German military.

Image
An honors ceremony at the Federal Ministry of Defense, the Bundeswehr, in Bonn in 2002. (Bundeswehr-Fotos/Wikimedia Commons/CC BY 2.0)

They met with the approval of the new West German government.

The central theme of the Himmerod gathering, as set forth in an eponymously named memorandum, was the restoration of the honor of the defeated Nazi army. The former Nazi officers believed that they could not build a new German military on a foundation of shame. As such, they insisted that before the rearmament of West Germany could proceed, the Western allies would need to release all German soldiers who had been convicted of war crimes.

Moreover, they demanded that the defamation of the Nazi soldiers, including those who served in the Waffen-SS, cease. All of this would be done under the cloak of a concerted public relations effort in the West to end the war-time prejudices that had accrued against the German soldier and to delink the performance of the Nazi military during the war from the issue of “war crimes.”

Collective Amnesia

The Western allies were overcome with collective amnesia about the true nature of the enemy they had vanquished a mere five years prior. “To achieve the extirpation of Nazi tyranny,” Winston Churchill had famously declared, “there are no lengths of violence to which we will not go.”

“God, I hate the Germans,” General Dwight David Eisenhower wrote in a letter to his wife in September 1944. Eisenhower didn’t just hate the German soldier — he hated the German people. Eisenhower, if he had his way, would have executed the entire German General Staff. It was his objective to kill as many German soldiers as possible.

Image
Himmerod Abbey, where postwar rearmament was agreed. (Christoph Lange/Wikipedia)

As the war approached its end, Eisenhower ordered that captured German soldiers be designated “Disarmed Enemy Forces” and in doing so ensured millions of German soldiers who surrendered would not be afforded the protections and rights of prisoners of war. In the months after the war ended, more than 1.7 million German soldiers died in the custody of the United States, treated as animals by a military that viewed them with disdain and hatred. [NOTE: The figure of 1.7 million comes from Canadian writer James Bacque, whose claim has been challenged by mainstream historians.]

And yet, soon after the Himmerod Agreement was finished, Eisenhower, who was by this time serving as the supreme allied commander in Europe, having been briefed on the agreement by the Nazi officers who had drafted it, issued a declaration in which he noted,

“I have come to know that there was a real difference between the German soldier and Hitler and his criminal group…for my part, I do not believe that the German soldier as such has lost his honor.”

Eisenhower then directed that U.S. Army historians begin working hand in glove with their former Nazi foes to whitewash the history of the German Army in World War II, helping create the myth of the “clean Wehrmacht,” a prerequisite for Americans and Germans to be able to stand side by side as allies against the Soviet threat.

This reshaped the West’s perception of the Nazi war effort and led to Wehrmacht’s eventual rehabilitation in the eyes of the public and the Allied authorities.

Churchill, too, apparently forgave those whom he deemed no amount of violence a burden to destroy. While declining health prompted Churchill to resign as prime minister in April 1955, he worked closely with Lord Ismay to ensure that Germany, far from being kept down, was allowed to stand again on its own two feet. [Churchill had wanted to use the defeated German army to fight the Soviets immediately after the war ended in Operation Unthinkable.]

Within a decade of being given the green light to reconstitute its military strength, the West German Army numbered more than 450,000 men. Moreover, German factories began production of the Leopard main battle tank that same year — a tank whose design and performance drew directly upon Germany’s experiences during World War II.

Image
Leopard 2A7+ battle tank made by Munich-based arms company KMW at the military trade show Eurosatory 2010. (CC BY 2.0, Wikimedia Commons)

The rehabilitation of the former Nazi officers and soldiers led to German officers rising to command NATO forces. By 1957, one of the principal architects of the Himmerod Agreement, General Hans Speidel, was put in command of NATO ground forces in the center of West Germany.

General Hans Speidel

Speidel was an attractive candidate for the position; the former Chief of Staff of Field Marchall Erwin Rommell, Speidel was implicated in the plot to assassinate Adolf Hitler on July 20, 1944. He was later arrested and interrogated. Marked for death, Speidel escaped custody near the end of the war, and turned himself in to allied authorities.

A career military man, Speidel joined the Imperial German Army in 1914, where he served with distinction on the western front, fighting in the battle of the Somme. He was one of the 100,000 German soldiers who remained in the German Army in the interwar years and played an important role in the rebuilding of the German military into the force used by Hitler in his drive to conquer Europe.

Speidel participated in the invasion of France in 1940 and, following the surrender of the French in June 1940, Speidel was appointed as the chief of staff of the military commander in France, during which time he was involved in organizing and facilitating mass executions and deportations of Jewish and Communist hostages as reprisal for the actions of the French Resistance, as well as similar reprisal activities against civilians in Albania, Yugoslavia, and Greece.

In March 1942 Speidel was transferred to the eastern front, where he was appointed chief of staff of the V Army Corps in Russia. Part of the German 17th Army, Speidel and the V Corps protected the army’s northern flank during the German spring offensive.

In January 1943, at the height of the Stalingrad crisis, Speidel was temporarily assigned as chief of staff to the Italian Eighth Army and helped organize a failed effort to relieve the German 6th Army, which was surrounded in Stalingrad.

After Stalingrad fell, Speidel organized the staff of an ad hoc Army-sized formation known as Detachment Kempf. Speidel played a significant role in helping stabilize the German southeastern sector after the Soviet breakthrough at Stalingrad and then launch the German counterstroke at Kharkov that halted the Soviet advance in February 1943.

Speidel served as Detachment Kempf’s chief of staff during the Battle of Kursk and, after the battle ended in a German defeat, Speidel was promoted to major general and appointed as the chief of staff of the Eighth Army, which was formed from the formations that had been operating under Detachment Kempf. Speidel received the Knight’s Cross of the Iron Cross for his services in Russia — one of the highest military honors — and was promoted to the rank of lieutenant general in January 1944.

Speidel was transferred to France in April 1943, where he was made chief of staff for Field Marshall Erin Rommell, who was preparing to defend France from allied invasion. Speidel was heavily involved in planning and executing the German defense of Normandy.

Image
Speidel with Rommel, April 1944. (Bundesarchiv/Jesse / Wikimedia Commons/ CC-BY-SA 3.0, CC BY-SA 3.0 de)

Somewhere between his transfer to France and the invasion of Normandy, Speidel was contacted by disgruntled German officers who were plotting to kill Adolf Hitler and take over control of Germany.

Following the failed assassination attempt on Hitler, on July 20, 1944, Speidel — who had not been informed about the planned assassination — did attempt to persuade General Field Marshal von Kluge, who had taken over command in France after Rommell was wounded in an allied air attack, to implement certain pre-arranged measures that had been agreed upon in the event of Hitler’s death.

Speidel remained on duty with the Wehrmacht, involved with the defense of France. Speidel famously refused to obey Hitler’s order to destroy Paris before it fell to the allied forces in August 1944.

But his connectivity with the anti-Hitler plotters caught up with him, and Speidel was eventually arrested in September 1944 and subsequently interrogated, during which time he revealed the involvement of Field Marshall Rommel in the plot against Hitler, resulting in Rommell being compelled to commit suicide or else face execution.

Speidel himself avoided execution only by the narrowest of margins, escaping Gestapo custody in the final days of the war and successfully evading capture until taken into custody by French troops.

After the war Speidel, now a prisoner of the Americans, found himself and 11 other former Nazi officers before what was known as “Military Tribunal V.” The tribunal was convened on June 28, 1947, to try the defendants on four counts involving

“the murder of hundreds of thousands of civilians of Greece, Yugoslavia and Albania by troops of the German Armed Forces; participation in the plundering and looting of public and private property, the destruction of cities, towns, and villages, and other acts of devastation in Greece, Yugoslavia, and Albania by troops of the German Armed Forces; participation in the initiation and drafting of secret orders denying enemy troops quarter and denying them the rights of POWs, and orders commanding that surrendered troops of countries at war with Germany be executed; participation in the murder, torture, imprisonment in concentration camps, use for forced labor, and deportation for slave labor of civilians of Greece, Yugoslavia, and Albania by the German Armed Forces.”

Hans Speidel and seven of his co-defendants were found guilty, and Speidel himself was sentenced to a term of 20 years imprisonment.

Whitewashing the Wehrmacht

Shortly after the Second World War ended, William J. Donovan approached Franz Halder, the former chief of the General Staff of the Wehrmacht, and two former Wehrmacht field marshals, Walther von Brauchitsch and Eric von Manstein, to prepare a document which would outline a historical narrative which could be used to separate the Wehrmacht from the Nazi leadership of Germany.

Donovan, who served as a deputy prosecutor at Nuremberg, was the ringleader of a few other senior U.S. officials who believed that the military potential of Germany should be preserved and aligned with the Western allies to contain and confront the Soviet Union. These officials believed that the Nuremberg trials should not proceed.

Image
Defendants at Nuremberg guarded by American Military Police, 1945. (Raymond D’Addario, Wikimedia Commons, Public Domain)

Donovan asked Halder and the other German generals to prepare a document, which was titled “The German Army from 1920 to 1945,” which had as its purpose the whitewashing of the crimes committed by the Wehrmacht.

This document would be used to portray the German Wehrmacht as an apolitical institution of military professionals who were innocent of the crimes committed by their Nazi masters. The irony here is that Halder was one of the biggest war criminals of them all, having drafted both the Commissar Order (issued on June 6, 1941) and the Barbarossa Decree (signed on May 13, 1941) that allowed German soldiers to execute Soviet citizens free from the fear of prosecution.

Halder’s paper was later used by Hans Laternser, the lead counsel for the defense of senior Wehrmacht commanders at was known as the High Command Trial, the 12th and last of the Nuremberg trials.

Of the 13 German high-ranking officers on trial, 11 were found guilty of crimes and given sentences ranging from three years to life. But German Chancellor Konrad Adenauer and the Bundestag weighed in on the side of the defendants, citing the information contained in the Halder document.

In 1949, shortly after the High Command Trial concluded, President Harry Truman sent John McCloy, an influential American lawyer who had served as a senior defense official during the war, helping oversee among other things the Manhattan Project, to Germany to succeed General Lucius Clay as military governor.

The following year McCloy was appointed U.S. high commissioner. One of McCloy’s first acts was to convene a review panel chaired by Judge David Peck of New York and, on its recommendation, reduced the sentences of High Command defendants who were still in prison.

Hans Speidel was a beneficiary of the “McCloy touch” and never served a day in prison despite his conviction of numerous war crimes. As part of the whitewashing of the German war record that was taking place under the guidance of the U.S. Army, Speidel wrote a book, Invasion 1944, which was a history of the Normandy campaign as seen from the German perspective.

One critic of Speidel’s work wondered if General Speidel was not a little too impressed by the chivalry of many officers and a little too blind to their tolerance of Gestapo atrocities. But this didn’t stop Speidel from gifting a signed copy of his book to McCloy in 1951, after Judge Peck’s panel had cleared Speidel’s name and those of the other German Generals who had committed war crimes under Nazi rule.

When, in 1955, the allies decided to rearm West Germany, General Speidel was one of two Hitler-era generals invited to help plan the new army. Over five years, in a delicate process that was watched with resentment by many Europeans, he negotiated terms of West Germany’s military force in the framework of a European army.

The New German Army & the Schnez-Truppe

The core of the German soldiers recruited by Speidel into the new German Army were drawn from a secret military organization organized and overseen by Speidel and other former Nazi officers in 1949, known as the “Schnez-Truppe” (named after the brainchild of the effort, a former Wehrmacht colonel named Albert Schnez), comprised of some 2,000 former Nazi officers who were organized into battle staffs around which another 40,000 former Nazi soldiers would rally around if the Soviet Union were ever to invade West Germany.

This unofficial West German fighting force, organized to the company level and intended to function as four armored divisions, was intended to reinforce allied efforts to repel any attack by the Soviet Union or East Germany on West Germany.

In 1955, the “Schnez-Truupe” was renamed the Bundeswehr. And thus was born the German Fourth Reich, a direct descendant of Nazi Germany unencumbered with any cloak of guilt for the crimes committed by the German soldiers who now stood side by side with the western allies who once fought against them.

https://consortiumnews.com/2025/07/15/s ... rth-reich/

******

What Birmingham’s Towering Trash Heaps Say About Starmer’s Britain
Posted on July 15, 2025 by Nick Corbishley

In the land that gave us Margaret Thatcher’s “there is no alternative” and “there’s no such thing as society”, the provision of even the most basic public services is becoming a problem.

Mountains of rubbish have been piling up on the streets of Birmingham, the UK’s second largest city, as a bin crisis rumbles on into its seventh month. Intermittent strike action started on January 6 with 12 walkouts planned across four months, but the situation quickly spiralled when the trade union Unite announced an indefinite all-out strike on March 11. That strike could continue until December, assuming the government doesn’t fire the workers first.



Birmingham is kind of close to my heart. It is the closest large city to the small Midlands town I grew up in and where my parents still live today. It underwent significant urban renewal in the first two decades of this century but now faces unprecedented financial strains.

While I haven’t had a chance to visit the city, or the UK for that matter, since the bin crisis erupted, reports from friends and family suggest the more affluent parts of the city, including the centre, have been less affected. As Plutonium Kun notes in the comments below, this is probably largely down to higher rates of car ownership, with many people driving to recycling depots to get rid of most of their waste (or possibly fly-tipping).

This chimes with The Guardian‘s April 18 report, “‘The Posh Areas Get Cleared’: Bin Strikes Illustrate Birmingham’s Wealth Gap“:

“It’s very frustrating that the posh areas get cleared and we’re just left, very frustrating but we expect it,” said Peter Thomas, outside his home in Ladywood, against a backdrop of overflowing bins.

Across neighbouring postcodes in Birmingham, the gap between wealthy and deprived parts of the city has been noticeable for residents ever since the bin strikes began last month…

Students living near Edgbaston reservoir said a lack of wheelie bins made the situation worse, despite having had a recent bin collection. Some of those who do have access to wheelie bins have added padlocks in the hope of deterring neighbours from using their bins.

Daniel Struczynski, a chef and culinary arts management student, said: “It’s awful because at the end of the day when we want to put rubbish out we have to put it on the streets and within like 12 hours the bags are all opened, the rubbish is all over the floor.”

He added that it made it a prime target for rodents. “You see rats throughout the night going through them and then crows throughout the day and sometimes even foxes walking around the road.”

The spark for the strike was the city council’s decision in January to remove Waste Recycling and Collection Officer (WRCO) roles which Unite claims would result in 170 workers losing up to £8,000 a year. For some workers that would be the equivalent of losing roughly one quarter of their salaries, says Unite — at a time of persistent moderate-to-high inflation in the UK. Birmingham City’s Labour-run council denies this claim.

Now in its fourth month, the strike could upend long-standing relations between the UK’s governing Labour Party and Unite, one of the country’s largest trade unions. Unite just suspended Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner and is even considering severing ties with the Labour Party altogether. The trade union also suspended the leader of Birmingham City Council, John Cotton. Unite boss Sharon Graham delivered scathing critique of Labour’s “shambolic mismanagement” and anti-worker policies:

Yet again workers are being asked to pay the price for the incompetence of this Labour council and Labour government. It is little wonder workers are deserting Labour in droves when they seem to be hell bent on attacking workers and leaving the super-rich totally untouched.

This should not be happening under a Labour government that promised a new deal for working people. It turns those promises into a complete joke. But let me be clear, the threats won’t work. Angela Rayner and John Cotton’s shambolic mismanagement of this dispute just makes it more likely that the strikes will continue into Christmas and beyond.

While this may all amount to mere bluster, if Unite were to server ties with Labour, the reverberations could be significant. Unite is the largest trade union affiliated to Labour. According to the Electoral Commission, it has donated over £400,000 to the party this year. What’s more, it is threatening to abandon Labour at a time that approval for Starmer’s government just hit an all-time low of -43 — a net drop of 54 points from the peak of plus 11% after Starmer’s landslide victory just over a year ago.

For the moment, the biggest beneficiary of Labour’s collapse appears to be Nigel Farage’s Reform party. As in many countries in Europe, the main establishment parties appear determined to off themselves on the altar of neoliberalism as well as through their dogged support for the war in Ukraine and for Israel’s genocide in Gaza. At the same time, they are stepping up their authoritarian attacks on freedom of speech, of assembly and to protest.



Starmer’s “landslide” victory last summer, as we noted at the time, was not owing to a groundswell of support for his vision or policy proposals — before the elections the UK public viewed the Labour Party under Starmer even less favourably than under Ed Miliband — but because support for the Conservative Party had all but disintegrated. Now, it is support for the Labour Party that is collapsing.

Meanwhile, Jeremy Corbyn, the former Labour leader who was stabbed in the back by Starmer, is in the process of creating a new left-wing party in the UK that could perhaps pose a threat to Labour’s electoral prospects. According to a poll last week, one third of Labour supporters would consider voting for a Corbyn-led party. And if unions like Unite were to disaffiliate themselves from Labour (still a big “IF”), they would be free to endorse candidates representing another party.



Another Broken Pledge

Unite’s decision to ditch Rayner and Cotton was made in an emergency motion at its conference in Brighton at the weekend, which condemned both the UK Government and Birmingham City Council for criticising bin workers who have taken industrial action in Birmingham. In a scathing message Unite leader Sharon Graham accused the deputy PM of backing a “rogue council” that had smeared its workers while seeking to “fire and rehire” the striking bin workers.

As the name suggests, “Fire and rehire” refers to the act of dismissing workers and hiring them back straight away — on worse terms. This practice became more commonplace amid the economic fallout from the COVID-19 pandemic as companies sought to slash their labour costs. The most notorious case was that of P&O Ferries, which fired 800 of its workers in 2022 and then reportedly used an agency to replace the fired staff.

Labour pledged that it would ban fire-and-rehire in its 2024 election manifesto, but it pledged a lot of things it hasn’t got round to doing while doing a lot of questionable things it never pledged to do (accelerating the roll out of digital identity, maintaining military support for Israel’s genocide in Gaza while seeking to criminalise public opposition to the genocide, intensifying the dismantling of the welfare state, increasing national insurance contributions…).

As the veteran journalist Peter Oborne warned in 2023, a year before Starmer’s election victory, “you would be very unwise to believe a word Starmer ever says.”

Birmingham: Ground Zero of UK’s Local Government Funding Crisis

Over a century ago, Birmingham was described by Harper’s magazine as the best-run city in the world. Today, it is one of the worst-run cities in the UK. In September 2023, Birmingham City Council, which prides itself on being the largest local authority in Europe, serving over one million “customers” (not residents or citizens but “customers”), issued a 114 bankruptcy notice, paving the way for the largest programme of cuts and asset sales yet for any UK local authority.

The BBC explains:

Councils technically can’t go bankrupt – but they can issue what’s called a section 114 notice, where they can’t commit to any new spending, and must come back with a new budget within 21 days that falls in their spending envelope.

And when they do, it often means an impact on residents with severe cuts to frontline services.

Councils are required by law to have a balanced budget each financial year and provide “Best Value” to residents.

But more and more councils are finding it harder to do so.

Thirteen section 114 notices have been issued since 2018 – compared to just one before, in the year 2000. Two of those notices were due to misallocation of funds, however, rather than financial challenges.

There are myriad reasons why Europe’s largest local authority ended up hitting the wall in September 2023 — including the fiscal fallout from COVID-19, the ongoing cost of living crisis and the Tory government’s decade and a half of crippling austerity, the brunt of which was borne by local authorities and which Starmer’s Labour government has done precious little to reverse.

All of these factors left Birmingham City Council with years of falling income and rising costs. But one factor has taken the lion’s share of the blame: equal pay.

In 2012, the UK’s Supreme Court ruled in a case brought by 174 former Birmingham Council employees that Birmingham City Council had contravened equal pay legislation by failing to provide bonuses to predominantly female positions such as cooks, cleaners, catering and care staff that it had offered to predominantly male positions such as bin men, street cleaners, and grave diggers.



Another factor, that has received a lot less attention, is Birmingham City Council’s hugely costly implementation of Oracle Fusion – a cloud-based enterprise resource planning (ERP), finance, and HR system — that essentially doesn’t work three years after its launch. According to The Register, “the estimated total cost has gone from around £19 million ($24.07 million) to £108 million ($137 million), with schools taken out of scope.”

Because most of the council staff lacked the necessary IT training and expertise, the implementation of the ERP system has been a catastrophic failure that has hindered rather than helped the Council’s financial management and its operations. A report in January found that two-and-a-half years after going live, the Oracle system was still not “safe and compliant” and had “effectively crippled the council’s ability to manage and report on finances.”

In Other Words, Yet Another UK.Gov IT Success Story

Yet it is a story that has been conveniently drowned out by all the focus on the equal pay ruling. An Oracle-based scandal would have been a very different kind of scandal in which senior Council heads may have actually rolled.

Also, Oracle’s founder, Larry Ellison, currently the second richest man on the planet, is the biggest donor to the Tony Blair Institute for Global Change. As we have documented in previous posts, Tony Blair and his associates wield outsized influence over the Starmer government while Ellison’s firms, including Oracle, continue to win lucrative government contracts.

Admittedly, the disastrous financial package imposed on Birmingham City as well as the subsequent program of cuts and asset sales, totalling £149m last year and £195m this year, with adult social care and child services so far bearing the brunt, all took place under the Tories’ watch (in central government). That was after successive Conservative governments had denied local authorities funds and the means to raise them, leaving councils in the UK facing a £6.2 billion shortfall as of February 2025.

Since 2010, the Tories’ cuts in central government funding have left councils more reliant on local revenue sources such as council tax and business rates. As a result, both residents and businesses have faced a growing tax burden. Another problem highlighted by the pressure group Unlock Democracy is that these revenue streams are highly uneven, with poorer areas generating less income:

Even with some redistribution, this has widened inequalities between regions, leaving many councils unable to meet basic needs.

Since 2011 central government funding for councils has shrunk by nearly a third in real terms. Overall spending has also shrunk by a third on average in the same period. As Unlock Democracy notes, George Osborne, “the architect of Conservative austerity in the first half of the 2010s, was ideologically committed to a sizable shrinking of the state.” And he was brutally effective in bringing it about. With their coffers rapidly running dry, more than half of local governments expect to go bankrupt in the next five years, reports Tortoise Media.

All that being said, Birmingham City Council has been under Labour majority control since 2012, and if the Oracle disaster is any indication, it has not been doing a very good job of it. What’s more, the Keir Starmer government has been in office for over a year now, and despite the seeming constraints imposed on its spending by the bond markets, it could plug the UK’s local government funding shortfall — if it wasn’t so wedded to the politics of austerity, privatisation and its absurd fiscal rules that prevent it from addressing these kinds of challenges.

As Richard Murphy notes, these fiscal rules “pretend to impose discipline, but the truth is they’re always suspended in a crisis, and they’re always rewritten if the government can’t meet the criteria they’ve set out in advance. In other words, these rules are about as flexible as a rubber band.”

In the meantime, the UK’s local authorities continue to bleed money. Most of the focus in the media is on the growing costs of basic services that are breaking the bank while far less attention is paid to the ongoing role of austerity. The result is that in the land that gave us Margaret Thatcher’s “there is no alternative” and “there’s no such thing as society”, the provision of even the most basic public services, including waste collection and clean drinking water, is becoming a problem.

As Murphy helpfully reminds his readers in another blog post, local councils were at the beating heart of transformational change in the UK, becoming the primary providers of schools, local transport, social housing, electricity, clean water and sewers:

In other words, they were at the forefront of the transformation of society, often using locally subscribed capital to fund local development via bond issues that turned the savings of local people into the future that they desired for themselves and others.

And now? They have been reduced to rumps of service that live under perpetual threat of further cuts, utterly dependent for funding on central government that is intent on denying it to them.

And that applies to Starmer’s Labour Party almost as much as it does to the Tories. In the absence of meaningful support from central government, more councils will inevitably fall into financial distress and bankruptcy. As they do, they will have to sell off their many of their most treasured assets, including land and housing stock, for well below market cost, just as Birmingham did. It is one last plunder in a country that has been plundered almost dry.

https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2025/07 ... today.html

******

Hungary refuses to finance US weapons for Ukraine

Donald Trump has shifted the financial burden of new US weapons to the EU, raising tensions among member states

News Desk

JUL 14, 2025

Image
(Photo credit: AP)

Hungarian Foreign Minister Péter Szijjártó said on 14 July that Hungary will not participate in financing US weapons for Ukraine, even if Washington formally proposes the initiative to the EU.

“I would like to emphasize that Hungarian money, Hungarian weapons, and Hungarian soldiers will not be sent to Ukraine.

Nothing will be sent there,” Szijjártó stated during a press conference in Budapest following a meeting with Moroccan Minister of Industry and Trade Ryad Mezzour.

Despite this, he expressed support for US President Donald Trump’s so-called peace efforts, stating: “No one has done as much for peace in Ukraine as Trump.”

He added that these efforts “could have been much more successful in recent months if they hadn’t been obstructed by European and Ukrainian leaders.”

Szijjártó's remarks came shortly after Trump announced on 14 July that the US would deliver Patriot air defense missiles to Ukraine, saying the EU would cover the full cost.

“We will send them Patriots, which they desperately need … The EU is going to pay us 100 percent for that, and that's the way we want it,” Trump told reporters at Joint Base Andrews.

Trump framed the weapons transfer as part of a broader strategy to pressure Moscow into negotiations, but did not specify how many systems would be delivered.

“Putin really surprised a lot of people. He talks nice and then bombs everybody in the evening. But there's a little bit of a problem there. I don't like it,” he said.

The announcement coincided with the arrival of Trump’s special envoy, retired Lt. Gen. Keith Kellogg, in Kiev. Ukrainian officials confirmed that discussions would center on weapons, sanctions on Russia, and deepening ties with Washington.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky earlier confirmed Kiev’s readiness to purchase Patriot systems and long-range missiles from the US.

A significant announcement on further arms support is expected from Trump later this week, according to Axios.

https://thecradle.co/articles/hungary-r ... or-ukraine
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 14394
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Blues for Europa

Post by blindpig » Sat Jul 19, 2025 3:48 pm

Maria Zakharova: Moldova Being Groomed as Next Ukraine

Moldova, Armenia and Historical Truth
Karl Sanchez
Jul 17, 2025

Image

The Orange Suit always means Maria has something strong to convey.

Today’s two-hour twenty-minute briefing started with Ukraine and its campaign of terror and ended with a Q&A that in the contents is called “On the struggle for historical truth,” which before getting into what’s said about Moldova and Armenia needs to be examined. I must admit that as I read the Q I was formulating what I thought would be Maria’s response, which was somewhat surprising:
Question: In the Moscow school No 1539 there is an interesting museum dedicated to the heroic Moscow militia. Schoolchildren, as well as children and grandchildren of the militia, are conducting search operations. Almost all the militiamen died defending Moscow. Not all of them have been found and not all are known. The searchers work tirelessly year after year. The fates of many people are being established. And the museum is replenished with new exhibits. Among the recent ones is the binoculars, which in the hands of our soldier saw the enemy rushing to Moscow. And much more. Also among the finds is a German helmet pierced in several places.

Perhaps, in connection with the growing militaristic intonation on the part of Germany, we should send them this helmet as a reminder of how everything can end again? To hand it over to Germany not "quietly", but solemnly and with pride from the children and grandchildren of our fighters to the children and grandchildren of the German "civilizers". What do you think about such an initiative?

Answer: Do you think they don't? The question is not that the helmet is "pierced", but that many of them have their heads "pierced". That's the problem.

What is needed here is not a helmet of "those times" for a reminder, but some kind of new "helmet" for them, so that they protect their heads from external influences. Judging by what a number of representatives of the German political establishment are talking about, they have a problem with their heads. There is no other way to explain it.

I have already talked a lot about this today. These people had to live with a sense of responsibility for the history of their country in order not to repeat it in the future, to do everything to preserve the history written in blood because of the actions of their compatriots and previous generations of German politicians, but in fact criminals, according to the verdict of the Nuremberg Tribunal. Instead, they are talking about how they will "kill Russian soldiers", militarize Ukraine, produce various types of weapons on the territory of Ukraine plundered and "raped" by them in order to inflict a "strategic defeat" on us.

You say send them a helmet. No! Let's better create museums on the territory of our schools and universities. Let's know history ourselves, make sure that neither their threats, nor their intimidation, nor their flattery (they will try anything) can affect our heads. Here's what we need to do. This is what we are doing. And we will not send anything to them.

One of the main and frequently asked questions that I receive from people, from journalists and from the public is how do you find the strength to restrain yourself in the face of monstrous statements, aggressive rhetoric and unacceptable statements about our country? Sometimes you think that, suddenly, maybe you need to answer more succinctly.

Every time I understand that in memory of our ancestors who won, who showed incredible patience, in their honor and glory, we will maintain the level set by them. We will respond to slander and insults with facts and concrete deeds. Let us preserve and defend ourselves in the way bequeathed to us by those who made our present life possible.

Developments in Moldova

We are closely following the developments in that country. The Moldovan authorities continue to impose on their citizens the idea of some kind of European integration under the pretext that it will save, just think about it, the republic from the alleged threat from Russia.

On July 4, the first Moldova-European Union summit was held in Chisinau. According to the organizers' idea, it was obviously supposed to look like a historic, fateful event, symbolizing the irreversibility of the process of rapprochement between Moldova and the EU. In fact, as Moldovan political scientists note, this "PR action" turned out to be faded and meaningless. The official part lasted less than two hours, as there was nothing to discuss. A few guests from Brussels did not bring breakthrough solutions. Therefore, it was necessary to limit themselves to mutual public praise, flattery and the adoption of a joint declaration, replete with hackneyed clichés about "commitments and aspirations", as well as about some threats from the Kremlin.

At the same time, the largest section of the declaration is devoted to bilateral cooperation in the field of security and defense. This fact is another and very eloquent confirmation of what we have repeatedly drawn attention to: the West is trying by all means to turn Moldova into a NATO military springboard for a possible confrontation with Russia. This is being done with the slavish assistance of official Chisinau, which is systematically pursuing a policy of dismantling the neutral status of its country. Although what kind of "their" country is it for them, if they are citizens of Romania, forcing everyone to rename the language from Moldovan to Romanian, and Moldovans to turn into Romanians? Let me remind you that the neutral status in Moldova is enshrined in its Constitution.

Here are a few more facts that confirm this.

On July 10 this year, the Moldovan parliament ratified an intergovernmental agreement with Germany on the program of assistance in equipping foreign armed forces and seconding an advisory group of the Bundeswehr to the republic, signed by the heads of the defense departments of the two countries in May of this year. How will this help develop education in Moldova? How does this indicate Moldova's integration into the European Union, as Chisinau tells its voters? Let me remind you that the European Union is, first of all, the economy. How will these agreements between the defense ministries of the two countries contribute to the economic development of Moldova? In no way. It's all a deception.

On July 11 of this year, Denmark announced the allocation of about $8 million over four years to strengthen the defense capability of Moldova. She was not given agricultural machinery, fertilizers, loans for industrialists-producers with this money. Everything is again moving towards the militarization of this country in favor of NATO.

In addition, the republic's active rapprochement with NATO member countries continues. Joint exercises are being held with the military personnel of the alliance. In 2024 alone, more than 30 of them were carried out.

Why is all this being done? The answer is obvious. The republic is being prepared for the role of a "second Ukraine". It is indicative that on July 13 of this year, the Moldovan media reported on four Moldovan officers who died near Kherson. According to the published data, ten servicemen were sent to the training ground of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, allegedly to "gain advanced experience." It seems that they got it in full.

The authorities continue to openly fight opposition politicians. On July 10, the Moldovan Metropolitan Court decided to extend the house arrest of the head of Gagauzia, Yelena Hutsul. Her arrest was extended for 30 days—until August 12. On July 11, the Moldovan Prosecutor's Office demanded that opposition Victory Bloc MP Maria Tauber be sentenced to 13 years in prison on charges of allegedly illegal financing, and that she be put on the wanted list.

All this is accompanied by the forced transfer of Moldova to "European standards". If you think that this develops science, education, industry in Moldova, then, of course, no. This implies the suppression of any manifestation of dissent, the rejection of national interests and one's own history.

Official Chisinau is trying to divert the attention of the country's public from its own failures in the socio-economic sphere. They have no time to deal with the problems of Moldova, to develop their science, industry, art, culture. They were given a different task in Brussels—to dock Moldova with NATO in order to act against Russia.

From July 5 to July 27, an "installation" entitled "State terror in Soviet Moldova. Scale, victims and perpetrators". In Moldova itself, independent experts have already called it a set of falsifications and inconsistencies that have nothing to do with the real history of the country.

In general, the policy of aggressive pro-Western propaganda in the republic has led to the opposite effect. According to recent opinion polls, 60% of respondents believe that Moldova is going in the wrong direction, 77% believe that balanced relations with both Russia and Europeans meet the country's national interests, and 78% are in favor of maintaining the republic's permanent neutrality.

The anti-people practices of Brussels do not find support from the friendly people of Moldova. And, obviously, they will not find it.

Moldovan authorities' plans to restrict the constitutional rights of their citizens

We express our deep concern over the plans of the Moldovan authorities to once again restrict the constitutional right of thousands of Moldovan citizens living in Russia to participate in the elections to their parliament. Let me remind you that the right to vote is a fundamental right of every citizen in a democratic country.

Last year's explanations from Chisinau about security threats on the territory of Russia were untenable and politically motivated. The whole world was convinced of their groundlessness. The Russian Federation has impeccable experience in organizing polling stations for citizens of dozens of foreign countries, guaranteeing complete safety of voters, commissions and observers.

For decades, Russia has been successfully and transparently ensuring the voting of citizens of other countries on its territory. Our infrastructure and law enforcement system reliably protect the electoral process in accordance with international standards.

Already now we see almost 20 thousand preliminary registrations of Moldovan citizens in Russia (let me remind you that the number of the diaspora is more than 300 thousand people) who want to vote in the elections on September 28. If Chisinau again limits their ability to only two polling stations, then some of these people, who have already announced their desire to vote, will literally lose their constitutional right. It is better to say that it will be stolen from them. But the number of registrations from the territory of our country continues to grow.

The Moldovan legislation provides for the possibility of opening additional polling stations abroad, including the Russian Federation. All the necessary legal grounds for their creation on September 28 exist. We confirm this. There are no organizational or legal barriers to opening polling stations in Russia. The Russian side is ready to provide all the necessary conditions and is ready to interact with the Moldovan electoral authorities to promptly resolve any issues, including technical ones.

Even human rights organizations in Moldova, including those funded by the European Union and the United States, recognize the authorities' arguments about the refusal to open polling stations in the Russian Federation as unfounded. This confirms the politicized nature of Chisinau's decision. The refusal to open additional sections this year is, of course, not a matter of security or logistics. This is a deliberate policy of the ruling party in the Republic of Moldova, and first of all the president, aimed at excluding the votes of a certain part of the Moldovan diaspora for political reasons.

Based on the analysis of the turnout in the three previous elections and the current requests, in order to ensure the rights of the citizens of the Republic of Moldova in Russia, it is objectively necessary to open at least 9-10 polling stations in key cities of Russia. This is obviously in line with both the demand and the Moldovan electoral norms.

We call on the Moldovan authorities to show responsibility, comply with their own laws and international obligations in the field of electoral rights. Russia is ready for immediate dialogue and practical cooperation to open the sections, guaranteeing their transparent and safe operation.

Question: Deputy of the Supreme Soviet of the Pridnestrovian Moldavian Republic Alexander Safonov said that NATO has "undoubtedly" developed a plan to attack Transnistria. However, according to him, now it is unlikely to be implemented, because the West has a different scenario in relation to the Dnieper Moldavian Republic, that is, to surround and force it to surrender. Does Russia have plans to support Transnistria in the event of a deterioration of the situation or a threat from the North Atlantic Alliance?

Maria Zakharova: As far as I understand, the statement by the Transnistrian MP that you quoted was made as a comment on the relevant report [reproduced below] by the Foreign Intelligence Service of our country on the prospects for Moldova to renounce its neutral status. We have repeatedly talked about the creeping, violent militarization of Moldova, in the implementation of which NATO, along with the European Union, plays a decisive role.

Of course, I would like to believe, on the one hand, the assurances coming from Chisinau about its commitment to an exclusively peaceful settlement. But the facts tell a different story: that Moldova, with the help of Western curators, is building up its capabilities for a military solution to the Transnistrian problem. At the same time, after all, a course has been taken for the economic strangulation of Transnistria. We also see this.

We are convinced that progress in the process of a comprehensive and sustainable Transnistrian settlement is possible only if peace and tranquility on the Dniester are reliably ensured. This, contrary to all speculation, is what Russian peacekeepers in the region are doing. By the way, we will soon celebrate the next anniversary of their entry into the region for peacekeeping purposes.

I would like to confirm that Moscow, closely following the development of the situation around Transnistria, is ready to respond appropriately to any, including the most unfavorable, scenario.

Therefore, I would like to ask you to quote the answer to your question in full, in all its interconnection.

NATO turns Moldova into a new military battering ram against Russia

14.07.2025

The press bureau of the Foreign Intelligence Service of the Russian Federation reports that, according to information received by the SVR, NATO is actively preparing to involve Moldova in a possible armed conflict with Russia. Brussels decided to accelerate the transformation of this country into "the forward bridgehead of the alliance on the eastern flank, taking into account the advance of the Russian Armed Forces in Ukraine."

Having bitten the bit, NATO is intensively turning the once peaceful agrarian republic into a military training ground. They are trying to make Moldovan territory suitable for the rapid transfer of NATO troops to the Russian borders. To this end, projects are being implemented to switch to the European railway gauge and increase the capacity of bridges. Logistics hubs, large warehouses and sites for the concentration of military equipment are being built. The airfields of Marculesti and Balti, located near the Ukrainian theater of operations, are being modernized with an eye to the possibility of receiving a significant number of combat and military transport aircraft.

However, the main blow in the event of a direct conflict between NATO and Russia, according to Brussels, will be taken by the Moldovans themselves. It is they who should become "cannon fodder" during hostilities with Russian troops. To do this, the leadership of the bloc is forcing Chisinau to switch to NATO concepts of warfare. The Moldovan army is flooded with military instructors from the states of the alliance. Specialized training centers are being deployed.

The comprador regime of Maia Sandu is ready to satisfy all the requests of the West, as long as it is not driven away from the "feeding trough". Chisinau is counting on the "material and organizational support" of NATO states for the pro-presidential Action and Solidarity party in the upcoming parliamentary elections on September 28 this year. In case of victory, Sandu promises NATO leaders to make a decision on the abolition of the neutral status of Moldova provided for in the national constitution.

It seems that the implementation of such a scenario will be the beginning of the end for Moldova. President Sandu has long and rightly been accused of systematically "feeding" the country she leads to Romania, of which she is a citizen. Now, however, it is becoming obvious that Sandu and her entourage intend to go much further, namely, to give Moldova to NATO so that they simply "erase" it from Russia. Apparently, Zelensky's cannibalistic fame haunts the lover of gay pride parades and European integration.

Question: Just recently, President of the European Council Antonio Costa and President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen announced the EU's readiness to invest at least 2.5 billion euros in Armenia, as they said, for "sustainability" and to include it in regional and economic initiatives. This seems like complete nonsense, but could you comment on this?

Maria Zakharova: Apparently, we are talking about the money that Brussels has repeatedly promised to provide to Armenia. To what extent this promise is being fulfilled, I think it is necessary to ask Yerevan whether they received this money or not. We're not going to look into their pockets. This is their relationship with European institutions.

Even from today's briefing, it is obvious that this is a "classic of the genre". The European Commission, the EU, and NATO have a habit of making generous promises, and then, under the sauce of financial promises, enslave them and continue to manage the processes, skimming off the foam and benefiting only for themselves. Moreover, they count the same amounts several times as new assistance. Recently, EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Kaja Kallas said: "How can this be if we pay and the aid is not considered ours–-this is wrong." That is, even they sometimes "go into a nosedive" from those machinations that they themselves initiate within NATO associations or between NATO countries.

By the way, this very Western story with financial assistance includes such manipulations as, for example, promising one amount, and giving half as much. Or give nothing at all, saying that allegedly the conditions do not allow or are not fulfilled some principled, incomprehensibly formulated postulates or requirements. Brussels often practices this with other countries.

At the same time, the European Union is diligently and purposefully creating conditions to stimulate the interest of its foreign partners in receiving this EU assistance. The methods are well-known: the nuances of the conditions for the access of goods to the EU market, getting hooked on supposedly "preferential" loans (so many books have already been published on this matter), the creation of a pro-Western civil "society" fed by EU grants, which has nothing to do with democracy, but is simply a recipient or a "grant-eater".

For the EU, financial and economic assistance has long been not assistance, not a desire to develop or stimulate development, but a lever of influence on the policies of third countries–-both in foreign and domestic affairs. This is, in fact, interference in internal affairs.

We are convinced that assistance for the socioeconomic development of third countries and the implementation of important infrastructure projects should be carried out on a completely different basis. At the same time, sovereignty must be respected. It is necessary to honor originality. It is necessary to respect the foreign policy and economic interests of the countries they are going to help. And, of course, such "assistance" should not become an instrument for harming other countries, artificially introducing instability into regional affairs or slowing down development. And the formats in which Brussels is diligently trying to involve Yerevan in particular, although not only it, including the newly minted "EU Black Sea strategy", unfortunately, are aimed precisely at the above.
The theatre of Trump “forcing” EU to pay for Ukraine is just that as NATO is clearly working to advance the Empire’s Plan B for the destabilization of Russia and the Caucasus region that’s very closely linked to what its Zionist ally is doing in Syria. And I should add the Empire’s plan to eliminate Lebanon as a political entity in the Levant. Yes, this is all about escalation along the Arc of Instability since Ukraine has turned into a failure, although there’s still some hope that the Baltic region will erupt. The opening item is asking what can we do? The answer is proud and very Russian but it’s not proactive which is what IMO is the answer the questioner sought. Although, I must agree with Maria’s logic that sending the pierced helmet will do nothing to alter the minds of those wanting to revamp the Reich. And European censorship is now such that even if it was sent its receipt would never be acknowledged—the effort would be wasted. Here’s a handy map:

Image

As you see, it would be very difficult for Moldova to directly attack Russia, so NATO’s only recourse is for Moldova to attack Transnistria and the Russian peacekeepers stationed there—something not even Zelensky’s been crazy enough to try, which poses an interesting question: Why doesn’t Zelensky attack the easily accessed and far removed from Russia Transnistria? Perhaps it doesn’t have enough PR appeal, or has NATO told him no?

As for the situation in Armenia, Pashinyan recently visited Armenia’s longtime arch enemy Turkey for reasons it appears only he knows. There’s nothing of note about Armenia in the prior July briefings until today with more focus aimed at Azerbaijan. If Armenia is actually attacking the Armenian church, I would expect Russia to say something rather strong about it, but there’s nothing. It seems clear that something’s happening in that region, but it remains murky.

https://karlof1.substack.com/p/maria-za ... ng-groomed

******

Oh No, LOL))

Evidently not everybody buys a very very beautiful Trump's plan))

At least four countries are already bailing out of commitments to pay the US for weapons supplies for Ukraine, raising a question mark over the level of support Ukraine can expect now that Trump administration has withdrawn. France, Italy, Hungary and Czechia have all said they will definitely not participate in the weapons-purchase scheme. Nato General Secretary Mark Rutte has claimed that eight countries are willing to pay for the US weapons, but so far only Germany and Denmark have officially confirmed their commitment.
Danish definitely have a thing for Russians, for some reason, as for Germans ... Look at this guy, he is ready to roll into Volgograd Oblast at the head of mighty Naz ... pardon, German panzers.

Image

So, what can I say. Or rather Medvedev already stated--may be it is time to off Europe once and for all and put it out of her misery?

MOSCOW (Reuters) -Former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev said on Thursday that Russia had no plans to attack NATO or Europe but, if the West escalated the Ukraine war any further, then Moscow should respond and, if necessary, launch preemptive strikes.

It is not very difficult to do. Meanwhile, 404 terrorists are getting close and personal to Hungarians living in 404:

Image

"Magyars--on knives". Hungary is keenly aware of the intentions of 404 Nazis. Hey, these are favorite people of Sikorski, CIA, MI6. But in a surprise discovery--who would ever thought:

Image

One of the most poignant movies--a masterpiece, in fact--about Great Patriotic War. On UTube and HBO Max.

http://smoothiex12.blogspot.com/2025/07/oh-no-lol.html

******

Activists in Italy defend trade unionist targeted for opposing arms transfer

Workers and activists rally in Brescia against company retaliation targeting trade unionist who resisted arms transfers through civilian airport.

July 17, 2025 by Ana Vračar

Image
Luigi Borrelli during an action against arms tranfers via civilian transport hubs. Source: USB

Workers from the trade union Unione Sindacale di Base (USB) and other anti-armament activists are protesting today in Brescia, Lombardy, against attempts to intimidate trade unionists who speak out and take action against the use of civilian transport hubs for arms deliveries. Ahead of the protest, USB’s Dario Filippini told Peoples Dispatch that the union expects a diverse range of groups to join the mobilization, building on a protest organized in June against an arms shipment via Montichiari Airport in Brescia.

At that time, long-time airport employee and trade unionist Luigi Borrelli raised concerns about the possible transfer of military goods through the airport, which, as Filippini points out, is intended for the transport of cargo such as mail, medicine, and food. Borrelli’s warning triggered an organized response and ultimately led to the cancellation of the flight. However, the airport operator, GDA Handling, retaliated by threatening Borrelli with dismissal for allegedly breaching confidentiality and “loyalty to the company.”

Filippini notes that this is not the first time GDA Handling has targeted Borrelli over his opposition to the airport’s apparent covert role in transporting military cargo. Since at least mid-2024, when he began raising concerns about suspicious packages moving through Montichiari, Borrelli has faced suspensions and fines – measures seemingly aimed at silencing him and deterring others.

“The obvious goal is to prevent any scrutiny of the repeated use of the airport for operations related to weapons deliveries to active war zones,” USB stated.

Nevertheless, trade unions and other organizations argue that Borrelli’s actions are legally sound and morally justified. The Italian Constitution clearly states that the Republic “repudiates war,” which raises questions about the legitimacy of transporting arms to countries engaged in conflict. There are also practical implications for workers, Filippini points out: “If you’ve been hired to handle mail or food, why should you suddenly be expected to handle weapons?” he asks. “If arms have to be handled in the first place, wouldn’t soldiers be better placed to do that?” he adds, noting the proximity of Ghedi Air Base.

In several cases across Europe, workers have refused to handle military shipments destined for Israel during its ongoing genocide in Gaza, including over health and safety concerns. As an elected workers’ representative, Borrelli echoed similar concerns when he publicly denounced military transports through Montichiari. But this appears to matter little to Italian authorities or airport management.

Instead, broader efforts to discredit and constrain workers taking industrial action against the arms trade have emerged. Some official interpretations have even said arms were “essential goods,” thereby potentially limiting workers’ ability to legally strike over such shipments. Giorgio Cremaschi of the left political party Potere al Popolo described this as a form of militarization of labor, where “workers at ports, railways, airports, and throughout logistics become de facto soldiers, carriers of arms.”

USB and Potere al Popolo have called for resistance to these efforts and for the protection of workers’ rights – both to strike and to speak out against war. “We are convinced that strike, disobedience, collective action, and individual refusal by working men and women can be the most effective forms of nonviolent resistance,” reads a statement issued by dozens of trade unionists, legal scholars, and academics ahead of the protest in Brescia. “Such actions can stop the warmongers and the madness of rearmament, allowing the Republic, founded on labor, to repudiate war and consign it to history.”

“This is about going beyond the slogan ‘not in my name’ and declaring through concrete acts: ‘not with my hands, not with my knowledge, not with my labor,’” the statement adds.

Reflecting this approach, the mobilizations in Brescia are contributing to a growing movement among transport and logistics workers in the region who are standing up against Europe’s armament agenda, Filippini says. These efforts have earned solidarity from workers’ organizations abroad. Among them is Greece’s All-Workers Militant Front (PAME), which stated: “The persecution and the threat of dismissal against trade unionist Luigi Borrelli is an attack on the unions that resist the plans and the wars of the imperialist, that fight for peace between peoples.”

As solidarity with Borrelli continues, USB and its allies remain committed to expanding the campaign against the arms trade and defending workers’ right to conscientiously object to participating in weapons transfers. “Wars should be boycotted,” Potere al Popolo wrote in a statement of support. “Blocking arms shipments is not only legitimate: it is an act of justice and democracy.”

https://peoplesdispatch.org/2025/07/17/ ... -transfer/
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 14394
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Blues for Europa

Post by blindpig » Mon Jul 21, 2025 2:20 pm

Duda’s Rhetoric About Rzeszow Is Meant To Aid Nawrocki’s Envisaged Foreign Policy
Andrew Korybko
Jul 21, 2025

Image

He seemingly expects that this will support his successor’s efforts to turn Poland into a regional power.

Outgoing Polish President Andrzej Duda recently slammed Ukraine and the West, specifically Germany and the US, for taking Poland’s logistics infrastructure for granted. He even suggested that Warsaw could shut down the Rzezsow Airport through which around 90% of Ukraine’s foreign military aid passes on spurious pretexts as leverage. While it’s unlikely that Poland will risk the US’ wrath by blackmailing it in this way, his rhetoric succeeded in getting his intended audience’s attention. Here are his exact words:

“I believe that both Ukrainians and our allies simply believe that the Rzeszow airport and our highways are theirs, excuse me, as if they were theirs. Well, it's not theirs, it's ours. If someone doesn't like something, we close it down and say goodbye. Yes, we're renovating it.

We close the Rzeszow airport and deliver aid to Ukraine by sea, by air, I don't know, parachute it in. Figure it out if you don't think you need us.


I believe there were issues where we could have made it a little clear that we cannot be bypassed or ignored. And we didn't do that. And that was a mistake. This isn't about talks with Ukraine. We need to discuss this with our allies—Germany, the Americans.”

Duda then revealed that Poland wasn’t included in talks during 2023’s NATO Summit in Vilnius on sending more aid to Ukraine despite this only being possible through his country’s territory. It therefore appears that he has lots of pent-up anger from two years ago that he’s finally expressing during his last weeks in office. He didn’t do so earlier so as to avoid creating problems for the then-ruling conservatives and then later to avoid more creating problems for himself with the new ruling liberal-globalist coalition.

Seeing as how Polish foreign policy is formulated through collaboration between the President, Prime Minister, and Foreign Minister, making a big deal about this back when the conservatives still ruled Poland could have exacerbated rifts within the government before that fall’s election. Likewise, after the conservatives were replaced by a liberal-globalist coalition, this could have led to the new Prime Minister and Foreign Minister accusing him of provoking rifts with Poland’s allies for domestic political purposes.

The reason why Duda is speaking up now likely has to do with his successor Karol Nawrocki’s vision. The incoming president narrowly won by pledging to obstruct the ruling liberal-globalists’ agenda, which could lead to early elections depending on how serious the resultant deadlock becomes. All matters related to Ukraine are increasingly important to the electorate nowadays, who’ve come to believe that Poland hasn’t received enough benefits from that country and the West for its crucial role in this conflict.

Accordingly, Nawrocki is expected to do his utmost to ensure that this changes, to which end Duda’s latest rhetoric about Rzeszow Airport justifies him obstructing the ruling liberal-globalists on this front. Nawrocki won’t blackmail Ukraine and the West by threatening to close down that facility, but he could loudly remind them of its importance as a negotiating tactic for getting the first to grant Poland a privileged role in its reconstruction and for the second to include it in talks on their envisaged endgame.

His goal is for Poland to be placed on the path for leading Central & Eastern Europe once the conflict finally ends, which can only happen through the aforesaid means, not by continuing with the previous conservative government’s and the ruling liberal-globalist’s subordination to foreign interests. Duda shares Nawrocki’s vision but was unable to advance it for the previously mentioned political reasons, for which he now feels pangs of guilt, hence why he’s trying to aid him with his rhetoric as a parting gift.

https://korybko.substack.com/p/dudas-rh ... w-is-meant

******

Srebrenica and its toxic legacy

Stephen Karganovic

July 21, 2025

Destruction and death in regions far away from Bosnia and unrelated to it have been Srebrenica’s bitter legacy.

The demonstrable indifference of the collective West’s moral authorities to the humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza gives the lie to their moralistic posturing and tells us all that we need to know about the sincerity of their simulated concern over Srebrenica.

With nauseating regularity, in July of every year, that feigned concern manifests itself on the anniversary of the Serbian military operation conducted in July 1995 to eliminate a UN protected hostile enclave deep in the rear of Serbian territory. Over the preceding three years the armed enclave of Srebrenica served as the staging ground for raids on surrounding Serb villages which resulted in massive destruction and the killing of about 3,000 Serb civilians. For most of that time, the east Bosnian town of Srebrenica was under the direct auspices of the United Nations, with initially a Canadian and then a Dutch battalion stationed there.

Technically, the task of those foreign units was to oversee a cease-fire and demilitarisation agreement that had been concluded between the local parties in April 1992. The actual role of the UN contingent in Srebrenica, backed by a Security Council Resolution, was to make sure that the successful offensive of the Bosnian Serb army would be stopped in its tracks in return for an illusory cease fire. (Machinations pressuring for a “cease fire” in Ukraine when the Russian side has the clear advantage present a striking analogy.) In fact, Sarajevo forces in Srebrenica were neither disbanded nor was the enclave demilitarised, as the signed agreement required. Instead, UN forces turned a blind eye to the illegal presence in the town of a fully armed division of forces loyal to the Sarajevo authorities, estimated to number about 6,000 fighters. Unimpeded by the UN battalion, up until June 1995 those troops were conducting lethal and destructive forays out of the “demilitarised” enclave against surrounding Serbian settlements, killing civilians and burning their villages, whilst tying down a considerable number of Serbian army troops.

When in early July of 1995 the Serbian command decided that it had had enough and launched a military operation to neutralise the threat posed by armed enemy troops in Srebrenica, the campaign was over in less than a week. Serbian forces entered the town, but they found Srebrenica empty of both the soldiers who had been deployed there and the civilian inhabitants.

As it soon became clear, the soldiers and male adult civilians loyal to Sarajevo, estimated at up to 12,000, had assembled at the nearby village of Šušnjari. From there in full military formation they undertook an armed breakout across 60 km of Serbian held territory. Their objective was to reach Tuzla, the nearest area controlled by their forces. The civilians, consisting of women, children, and the elderly, numbering up to 20,000, were concentrated at the Dutch battalion base in the village of Potočari, also in the enclave but several miles away. The callous abandonment by the armed men of Srebrenica of their vulnerable relatives and fellow-citizens should have been the first warning sign that something very foul was afoot.

And indeed, it was. The Serb takeover of Srebrenica was not destined to be just another military operation in the Bosnian civil war. Before long, it was transformed into an emblematic event with the sinister connotations of genocide. The late Professor Edward Herman put it best when he wrote that Srebrenica was “the greatest triumph of propaganda at the close of the twentieth century.” From the beginning of the civil war in Bosnia, which lasted from 1992 to 1995, the dominant narrative spinners stigmatised the Serb side as the undisputed villain, suggesting that the Serbs were perceived as the collective West’s principal geopolitical adversaries in the region. It soon became evident that fabricated allegations of what supposedly had happened in Srebrenica would symbolically raise that already pejorative portrayal to an entirely new level.

After the fall of Srebrenica to Serbian forces on 11 July 1995 and the execution of a certain number of prisoners that the Serbs had captured, the watchword that marked subsequent discourse about Srebrenica in Western media and political circles became “genocide.” With amazing swiftness which suggests prior planning and preparation an account – which largely persists to the present day – was cobbled together. It alleged that in the aftermath of entering Srebrenica Serbian forces murdered in cold blood “8,000 men and boys” that they had captured, committing not merely a war crime or an atrocity expected to occur in most civil conflicts but a qualitatively far greater outrage: the “first genocide in Europe after the Second World War”.

In order to lend credibility to this extraordinarily bold charge, with the acquiescence of the UN Security Council, where in the 1990s the three Western powers reigned supreme, and in disregard of the UN Charter which makes no provision for such a court, a special Tribunal was created to put a seal of legal finality to Srebrenica allegations and to recompose local history so that commission of “genocide” would flow naturally from the “factual context” the Tribunal was tasked to establish.

That is how the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) at the Hague came into being. It was an illegal court set up not to sort out the facts but to rubber stamp preordained political conclusions dictated to it.

The alleged factual matrix of Srebrenica was elaborated first by collective West media outlets and in the statements of high-ranking political figures, only subsequently to be given a pseudo-judicial imprimatur by being copy/pasted into the Tribunal’s judgments.

Notwithstanding that the Hague Tribunal was a fully controlled operation, in the course of its proceedings evidence slipped through the cracks that was incompatible with the main thrust of its pre-programmed judgments. The results of exhumations, conducted by ICTY Prosecution forensic experts, of mass graves associated with execution victims projected a picture completely at variance with the official account.

The exhumation of human remains – performed under the supervision of the ICTY – recorded a total of 3,568 “cases” and it tells the following story:

Only 442 exhumed bodies could be classified as indisputable execution victims, as they had either blindfolds or ligatures;
627 bodies had shrapnel or other metal fragment injuries, which points to death in combat rather than execution;
505 bodies had bullet injuries, which may indicate death by execution, but also death in battle;
Cause of death could not be determined for 411 bodies;
583 of the “cases” presented only body fragments, and ICTY forensic experts concluded that cause of death could not be determined for 92.4% of them.
Finally, in order to make the most accurate possible estimate of the number of actual bodies among the 3,568 “cases”, forensic analysts used a method by which left and right thigh bones (femurs) were matched. That gave a total of 1,919 right femurs and 1,923 left femurs, which means that the total number of bodies whose death may have resulted not only from execution but also from a variety of other causes was under 2,000, not coming even close to the 8,000 execution victims claimed by the official Srebrenica narrative.

On closer examination even of the Tribunal’s own evidence the Srebrenica death toll for both ethnic warring parties in Bosnia is roughly equivalent and in neither case does it fit the Genocide Convention’s definition of the crime.

Israeli Holocaust historian and director of the Simon Wiesenthal Centre, Efraim Zuroff, has pointed that out, asserting that “not every war crime is … a case of genocide, and Srebrenica is a classic example, since all the women and children were spared by the Bosnian Serb forces. If the Bosnian Serbs were intent on committing genocide, they would have murdered all the Bosnian Muslims gathered in Srebrenica.”

Echoing the words of Noam Chomsky (“If Srebrenica was genocide we must invent another word to describe what happened in Auschwitz”) Zuroff argued that mislabelling “Srebrenica as a case of genocide will further weaken and erode the significance of a term which still continues to serve as an important warning to humanity about the dangers of wars and conflicts.”

Accordingly, Zuroff rejects the application of the term “genocide” in instances which do not fulfil the criteria of the original definition of that crime. “What has happened in the past few decades,” he wrote in the Jerusalem Post, is that accusations of genocide have emerged as a political tool to be used against enemies to attain geographic and/or financial gains by claiming lost territory and/or reparations for damages incurred.”

Zuroff is spot on, at least as far as Srebrenica is concerned, where a deliberately distorted concept of genocide has been weaponised as a political tool par excellence.

Confining the discussion of the toxic consequences of misdesignating Srebrenica as genocide to the foreign policy domain, it suffices to point out that implementation of the infamous doctrine of the “Responsibility to Protect,” or R2P, has done nothing to improve the human condition. That criminal project was rationalised directly by the duplicitous refrain “never again Srebrenica,” launched by intellectual clowns of the ilk of Bernard-Henri Lévy (at 04.54 minutes into the video). Its practical results, however, have been nothing less than disastrous. Under a moralistic façade, the predatory doctrine and Levy’s pompous slogan have inspired ruthless Western military interventions, causing the destruction of independent countries and the killing of millions of their innocent inhabitants. In every instance where R2P was invoked with reference to Srebrenica the real motive for intervention was never alleviation of a humanitarian crisis but overthrowing a government which had insisted too vocally on its right to sovereignty. The secondary motive was always as nefarious as the first: to occupy a country in order to strip it of its natural resources.

Destruction and death in regions far away from Bosnia and unrelated to it have been Srebrenica’s bitter legacy.

https://strategic-culture.su/news/2025/ ... ic-legacy/
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 14394
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Blues for Europa

Post by blindpig » Sun Jul 27, 2025 5:36 pm

The case for media transparency within the EU just got sexy

Martin Jay

July 23, 2025

A recent report has exposed the European commission guilty of bribing journalist to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars for favourable coverage. How long can this go on?

While we witness the continuation of the European Commission chief’s anti-democratic control over the project but also a host of values like freedom of speech, a Brussels Eurosceptic think tank has revealed that the project bribes journalists for favourable coverage. In a recent report, MCC claimed that the EU was secretly pumping at least 80m euros a year into both print and broadcast outlets often under the guise of fighting fake news.

Yet the figure of 80m euros is wildly underestimated and in reality is likely to be three or four times this as the accountability and transparency of such payments are unsurprisingly buried in opaque accountancy practices with both the EU and media outlets themselves unwilling to be open to their readers/viewers.

Funding programmes are often presented using buzzwords like “fighting disinformation” or “promoting European integration” yet the reality is that it is a fund which is simply there to push propaganda for the project itself.

The truth is that the European commission in particular is advancing with a strategy to bribe media giants more and more to promote the EU with its tainted narrative. Ironically, it is Ursula von der Leyen who often talks about “facts” being important. Her pretence that she believes in the truth and an independent press is in itself an illusion on a grand scale and perhaps the greatest example of what “fake news” itself is, on the EU circuit. Just recently, the irony of her being close to losing her job as commission president gave her the opportunity to give us all a good laugh.

“Facts matter, the truth matters”, she said recently in her speech to the EU Parliament, just before a vote of no confidence was held against her. She said – stop laughing – she was willing to engage in debate — provided it was based on “facts” and “arguments”.

Yet there has never been an EU commission president who believes and benefits more in the dark art of bunging journalists and media more than Ursula. Indeed, the very media outlets who rushed to her defence when she was facing the jaws of defeat by a group of Eurosceptic MEPs recently are fake news outfits which have been receiving millions of euros of cash in brown envelopes for decades.

“Von der Leyen successfully defends against no-confidence vote and attacks right-wing extremists”, thundered Der Spiegel, while Deutsche Welle (DW) reported a failure by the right: “Right-wing extremists fail with no-confidence motion against von der Leyen”.

“Right-wing extremists”? Really?

Perhaps it’s worth noting that DW, to date, has received around 35m euros from the EU slush fund, according to the Hungarian think tank’s report which is compiled by Thomas Fazi, an Italian hack whose work is published on Unherd and who recently has published impressive investigations into the salami sliced power grab that the EU has been executing from member states. Ursula, of course, plays a pivotal role in that, as does corrupt media outlets like Deutsche Welle which is so spectacularly shite that its own German language service had to be shut down as no Germans would watch such gobbledygook garbage which champions the EU and Germany’s foreign policy ambitions.

This slush fund, aimed at boosting the EU’s status and relevance, has been around for quite a while but the report was revealing as it explains exactly how the European Commission goes about distributing the cash.

Traditionally, a big way the EU gets artificially positive coverage from Brussels events is via broadcasters. Outfits like DW, Euronews and most of the major state broadcasters across the EU benefit from a subsidy here, whereby the European Commission, European parliament and other institutions like the Council of Ministers provide filming, editing and studio facilities at their state of the art studios which, themselves, are a murky pit of corruption and embezzlement on a grand scale. These “studios” provide everything for national broadcasters who have “correspondents” in Brussels. TV production, particularly on location is expensive. The EU pays for everything saving state broadcasters like DW millions in production costs which is of course paid back by coverage from the outlet not only with a positive EU spin but often simply replicating the EU narrative. It’s propaganda on a level which would make Goebbels proud as the genius of it is that the relationship which forms between the broadcasters and the EU grows each day until the point where both realise they need one another more than they have previously realised. The result is that so-called “news events” in Brussels which are so boring and would never normally see the light of day if the editors back in Berlin, Paris or Rome would have their say, get air time. And quite a bit of it.

What the report didn’t cover was the contracts themselves with the private companies which run the studios who employ scores of technical staff. Curiously perhaps, it is the same Belgian company which gets the contract every six years when the budget is completed despite EU rules making this impossible. All the Belgian firm does is simply change its name. Corruption of course has to be the heart of this. Someone in the EU commission is getting a huge commission for this of course.

For newspapers, there is less money involved but the naked lust to push its own fake news is apparent, none the less with those who can really promote the EU and raise its profile favoured the most. According to the MCC investigation, the Information Measures for the EU Cohesion Policy (IMREG) programme has financed around €40 million since 2017 to media outlets and news agencies to produce content highlighting the “benefits” of EU policy. The report highlights examples where this funding is not clearly disclosed, effectively amounting to “stealth marketing” or “covert propaganda”.

Projects with Italian newspapers Il Sole 24 Ore (€290,000 awarded, with articles on EU funds’ positive impact lacking clear disclosure on the website) and La Repubblica (€260,000 awarded, with only a tiny EU logo on the project banner) are just two examples the investigation identifies.

A recent article by a German journalist has gone further and identified clear examples how EU cash given the media outlets is used expressly to generate fake news about events even beyond the EU’s borders, citing the report.

Franz Becchi of the German outlet Berliner Zeitung explained recently that EU cash used to buy favourable coverage even recently reached Ukraine.

“In geopolitically sensitive topics like the Russia-Ukraine conflict, media outlets receiving such funding may be incentivised to echo official EU and NATO positions” he writes. “In the past year alone, the EU allocated around €10 million to Ukrainian media” he adds.

The EU has become so brazen about its murky practices that it barely tries to hide the bribery which is going on. Even the names of the programs spell it out.

A program aptly called, “Journalism Partnerships”, has provided nearly €50 million since 2021.

Newspapers also receive considerable advertising revenue from the EU which uses these outlets to promote swanky Brussels “events”. Brussels consultancies also use their own slush funds provided by EU contracts for “publishing” promotional material to take out advertisements in EU publications. For years this was the case with the now defunct Economist-owned “European Voice” which sold almost no copies but was allowed a unique special access to EU officials addresses for its weekly print run “dump”. Its only income was via Brussels based think tanks, trade associations and consultancies who regularly took out full page advertisements. Perhaps unsurprisingly, its two last editors, took cushy, well paid jobs…yes, you’ve guessed it, in the media department of the European Commission.

For the big news agencies one might think that it would be harder to stuff cash into journalists’ pockets, or at least their owners. Not quite.

News agencies, in particular, are involved in several murky media initiatives. According to the report, in 2024, about €1.7 million was allocated under the “Multimedia Actions” program to establish the European Newsroom (ENR). It is claimed that this so-called “newsroom” brings together news agencies from 24 countries to produce and disseminate content related to EU affairs. These agencies — including AFP (France), EFE (Spain), Ansa (Italy), Belga (Belgium) – feed national newspapers with copy which of course has a strong EU slant and whose claims made by the European Commission are never verified.

Perhaps more worryingly is that many major news outlets are so ensconced in the EU sphincter and its fake news, that many have lost all contact with the discipline of news reporting and have become mere extensions of the EU propaganda machine. Some of these agencies are so on board with any preposterous propaganda schemes the EU can cook up that they even help Brussels shut down any examples of old-fashioned zealous journalism which might on occasion rear its heads in the member states themselves, presumably outlets which aren’t on the EU payroll.

Hold yourself from hurting your sides from giggling, but the EU actually has its own agency which finds journalists and outlets who report on it objectively. It names and shames them as “fake news” outlets and even has big media agencies who help it with its work.

The European Digital Media Observatory (EDMO), which supports networks to combat disinformation, has received at least €27 million over the past five years — a domain closely linked to the promotion of pro-EU narratives, MCC claims. The outfit presumably monitors thousands of websites on an hourly basis and when it finds articles which don’t follow the script and perhaps asks awkward questions, it sets the dogs on them. France’s AFP are one of those agencies who have signed up to the program.

Even the EU Parliament itself, whose small band of right-wing MEPs recently brought about the no confidence vote against darling Ursula, has sullied hands from greasing the palms of media. The MCC report claims that it dished out nearly €30 million for media campaigns since 2020. This funding aimed, among other goals, to “increase outreach to target audiences” and “boost legitimacy for EP campaigns”, particularly ahead of European elections. In plain English “bribe journalists to write about stuff leading up to EU elections” so as to assure a reasonable turn out. What it should be doing of course, now that it is licking its wounds after the mob of the EU elite and its gang of media outlets have smeared the MEPs behind the recent Ursula stunt, is campaigning for much more transparency when it comes to cash being given to journalists – perhaps an on screen logo for all journalists who do their “pieces to camera” in front of EU institutions, or an EU flag on all content which has received EU money for its coverage. Such a program needs a name, a decent paper written about its importance, a good number of MEPs who support it and, of course, media support. The more that the EU pushes this farcical program it has to pay cash for its own favourable coverage – not to mention its own fake news watchdog – the greater the case for accountability for the media who sign up to its tawdry deal. The chances of that happening though are about the same as Ursula turning up at a plenary session in one of her grandparents’ Waffen SS uniforms while doing the John Cleese infamous Hitler walk. MCC would be probably the only outfit in Brussels who could pull it off. Such a program should simply be called U.R.S.U.L.A.

https://strategic-culture.su/news/2025/ ... -got-sexy/

Couldn't resist...


******

Will Voters Turn to Corbyn and Socialism over Starmer’s Big Finance Love-In?
Posted on July 26, 2025 by Yves Smith

Yves here. Americans who have become disillusioned about the prospects for national candidates like Sanders who advocate for concrete material benefits for ordinary voters, aka socialism, might understandably be inclined to dismiss Corbyn’s efforts to seek leadership via a new party as quixotic. But things have changed since his last big. First, with Gaza genocide becoming even more visibly horrific, it’s much harder to make “pro Palestine = anti-semitic” stick. Second, as rise of Zohran Mamdani, and even more tellingly, the difficulty Team Dem and plutocrats are having in sinking his campaign, even in hard-core, heavily propagandized America, capitalism has resulted in such severe inequality and visible looting that voters are tossing the old guard over the side. The same impulse that produced Trump should if anything even more favor a bona fide socialist.

Early UK voter reactions indicate that Corbyn will be a force to be reckoned with, as in even if he does not become PM, he could come to command a big enough block of seats so as to lead a coalition essential to forming a government and hence influence policy. From Council Estate Media in New Corbyn party already bigger than Tories and Reform as 250,000 sign up in one day:

The new party founded by @jeremycorbyn and @zarahsultana might not have a name, but it already has over 250,000 sign ups. To put that in perspective, Reform has around 230,000 members and the Tories have 120,000. The evidence could not be clearer: people are desperate for change.

At Labour’s peak under Corbyn, the party had a membership of nearly 600,000 which has plummeted to 300,000 under Starmer. Most of the people who left Labour in disgust have jumped into the arms of the new party. Expect that trend to continue until the new party is the biggest in the UK.

I’m not sure if Starmer realises that constantly kicking his party’s members in the bollocks was a suicidal move, but he soon will. Remember when Angela Rayner said she would suspend thousands and thousands of members until everyone fell in line? Well, Corbyn sends his thanks!

To unpack this development a bit, in the UK voters can become party members, which requires them to pay annual dues and also allows them to vote in leadership contests. Recall it was Tory members who chose Boris Johnson to replace Theresa May in 2019, as opposed to UK voters at large. That outcome was widely criticized as undemocratic (although Johnson cemented his status as Prime Minister after a later general election).

Readers will not doubt offer additional observations on the new-found appeal of socialism in the Anglosphere, but a fresh article in the Financial Times provides a clue. From Why are young adults in the English-speaking world so unhappy?:

One of the most striking but under-discussed insights from this year’s World Happiness Report was that the marked worsening in young adult mental health over the past decade is primarily, if not exclusively, an Anglosphere phenomenon.

The share of young adults regularly experiencing stress and anger has risen sharply over the past 15 years in the US, Canada, UK, Ireland, Australia and New Zealand. But it has been largely stable elsewhere in the west, according to detailed data from the Gallup World Poll used in the report….

I want to throw another factor into the mix: housing.

While dozens of countries are dealing with deteriorating housing affordability, the issue is especially acute in the Anglosphere.

Image

Image

Image

Keep in mind that the British are underhoused compared to Americans, in terms of living space per person. so rental housing is almost certain to be more cramped than here.

By Carla Abreu, openDemocracy’s Audience Engagement Manager, journalist. She tweets @carlasabreu_. Originally published at openDemocracy

Welcome to openDemocracy’s weekly reader comments round-up. This is an opportunity for us to showcase some of the many carefully considered messages we receive on a range of topics.

These comments are edited for clarity, accuracy and length and don’t necessarily reflect openDemocracy’s editorial position.

Money makes the world go around, so they say. So, how come those who already have a shed load of it always seem to get more, while those living pay cheque to pay cheque never do? Also, it’s past time to put a stop to political donations from bankers and businesses. They are only giving money to politicians to increase their own wealth. Or do they expect us to believe they are just being philanthropic? Give me a break! –Vee

They’ve clearly forgotten Gordon Brown’s ‘light-touch regulation’. That was a Mansion House speech, too. It ultimately led to disaster in 2008/9. Which in turn led to George Osborne’s perma-austerity, which led to Brexit and the rise of Farage. –Judith

I switched my vote from Labour to the Greens many years ago. Yes, I know it’s a lot easier to make promises in opposition than it is to deliver policies when in power. But the Green Party’s policies are much closer to ‘traditional Labour values’ than those of the current Labour Party. –Steve

Ethan Shone makes the case that Rachel Reeves and the Labour Party are now a wholly owned subsidiary of the financial services industry and are focused on a corporate-privileging agenda. While this may or may not be exaggerated (after all, we might point to some non-corporate favouring actions this year), as an overall trend, it doesexplain Reeves’s position-taking. –Christopher

I was wondering how the current situation is different from under the Tories. Not in a ‘they’re all the same’ way, but whether finance correctly spotted a chance to get more radical (and profitable) changes pushed through because Labour is so vacuous and easily manipulated, while senior Tories who know better how the city works might pushback. –Bash

Do you not think that your question is simplistic? Socialism in one country, just like that? What world do you think we live in? You do risk sounding like entitled young things who expect to get everything they want without understanding the context at all. Working for socialism is harder than that, as your own research surely tells you! –Jennifer

I do think a socialist government is possible for the UK. Just look at what happened in 1945. There was a longing for a kinder, fairer, healthier world, with its shoots appearing even during the war.

Now we are approaching a tipping point, where the general public has had enough of both Big C and Small C conservative governments. Inequality is so clear to see, yet it’s getting worse. Old Labour principles have been thrown out in favour of ‘growth’ and cosying up to Big Business. Our services and local government are underfunded, reducing our quality of life, while the distortion of the housing market is increasing homelessness, and the government won’t meaningfully commit to ditching fossil fuels. The British people feel they deserve better, and it is possible they will demand it soon. –Susan

A socialist government is electable in the UK, especially if the left pulls together. However, it would need the support of other socialist governments to counter the corporate efforts that would undermine it, specifically deals that include investor/state dispute clauses, corporate arbitration and exemptions from national laws, as well as so-called free trade zones. –Lesley G

Of course it is possible! We’ve had socialist-led governments in this country in the past, though not really since Harold Wilson’s. It was with Tony Blair’s premiership that the rot set in within Labour; he was no socialist, and it all went downhill from his first day in office. Now, we’ve got middle-class, lawyerly Keir Starmer, whose bourgeois ways and colleagues, as well as his habit of ousting anyone whose ideology isn’t in lockstep with his own, make socialism an impossibility under what passes for a Labour Party today.

But there’s hope! Jeremy Corbyn has already had a very uneasy five years as the Labour leader before all those right-wing Blair hangovers managed to oust him. Now he seems to be planning to launch a new socialist party with the fresh and enthusiastic young MP, Zarah Sultana. There’s certainly a hunger in the electorate for a socialist party to represent them, even just to listen to them with left-wing ears, so to speak, and then move on from there with fresh ideas and additional active support.

I’ll do everything I can to help, little though that is. I’m rooting for them, and I know I’m not the only one. So yes, of course we can have a socialist-led government in England – even in the UK – just as we’ve had (too rarely) in the past. Live in hope, hope for the best but plan for the worst, all that kind of thing. –Val

Yes, in my country, Scotland, if it manages to gain its independence. I believe that English votes will bring the UK a Reform-led government at the next general election, and Scotland, just as happened when it voted to remain in the EU, will find itself outvoted – and governed by that right-wing bunch of charlatans.

Reform Ltd will not need a single vote from Scotland to achieve its goal of forming the next government, although it will get some with the money it is currently pouring into winning Scottish votes. But polling suggests that most people in Scotland intend to vote for the centre-left SNP which already runs the UK’s best performing, better paid and only strike-free health service, NHS Scotland; operates the internationally acclaimed Scottish Child Payment, lifting more Scots kids out of poverty than any other part of the UK; offers free bus travel for young and old; free prescriptions and tuition; more and better paid police with lower crime rates across all metrics; more teachers and GPs per head of population; better building standards – I could go on. In other words, it is a far more socialist government and is currently politically left of Labour. –Lesley M

I hope a socialist-led government is possible; it’s the only way to save our miserable species (though it may be best for all other species if we don’t survive). But until left-wing radicals can come together in a convincing way, I can’t see it happening. –Amanda

The prospect of a new party involving Jeremy Corbyn and Zarah Sultana appears immensely popular but would face tremendous opposition from the establishment and right-wing media. So, yes, it’s possible, but only if brutal opposition can be overcome. –Barrie

The more I learn about the world, the more I doubt that socialism is possible, and this is coming from someone who likes socialism. – CAT via Mastodon

https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2025/07 ... ve-in.html

Do these 'progressive' types even know what socialism is? Would Corbyn expropriate any capital, perhaps other than rail? And if he did there would be compensation, which is bullshit. I think the reason people confuse socialism and the welfare state is due to capitalist propaganda over the decades wherein any public beneficence or ownership is declared 'communism'. The reactionaries see 'slippery slopes' everywhere, the paranoia of a thief.

******

Britain vs. Trump
July 26, 2025
Rybar

" Why London Didn't Want His Return "

Given Britain's role in promoting narratives about Russia's interference in the US elections, a natural question may arise: why did the authorities in London need this at all and why did they dislike Trump so much?

The answer may be a Financial Times article , “US allies need to wake up to the Trump question,” published in 2023 and authored by Bronwyn Maddox , a British citizen and CEO of the Russian-unwanted organization Chatham House.

In the article, she writes that British foreign policy is largely based on the idea that the US will always remain the same, implying an unchanging course towards Russia, NATO, Europe and international institutions.

In the text, Maddox argued that a second Trump term would be destructive: support for the so-called Ukraine would cease, the British economy and technology industry would suffer, and American democracy in general was in danger.

And indeed, relations between the countries are far from ideal, and in some places there are fundamental disagreements . That is why London tried to interfere in the elections and ensure the victory of Kamala Harris and the Democratic Party, as more convenient partners.

And this means one thing: London will try to win back positions and arrange another long-running scandal in the style of "Russiagate" for the Trump administration. For example, by doing something on the Ukrainian track.

https://rybar.ru/britaniya-protiv-trampa/

"No peace with Russia!"
July 26, 2025
Rybar

" On the role of Chatham House in anti-Russian policy "

The mention of Chatham House in the context of British discontent with Trump is a reason to once again recall this organization, which is undesirable in Russia, created to develop ideas for the British government in foreign policy and financed by the Foreign Office.

If you look at the publications of the London organization, it becomes clear why its leader, Bronwyn Maddox, was so afraid of a second Trump term and the possibility of a change in American course.

What are the narratives of Chatham House?
The Institute's position on Russia has been stable for many years and boils down to "the West is right in everything" , as well as the fundamental inadmissibility of even normalizing relations with the Russian Federation, not to mention dialogue on equal terms.

Chatham House fundamentally denies Russia's right to a sphere of influence , openly speaking about the need to destroy the concept of a single Russian people and strengthen NATO's presence on the borders.

Narratives about domestic Russian politics - the British institute espoused narratives such as "Putin is losing power over voters" or "the Kremlin has weakened."

Chatham House considers only the complete defeat of Russia in the so-called Ukraine acceptable, proposing to ensure this by increasing economic and financial pressure.

The so-called Ukraine itself was directly called an anti-Russian instrument that needed to be pumped with weapons at the institute long before the SVO. In 2020, they even criticized Zelensky for his statements about the need for peace in Donbas.

For many years, Chatham House has been promoting confrontation between the West and Russia, denying even the possibility of dialogue. The arrival of a new administration in the US is perceived there as a threat to the established order of things.

As we wrote earlier, the publications of Chatham House are a great reminder that it is Britain that is the main beneficiary of the "war to the last Ukrainian". Any even conditionally peaceful initiatives of Trump will be torpedoed there.

In this regard, the question arises as to what exactly the British can do on the Ukrainian track within the framework of those very recommendations issued by Chatham House.

https://rybar.ru/nikakogo-mira-s-rossiej/

Google Translator

Some Russians cling to the notion that Trump is playing with a full deck. Ha!
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

Post Reply