Towards an “Oppressive Digital New World Order”. UN “World for the Future” Conference. 22-23 September 2024. Borderless “Enslavement Package”, Digital Control over 8 Billion People

By Peter Koenig

In less than two weeks, the United Nations will present during a special session – 22 and 23 September — of their 2024 UN annual meeting in New York, the World of The Future. It is a fully digitized world. For the UN AG meeting, a “package” of global digitization was prepared by the governments of Germany and Namibia. Of course, with the “help” of Big Tech and Big Finance.

This digital enslavement package will be adopted under almost complete exclusion of the public, of people like you and me.

Most parliaments and governments worldwide have apparently already agreed to it, so that the presentation and the so-called discussion during the UN Annual Conference is a sheer fig leaf, a mere farce.

This is the new “rules-based” way of forcing an entire population into a compact of a digital straightjacket, escaping from which is almost impossible.

People nowhere have been consulted or even informed. Governments worldwide were forced by the unnamed powers-that-be to accept a complete digitization of our future – what the WEF calls the 4th Industrial Revolution.

People, it is here!

No waiting for the end of the UN Agenda 2030. The goals have conveniently been advanced. You – and me – will be confronted with cash elimination, already started in many European countries and to some extent in the US; and even in some “developing countries” like India, without people’s consent.

All will be controlled, our money-spending, health data, food and eating habits, travels, TV viewer preferences, radio favorites, friends with whom we regularly meet and communicate, as well as others from the opposition camp; shopping / spending habits – and so on – all will be controlled digitally by the IT-digital corporate control system.

See this (in German) for the full story.

The means to do so is the benign looking QR code which has been gradually and gently introduced over the last two decades or so – and today has become a common appearance in our daily life. In many cases you may not be able to read a restaurant menu without downloading it on your personal QR code.

Who do you guess will control all personal QR codes? 

Exactly, you guessed right.

QR stands for Quick Response. It is a barcode on steroids. While the barcode holds information horizontally, the QR code does so both horizontally and vertically. The two-dimensional matrix barcode was invented in 1994, by the Japanese company Denso Wave, originally meant for labelling automobile parts.

Western control freaks quickly discovered its potential and captured it for their evil “program for the future of mankind”, left to the corporate IT world (with a combined worth of about 3 to 4 trillion dollars) for administering and imposing it on humanity. An individual QR code has basically unlimited storage capacity. So, it may know you better than you know yourself.

A Message of Hope from Archbishop Vigano

The debate or “negotiations” for this digital compact, officially take/s place on 20 and 21 September behind closed doors, during the UNGA, but the context had been discussed and agreed upon in several clandestine iterations, also called Revisions 2 and 3, which are published on the UN website for “The Summit of the Future”. See this.

Unfortunately, hardly anyone knows this page and even fewer read it. If people were better and more informed or would care to inform themselves, we might not stand before the digital abyss, as we do today.

It is not clear what corporate / IT, and civil society representation was part of these secretive “negotiations”. But for sure the World Economic Forum (WEF) and the Club of Rome, both headquartered in “paradise” Switzerland (it cannot be repeated often enough how “neutral” Switzerland hosts the bulk of these evil organizations, whose purpose is to reduce and control humanity), were party to the original drafting and the subsequent revisions.

The digital compact has no space for human choices. There is no way a “voluntary option” is available. In other words, an individual cannot say, “Thanks, but no thanks, I prefer to opt out of this digital world”. People are forced into this system, come hell or high water. That is the plan.

Governments’ choice to participate was equally blocked, as they were told it is a MUST, or else. We know what “or else” means.

There are no exceptions allowed in “full digitization” because they would throw global control, or Globalist Control, out of the window, or to the wolves, so to speak.

Exceptions would be a definitive hindrance for the impending One World Order.

The compact clearly explains the enormous advantages offered for the human wellbeing by digital technologies. Therefore, it is imperative that no gaps remain between people and countries, that ALL navigate on the same wavelength – namely full-digitally.

The goal of overall human wellbeing, as explained in the compact – no wars, no conflicts, no pollution, no noise, diseases under control, and more — justifies the rapid move towards full or ALL digitization.

Without directly saying so, this is the first step to a One World Order, and a One World Government. The latter executed by the UN, with a policy framework established by the WEF, and a GESTAPO-like tyranny imposed by WHO.

The UN has been fully co-opted into this humanity destroying enterprise which in hindsight can be traced back over the last 20-some years, while humanity was lulled into a deep slumber. It was finally made official, with a Cooperation Agreement between the UN and the WEF, signed in June 2019. Illegal as such, as the UN may not enter into agreements with NGOs, but de facto irrelevant in a rules-based-ordered world.

Besides, the UN’s resources and budget, currently depending mostly on contributions from member countries, could be easily replaced by the ruling paymasters, Big Tech and Big Finance, who eventually will call the shots. Deservedly in today’s world, where “who pays decides” mandates.

Future UN Annual Meetings could be considered as pro-forma shareholders meetings, or in WEF terms “stakeholder’s meetings”, without in fact having any power to change direction, or chart a different, more human course.

Digital Management is in control, with voiceless (trans)humanity following almost blindly. Those who are not blind and may resist can easily be digitally removed. Nobody cares. Mr. “digital” cannot be accused of murder. The rules-based order has no concept of killing; it is simply a digital disappearance.

In the ranks of the closer UN advisory services, we are to be expected finding the Big Tech IT corporations. They will decide in terms of digital directions, as they are given the playscript by so far unnamed Big Finance.

Do we, humanity, have a choice, an alternative, a way to get out of this digital stranglehold? We have, but only when we realize what is being planned, when we recognize the implications, and when we act not as individuals but when we are ready for shedding “system-imposed” individualism and adopt “Together we Can”.

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Get Your Free Copy of “Towards a World War III Scenario: The Dangers of Nuclear War”! 

Peter Koenig is a geopolitical analyst and a former Senior Economist at the World Bank and the World Health Organization (WHO), where he worked for over 30 years around the world. He is the author of Implosion – An Economic Thriller about War, Environmental Destruction and Corporate Greed; and co-author of Cynthia McKinney’s book “When China Sneezes: From the Coronavirus Lockdown to the Global Politico-Economic Crisis” (Clarity Press – November 1, 2020).

Peter is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG). He is also a non-resident Senior Fellow of the Chongyang Institute of Renmin University, Beijing.

Featured image: United Nations General Assembly hall in New York City. (Licensed under CC BY-SA 2.0)

The original source of this article is Global Research

Copyright © Peter Koenig, Global Research, 2024

https://www.globalresearch.ca/un-conference-future-complete-borderless-digital-control/5867564

Did Putin Just Issue the Most Serious Warning to Date?

By Drago Bosnic

When the special military operation (SMO) was launched to end the NATO-orchestrated Ukrainian conflict, Russian President Vladimir Putin was very clear about the direct involvement of any third parties.

This has prevented the political West from taking direct action in support of the Kiev regime, but it still didn’t prevent it from doing everything else in its power to avert the complete defeat of the puppets in Kiev. In fact, they even sent former UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson to sabotage the already signed peace deal that would’ve ended the NATO-orchestrated Ukrainian conflict a couple of weeks after the SMO started.

Several high-ranking Western officials admitted this in the last two and a half years, including monstrous war criminals such as Victoria Nuland. Even former top-ranking Neo-Nazi junta officials such as Oleksiy Arestovych lamented that the deal was beneficial to both sides, but the US-led political West had other plans.

However, while making sure as many Ukrainians as possible die a pointless death in a perfectly avoidable war with a military superpower, NATO also keeps trying to probe Russia’s reaction to various levels of indirect involvement of third parties. This includes everything from sabotage operations and ISR (intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance) support for the Kiev regime to terrorism and guiding NATO-sourced weapons to kill Russian soldiers and even civilians in some cases. Expectedly, Moscow is furious, but it’s still trying to keep its cool, as a direct response could easily result in global thermonuclear annihilation. However, Russian patience is regularly mistaken for weakness in the political West, which is why they keep sending ever more advanced weapons to the Neo-Nazi junta. After initially giving mixed signals about this, it seems the political West has now decided to take things up a notch (or a thousand).

Image: An ATACMS missile being launched from an M270 MLRS (Licensed under the Public Domain)

Namely, both the United States and United Kingdom have given the go-ahead for the use of their long-range missiles against targets deeper within Russia. For Washington DC, those are longer-range ATACMS missiles, while it’s the “Storm Shadow” air-launched cruise missile for London. In previous months, UK PM Keir Starmer said that he supports such strikes, only for the British military to deny such reports. The US is doing something similar, with Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin telling Zelensky that long-range strikes “won’t be a game changer” against Moscow.

Perhaps the political West is trying to use these sorts of intentionally misleading and contradictory statements as a Pilatian way to avoid responsibility for any escalation. However, President Putin just made it very clear that such a strategy is futile and that NATO will be held accountable. Namely, in a short interview with Russian state media, he actually said there will be a direct response.

“What we are seeing is an attempt to use a straw man argument. Because this is not a question of whether the Kiev regime is allowed or not allowed to strike targets on Russian territory. It is already carrying out strikes using unmanned aerial vehicles and other means. But using Western-made long-range precision weapons is a completely different story,” Putin said, adding: “The fact is that – I have mentioned this, and any expert, both in our country and in the West, will confirm this – the Ukrainian army is not capable of using cutting-edge high-precision long-range systems supplied by the West. They cannot do that. These weapons are impossible to employ without intelligence data from satellites which Ukraine does not have. This can only be done using the European Union’s satellites, or US satellites – in general, NATO satellites. This is the first point.”

“The second point – perhaps the most important, the key point even – is that only NATO military personnel can assign flight missions to these missile systems. Ukrainian servicemen cannot do this. Therefore, it is not a question of allowing the Ukrainian regime to strike Russia with these weapons or notIt is about deciding whether NATO countries become directly involved in the military conflict or not,” he continued and concluded: “If this decision is made, it will mean nothing short of direct involvement – it will mean that NATO countries, the United States, and European countries are parties to the war in Ukraine. This will mean their direct involvement in the conflict, and it will clearly change the very essence, the very nature of the conflict dramatically. This will mean that NATO countries – the United States and European countries – are at war with Russia. And if this is the case, then, bearing in mind the change in the essence of the conflict, we will make appropriate decisions in response to the threats that will be posed to us.”

⚡️The use of Western high-precision long-range weapons against Russia will mean direct participation of NATO countries in military operations in Ukraine — Putin

The Ukrainian army cannot strike with modern Western-made high-precision long-range systems, said President Vladimir… pic.twitter.com/0kKBAzsbw7

— Sputnik (@SputnikInt) September 12, 2024

This is the message, the be-all and end-all warning that should be taken as seriously as possible. In the last two and a half years, Russia has drastically changed its long-range strike strategy, as well as its nuclear doctrine, including recently, putting emphasis on its unrivaled strategic arsenal. The Kremlin simply needs to be ready to use its world-class thermonuclear weapons to secure basic Russian national interests. On the other hand, this is yet another neocolonial war for the political West, which simply wants to continue its parasitical existence at the expense of the entire world’s peace, prosperity and sustainable development. In order to put a final stop to this, Russia is working together with other superpowers, such as China, and various regional actors, such as Iran and North Korea. At Moscow’s helm, Putin is critically important to the rest of the globe as one of the leaders of the free world, which is why the political West even tried to assassinate him.

In fact, only two days after the attempt on his life, Foreign Policy, one of the most prominent outlets of the mainstream propaganda machine even published a piece titled “Would the US Consider Assassinating Putin?”, further confirming what Pepe Escobar, a colossus in geopolitical analytics, told me during an online meeting concerning this and several other important topics. It is only thanks to Putin’s unrivaled patience, self-control and cool-headedness did we not see monstrosities such as the RS-28 “Sarmat” launched immediately at all major NATO capitals. However, it seems the political West is determined to make sure exactly this happens, as they keep poking the Bear and trying to force it to respond as violently as possible. As the saying goes, be careful what you wish for… And indeed, if the US, UK and other pathologically Russophobic countries and entities keep doing this, the consequences might be global and permanent.

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Get Your Free Copy of “Towards a World War III Scenario: The Dangers of Nuclear War”! 

This article was originally published on InfoBrics.

https://www.globalresearch.ca/putin-most-serious-warning/5867766

Russian Hypersonic Dominance Results in Hundreds of NATO Casualties in Ukraine

By Drago Bosnic

As the entire US-led political West continues to lag decades behind Russia in hypersonic weapons, it keeps using various coping mechanisms to “explain” the gap.

This ranges from rather pathetic claims that Moscow “stole American hypersonic technologies” (they must’ve all been stored on a single hard drive that was snatched by the SVR over 40 years ago and the US hasn’t recovered ever since) to the laughable “need for perfectionism in the minds of American engineers”.

And while Washington DC is “perfecting” technologies it doesn’t have (remember, because the evil Russians stole them), the Kremlin is putting its very real hypersonic weapons to good use. Continuing months of unprecedented kill streaks with its long-range strike systems, Russia just obliterated hundreds of NATO personnel in Ukraine, forcing the world’s most vile racketeering cartel to send dozens of aircraft to Poland and Romania.

These are used to collect the casualties and send them off to their home countries. Numerous reports indicate there are hundreds of dead and wounded. The NATO personnel were stationed in Poltava and Lvov. The Kiev regime tried hiding and downplaying these losses, insisting that “50 people were killed” and that a “neighboring hospital was also struck”. Citing local sources, the New York Times reported that the “missiles struck with an unforgiving quickness: The Ukrainian Defense Ministry reported that the gap between the sounding of warning sirens and the strike was so short that many people were killed on their way to shelter”. Interestingly, the label “people” is often used to conceal the fact that these were NATO personnel. It’s also unclear where the Kiev regime’s air defenses were, otherwise fabled for their “50,000% interception rates” of Russian missiles, drones and other long-range precision strike weapons.

However, even the mainstream propaganda machine had to admit that the Kremlin targeted military assets. However, they still tried hiding the fact these were NATO personnel, calling them “cadets of the Poltava Institute of Military Communications in what marks a first in terms of targeting such a large gathering of soon to be commissioned officers”. Kiev keeps pushing a sob story about “classes and teaching underway at the military academy” when two 9M723 hypersonic missiles used by the “Iskander-M” struck. Ukrainian MP Oleksiy Goncharenko lamented that “the cadets” had only two minutes to leave the building, saying that it’s impossible to escape from “the sixth floor of some building and you need to run downstairs”. I’ve already covered the topic of just how little time a group of soldiers would have to leave a building after a hypersonic weapon such as the 3M22 “Zircon” is fired.

Some sources are claiming the missile strike wiped out at least 700 troops, nearly all of whom were specialists in ISR (intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance) and EW (electronic warfare). Reports indicate that many of the neutralized NATO personnel were Swedes, sent to train Ukrainian personnel to use the Saab 340 AEW&C (Airborne Early Warning & Control) aircraft, two of which were promised by Stockholm and are supposed to be delivered in the near future.

French Mercenaries and Military Contractors Targeted by Russia in Kharkov, Bad Omen for NATO Personnel in Ukraine

Interestingly, Swedish Foreign Minister Tobias Billstrom resigned in the immediate aftermath of the strike and announced that he’s retiring from politics. The two events aren’t necessarily related, but the timing is quite peculiar. However, that wasn’t the end of NATO’s troubles in Ukraine, as Russian hypersonic weapons continued raining down on other military targets in the country, particularly those with high concentration of foreign troops.

Namely, another Russian long-range precision strike targeted Lvov in Western Ukraine. The city is the capital of the homonymous oblast (region). A lot of critical military facilities are located in the area, including the infamous Yavoriv training camp, notorious for accommodating various Neo-Nazi units and foreign mercenaries, as well as NATO personnel.

The Russian military reported that the 9-A-7660 “Kinzhal” missile systems armed with the 9-S-7760 air-launched hypersonic missiles were used in the strike. Poland said it scrambled fighter jets because the area is quite close to its border. According to Reuters, “Polish and allied aircraft were scrambled for the third time in eight days to closely monitor the inbound projectiles, and were ready to intercept them in the event the missiles approached Polish airspace”. However, there’s nothing they could really do against hypersonic missiles.

Back in May, Moscow also used its hypersonic weapons to wipe out NATO personnel in Yavoriv, less than 15 km from the Polish border. The strike came right after speculation that the so-called “no-fly zone” (NFZ) could be established over Western Ukraine. For quite some time, Warsaw has been demanding that NATO starts shooting down Russian missiles. However, such proposals have been rejected repeatedly, as the world’s most vile racketeering cartel doesn’t have the backbone to fight Moscow directly and is doing so only through proxies, be it terrorists and extremists (including Islamic radicals) or entities such as the Neo-Nazi junta. Despite desperate attempts to portray it otherwise, NATO simply doesn’t have the means to intercept Russian hypersonic weapons. In the meantime, Moscow continues to obliterate overhyped Western-made systems all across NATO-occupied Ukraine.

This includes the now regular hunt for platforms such as the HIMARS and M270/MARS, as well as dozens of long-range strikes on all sorts of high-priority targets. Since late July, when I made a list of reports about the latest strikes (at the time), there have been numerous other attacks, destroying hundreds of NATO-sourced assets.

This includes strikes reported by Daily Journal and Military Watch Magazine, both on July 26. The MWM covered another one on July 28, as well as several more in August (hereherehere and here), while the South Front has been the most diligent in reporting about this in the last month or so, providing video evidence for around a dozen strikes (herehereherehereherehereherehereherehere and here). Numerous other sources also reported on similar strikes (hereherehereherehereherehereherehereherehere and here), which includes almost exclusively those with video evidence.

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Get Your Free Copy of “Towards a World War III Scenario: The Dangers of Nuclear War”!

This article was originally published on InfoBrics.

Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.The original source of this article is Global ResearchCopyright © 

Drago Bosnic, Global Research, 2024

https://www.globalresearch.ca/russian-hypersonic-hundreds-nato-casualties-ukraine/5867165

Another September 11th, “I Wondered Where Dick Cheney Was”. Edward Curtin

By Edward Curtin

Rolling out of my crib before dawn today (I was in it long before the charlatans Harris and Trump began their theatrical “debate”), it being another September 11th, I wondered where Dick Cheney was.

And I was still wondering where Elmer Gantry was, having received the previous day a form message from RFK, Jr.’s faith-based engagement team leader, Rev. Wendy Silvers, that she was conducting a “pop-up” prayer service for the great Ciceronians’ debate, with Bobby Kennedy in the press room, rooting for his boy Donald. Cheney and Harris vs. Kennedy and Trump. A tag-team match perfect for the World Wrestling Federation (WWF).

I had just dreamed, or so I thought, that Cheney was out night-riding his white stallion across the Wyoming hills, long gun tight aside his saddle, cowboy hat slung back with a full moon shining on his melonic noggin, sea-shells in his ears as he grooved from side-to-side to the music of that other Kamala Harris endorser, Taylor Swift. It’s always wonderful, wonderful, oh so wonderful to get political advice from a fully-clothed warmonger and a scantily-clad diva.

In my dream I heard another voice as night rider Dick ripped off his earphones and pulled back on the reins. “Dick, Dick,” an eerie voice rang out:

‘If you want to save your soul from hell a-riding on our range,
Then cowboy change your ways today or with us you will ride
-try’ng to catch the devil’s herd
Across these endless skies’
Yippee-yi-ay, yippee-yi-o,
The ghost herd in the sky.

That was it, I threw my old clothes on and headed up the hill to the lake to clear my mind of such a nasty flic. Dick hadn’t changed his ways since 2001, except to embrace Democratic war making instead of Republican. Actually, that’s wrong, for as Mr. Neocon, a signer of the bloodthirsty neo-conservative document the Project for the New American Century, he always welcomed and got bipartisan support to attack Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Iran.

The neo-cons who run the Democrats and Republicans alike, and whose document “Rebuilding America’s Defenses” most interestingly stated long before COVID-19 that “advanced forms of biological warfare that can ‘target’ specific genotypes may transform biological warfare from the realm of terror to a politically useful tool.”

You don’t say.

There was no need for these neocons to mention the Palestinians, of course, for their slaughter was guaranteed, not only because so many neocons held dual Israeli-U.S. citizenship, but because of all the Israel Lobby money flowing into the pockets of Congress. As for the Russians, attacking them was as American as cherry pie, for they were always coming to get us, just as those sneaky Chinese had their eyes on seizing California.

The Russians Are Coming the Russians Are Coming (1966) - IMDb

It was still semi-dark as I walked, with just the fingertips of a rosy-fingered dawn raising its hand over East Mountain. At the lake’s edge, two men in woolen caps and parkas sat meditating facing the mist-rising lake. I wondered why. Were they seeking personal peace of mind or illumination about the ruthless ways of their government? As I walked, I talked to myself and my own ghosts, watching as I went the disappearing vapor and the sky slowly turning blue.

I remembered that September 11, 2001 was also a very blue day until the black clouds flew in and that sparkling morning turned to smoke and dust as the three World Trade Center buildings were brought down by controlled demolition, not airplanes.

But where was Dick Cheney that morning? Not out on the range, no siree. He was riding herd on another roundup. He had taken control of the U.S. government under a Continuity of Government (COG) declaration, as Peter Dale Scott has documented:

Within hours of the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon on Sept. 11, 2001, Dick Cheney in effect took command of the national security operations of the federal government.

Quickly and instinctively, he began to act in response to two longstanding beliefs: that the great dangers facing the United States justified almost any response, whether or not legal; and that the presidency needed vastly to enhance its authority, which had been unjustifiably and dangerously weakened in the post-Vietnam, post-Watergate years.

James Mann has argued that COG implementation was the “hidden backdrop” to Cheney’s actions on 9/11, when he “urged President Bush to stay out of Washington,” and later removed himself to more than one “’undisclosed location’”.

Scott and authors James Mann and James Bamford further show how Cheney and his buddy Donald Rumsfeld of “unknown unknowns” fame were for a long time part of the permanent hidden national security apparatus that runs the country as presidents like Bush, Obama, Trump, and Biden enter and exit the White House and are falsely held up as leading the nation. “Cheney and Rumsfeld had previously been preparing for almost two decades, as central figures in the secret agency planning for so-called Continuity of Government (COG),” writes Scott. “It was revealed in the 1980s that these plans aimed at granting a president emergency powers, uncurbed by congressional restraints, to intervene abroad, and also to detain large numbers of those who might protest such actions.”

Why I Don’t Speak of the Fake News of “9/11” Anymore

Unlike this morning when I saw Cheney riding the range, on the morning of September 11, 2001, Cheney was in the Presidential Emergency Operations Center (PEOC) beneath the White House.

What exactly he was doing there I will leave to the reader’s research initiative. The great researcher David Ray Griffin’s many books about the attacks of that day would be a good place to start. Let’s just say he wasn’t listening to pop music, not presidential recommender Taylor Swift anyway, for she was just eleven years old that day. She was probably dreaming of writing her political music, Phil Ochs style.

Have you ever noticed how in all the presidential debates since 2001, the truth about what happened on September 11, 2001 is never discussed?

It is just assumed that the government’s version of events is true. It is a third rail of American politics; mention it and your goose is cooked.

Just this morning at the 23rd anniversary memorial service of September 11th in NYC, Donald Trump and Kamala Harris shook hands. (Anthony Fauci would be outraged, having said that “I don’t think people should ever shake hands again.”)

Was that handshake some sort of tacit agreement never to broach the subject of September 11th during the campaign? To suggest that both the attacks of that day and the subsequent anthrax attacks were linked inside jobs sounds so conspiratorial. That’s a voter turnoff.

Even I find accusing the U.S. government of a false flag attack conspiratorial, since that’s exactly what it is, as I wrote years ago about the linguistic mind-control used to convince Americans that they are ruled by a secret cabal of ghost writers in the sky. My words:

In summary form, I will list the language I believe “made up the minds” of those who have refused to examine the government’s claims about the September 11 attacks and the subsequent anthrax attacks.

  1. Pearl Harbor. As pointed out by David Ray Griffin and others, this term was used in September 2000 in The Project for the New American Century’s report, “Rebuilding America’s Defenses” (p.51). Its neo-con authors argued that the U.S. wouldn’t be able to attack Iraq, Afghanistan, etc. “absent some catastrophic event – like a new Pearl Harbor.” Coincidentally or not, the film Pearl Harbor It was in the theatres throughout the summer. The thought of the attack on Pearl Harbor (not a surprise to the U.S. government, but presented as such) was in the air despite the fact that the 60th anniversary of that attack was not until December 7, 2001, a more likely release date. Once the September 11 attacks occurred, the Pearl Harbor comparison was “plucked out” of the social atmosphere and used innumerable times, beginning immediately. Even George W. Bush was widely reported to have had the time that night to allegedly use it in his diary. The examples of this comparison are manifold, but I am summarizing, so I will skip giving them. Any casual researcher can confirm this.
  2. Homeland. This strange un-American term, another WW II word associated with another enemy – Nazi Germany – was also used many times by the neo-con authors of “Rebuilding America’s Defenses.” I doubt any average American referred to this country by that term before. Of course it became the moniker for The Department of Homeland Security, marrying home with security to form a comforting name that simultaneously and unconsciously suggests a defense against Hitler-like evil coming from the outside. Not coincidentally, Hitler introduced it into the Nazi propaganda vernacular at the 1934 Nuremberg rally. Both usages conjured up images of a home besieged by alien forces intent on its destruction; thus preemptive action was in order.
  3. Ground Zero. This is a third WWII (“the good war”) term first used at 11:55 A.M. on September 11 by Mark Walsh (aka “the Harley Guy” because he was wearing a Harley-Davidson tee shirt) in an interview on the street by a Fox News reporter, Rick Leventhal. Identified as a Fox free-lancer, Walsh also explained the Twin Towers collapse in a precise, well-rehearsed manner that would be the same illogical and anti-scientific explanation later given by the government: “mostly due to structural failure because the fire was too intense.” Ground zero – a nuclear bomb term first used by U.S. scientists to refer to the spot where they exploded the first nuclear bomb in New Mexico in 1945 – became another meme adopted by the media that suggested a nuclear attack had occurred or might in the future if the U.S. didn’t act. The nuclear scare was raised again and again by George W. Bush and U.S. officials in the days and months following the attacks, although nuclear weapons were beside the point. But the conjoining of “nuclear” with “ground zero” served to raise the fear factor dramatically. Ironically, the project to develop the nuclear bomb was called the Manhattan Project and was headquartered at 270 Broadway, NYC, a few short blocks north of the World Trade Center.
  4. The Unthinkable. This is another nuclear term whose usage as linguistic mind control and propaganda is analyzed by Graeme MacQueen in the penultimate chapter of the very important The 2001 Anthrax Deception He notes the patterned use of this term before and after September 11, while saying “the pattern may not signify a grand plan …. It deserves investigation and contemplation.” He then presents a convincing case that the use of this term couldn’t be accidental. He notes how George W. Bush, in a major foreign policy speech on May 1, 2001, “gave informal public notice that the United States intended to withdraw unilaterally from the ABM Treaty”; Bush said the U.S. must be willing to “rethink the unthinkable.” This was necessary because of terrorism and rogue states with “weapons of mass destruction.” PNAC also argued that the U.S. should withdraw from the treaty. A signatory to the treaty could only withdraw after giving six months notice and because of “extraordinary events” that “jeopardized its supreme interests.” Once the September 11 attacks occurred, Bush rethought the unthinkable and officially gave formal notice on December 13 to withdraw the U.S. from the ABM Treaty. MacQueen specifies the many times different media used the term “unthinkable” in October 2001 in reference to the anthrax attacks. He explicates its usage in one of the anthrax letters – “The Unthinkabel” [sic]. He explains how the media that used the term so often were at the time unaware of its usage in the anthrax letter since that letter’s content had not yet been revealed, and how the letter writer had mailed the letter before the media started using the word. He makes a rock solid case showing the U.S. government’s complicity in the anthrax attacks and therefore in the Sept 11 attacks. While calling the use of the term “unthinkable” in all its iterations “problematic,” he writes, “The truth is that the employment of ‘the unthinkable’ in this letter, when weight is given both to the meaning of this term in U.S. strategic circles and to the other relevant uses of the term in 2001, points us in the direction of the U.S. military and intelligence communities.” I am reminded of Orwell’s point in 1984: “a heretical thought – that is, a thought diverging from the principles of Ingsoc – should be literally unthinkable, at least as far as thought is dependent on words.” Thus the government and media’s use of “unthinkable” becomes a classic case of “doublethink.” The unthinkable is unthinkable.
  5. 9/11. This is the key usage that has reverberated down the years around which the others revolve. It is an anomalous numerical designation applied to an historical event, and obviously also the emergency telephone number.  Try to think of another numerical appellation for an important event in American history. The future editor of The New York Times and Iraq war promoter, Bill Keller, introduced this connection the following morning in a NY Times op-ed piece, “America’s Emergency Line: 911.”  The linkage of the attacks to a permanent national emergency was thus subliminally introduced, as Keller mentioned Israel nine times and seven times compared the U.S. situation to that of Israel as a target for terrorists. His first sentence reads: “An Israeli response to America’s aptly dated wake-up call might well be, ‘Now you know.’”  By referring to September 11 as 9/11, an endless national emergency became wedded to an endless war on terror aimed at preventing Hitler-like terrorists from obliterating us with nuclear weapons that could create another ground zero or holocaust. It is a term that pushes all the right buttons evoking unending social fear and anxiety.  It is language as sorcery; it is propaganda at its best. Even well-respected critics of the U.S. government’s explanation use the term that has become a fixture of public consciousness through endless repetition.   As George W. Bush would later put it as he connected Saddam Hussein to “9/11” and pushed for the Iraq war, “We don’t want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud.”  All the ingredients for a linguistic mind-control smoothie had been blended.

It’s getting dark now, the sun is setting and shimmering across the lake.  Shadows are falling, but to quote Dylan, “it’s not dark yet but it’s getting there.”  I hope to dream again tonight as I rock in my crib, not about Cheney and his ilk, not about Trump or Harris and the Spectacle, but maybe just about the lovely lapping lake I listened to today, thinking of Yeats’ poem, “The Lake of Innisfree,” set in the land of my ancestors, hearing its cadence that flows like a prayer. 

It is always the poets who remind us that words can be used to traumatize or transport one into a beautiful dreamer.

I will arise and go now, and go to Innisfree,
And a small cabin build there, of clay and wattles made;
Nine bean-rows will I have there, a hive for the honey-bee,
And live alone in the bee-loud glade.

And I shall have some peace there, for peace comes dropping slow,
Dropping from the veils of the morning to where the cricket sings;
There midnight’s all a glimmer, and noon a purple glow,
And evening full of the linnet’s wings.

I will arise and go now, for always night and day
I hear lake water lapping with low sounds by the shore;
While I stand on the roadway, or on the pavements grey,
I hear it in the deep heart’s core.

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Get Your Free Copy of “Towards a World War III Scenario: The Dangers of Nuclear War”! 

This article was originally published on the author’s blog site, Behind the Curtain.

Edward Curtin is a prominent author, researcher and sociologist based in Western Massachusetts. He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG).

The original source of this article is Global Research

Copyright © Edward Curtin, Global Research, 2024

https://www.globalresearch.ca/another-september-11th/5867891

GRÜNE JAMMERLAPPEN IM FREIEN FALL: SCHULD SIND NATÜRLICH DIE BÖSEN RUSSEN UND DESINFORMATION

Grüne als “Opfer von Kreml-Kampagnen”: Hofreiter (r.) redet sich bei Lanz um Kopf und Kragen (Foto:ScreenshotZDFMediathek)

Wie immer die Wahlen in Brandenburg heute ausgehen mögen, man kann davon ausgehen, dass die Grünen ihre weitere verdiente Abstufung und den nächsten Booster auf ihrem überfälligen Weg in die Bedeutungslosigkeit erfahren werden. Kein Wunder: Nach weniger als drei Jahren Ampel-Regierung, steht diesen zerstörerischen, brandgefährlichen Ideologen, die nie hätten in politische Verantwortung gelangen dürfen, das Wasser bis zum Hals. Ihr Klima-, Energie- und Migrationswahnsinn ist endgültig und – offensichtlich für alle außer ihnen selbst und ihrer medialen Claqueure – gescheitert. Dennoch ist ihr katastrophales Wirken überall sichtbar, denn dank ihnen versinkt Deutschland in Armut und Gewalt. Zu spät schlägt sich dies in ständigen Wahlniederlagen und sinkenden Umfragewerten nieder. Wie alle Verlierer der Geschichte suchen auch die Grünen die Schuld für ihren Niedergang bei anderen – und entwickeln bizarre Verschwörungs- und Dolchstoßlegenden. Am tollsten trieb es dabei Anton “Panzer-Toni” Hofreiter am Donnerstag bei Markus Lanz im ZDF, der CSU-Generalsekretär Martin Huber nach dessen Grünen-Bashing vorwarf, er würde sich an der Anti-Grünen-Kampagne des Kreml beteiligen, denn es sei ja “klar”, dass Putin und die russischen Geheimdienste hinter dem Gegenwind gegen die Grünen steckten.

Huber – der zuvor die Annäherungsversuche der Grünen an die Union als “fast schon politisches Stalking” und “Heranwanzen” beschrieben hatte – fragte verblüfft zurück, ob also jeder, der die Grünen kritisiere, im Auftrag Putins handele? Hofreiter eierte daraufhin spürbar herum, doch es wurde klar, dass man sich in der grünen Zentrale anscheinend wirklich diese Strategie zurechtgelegt hatte: Bloß die Fehler nicht bei sich selbst suchen, immer bei den anderen und im Zweifel immer bei den bösen Russen! Auch die Co-Vorsitzende Ricarda Lang blies in jüngster Zeit in dasselbe Horn und versinkt in Selbstmitleid: Es sei „ja schon so ein bisschen Volkssport geworden, Grüne zu hassen“, jammerte sie, und kündigte an, man wolle sich künftig stärker gegen angebliche “Falschbehauptungen” wehren – „am besten mit Humor“. Humor – ausgerechnet die Grünen, die 1.200 erfolglose Strafanzeigen gegen Kritiker erstatteten? Die Masche ist klar: Da es für Grüne undenkbar ist, dass die wachsende Abneigung der Wähler an ihrer Politik liegen könnte, müssen irgendwelche finsteren Mächte dahinterstecken. Jede Kritik an ihnen sehen sie pauschal als „Desinformation, deren Verbreitung auch gleich die ganze Gesellschaft gefährde. Und als Urheber bietet sich – neben den obligatorischen Nazis, die die Grünen ohnehin immer und überall am Werk sehen – seit nunmehr über zweieinhalb Jahren, seit Beginn des Ukraine-Krieges, eben Putin an, dem man alles in die Schuhe schieben kann.

Gemeingefährliches Theater

Noch besser ist es natürlich, beides zu kombinieren, indem man den Niedergang der Grünen auf ein besonders perfides Komplott der angeblich vom Kreml geförderten AfD zurückführt: Bei jeder Gelegenheit faseln Grünen-Politiker wie unter anderem auch Robert Habeck nun plötzlich über „gekaufte Landesverräter und Faschisten“ oder behaupten, die AfD sei „der verlängerte Arm des Kremls in Deutschland und damit ein zunehmendes Risiko für unsere nationale Sicherheit“. Wer keine „Putinisten“ in der Landesregierung in Brandenburg wolle, müsse die Grünen wählen, schwadronierte der Co-Vorsitzende Omid Nouripour. Solcher Unsinn gilt dann natürlich nicht als Verschwörungstheorie – obwohl dies genau die Strategie totalitärer Systeme und Parteien ist: Wenn das Regime unter Druck gerät, können dafür nur ausländische Agenten verantwortlich sein, die den ganzen Staat infiltrieren, wenn man ihnen nicht entgegentritt. Und das geht aus linksgrüner Sicht nur mit immer neuen und rigideren Zensurmaßnahmen. Deshalb lassen sie sich von einem verfassungswidrigen, durch nichts legitimierten und aus ihren Anhängern zusammengewürfelten „Bürgerrat ein „Gutachten“ übergeben, in dem genau das Zensurregime gefordert wird, das Grüne und SPD errichten wollen.

Es ist ein gemeingefährliches Theater, das hier inszeniert wird. Grünen und SPD schwimmen die Felle davon, weil ihre Politik so katastrophal ist, dass sie deren Folgen selbst mit ihrer fast vollständigen Kontrolle der Medien nicht mehr vertuschen können. Daher lehnen es ab, sich noch länger dem demokratischen Wettbewerb zu stellen und wollen daher alle Informationen, die ihr totales Scheitern dokumentieren und anprangern, unterdrücken und diejenigen, die sie verbreiten, mit eilends erfundenen und völlig lächerlichen Pseudo-Tatbeständen einschüchtern. Dies ist die Absicht, die sich hinter dem ständigen Geschwätz über die angeblich von Putin gelenkte AfD verbirgt. Nun, da ihre über Jahrzehnte aufgebaute Hegemonie bröckelt, wollen die Linken die Freiheit in Deutschland endgültig abschaffen, weil sie sich der Illusion hingeben, dies würde sie irgendwie an der Macht halten. Tatsächlich offenbart sich ihre diktatorische Fratze dadurch jedoch nur umso deutlicher. Am Ende schaffen sie es damit wahrscheinlich, dass noch mehr Menschen endlich die Augen aufgehen und sie sehen, welche Kräfte sie in Wahrheit drangsalieren und bevormunden.

Vor UN-Zukunftsgipfel fliegt geplantes Notstandsrecht des Generalsekretärs aus dem Zukunftspakt

22SonntagSept 2024

20. 09. 2024 | Ab Sonntag findet in New York im Rahmen der UN-Generalversammlung ein Zukunftsgipfel statt. Dort soll ein Zukunftspakt verabschiedet werden. Dieser enthielt im Entwurf bis vor wenigen Tagen noch den Plan, dem UN-Generalsekretär die Macht zu geben, eigenhändig einen globalen Notstand auszurufen und den Umgang damit zu koordinieren. Dieser Plan wurde nun still und leise entfernt.

Die Notstandsrechte, die der UN-Generalsekretär auf dessen eigenes Betreiben beim UN-Zukunftsgipfel bekommen sollte, waren bis vor kurzem fast kein Thema in den Medien. Ich berichtete am 9. und 11. September auf deutsch und englisch:

weiter

Lawrow: Russland vollständig bereit für Krieg in der Arktis

Von 

Roland.M.Horn 

22. September 2024

  • von Roland M. Horn

(Zum Beitragsbild oben: Die Arktis (Orthografische Projektion) mit Landesgrenzen (Heraldry, CC BY-SA 3.0 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/, via Wikimedia Commons))

Wie die Online-Seite der Frankfurter Rundschau am 21. September 2024 vermeldet, ist Russland nach eigenen Angaben “vollkommen bereit” für einen Konflikt mit der Nato in der Arktis, wie Russlands Außenminister Sergeij Lawrow verlauten ließ.

Lawrow:

“Wir sehen, dass die Nato ihre Übungen im Zusammenhang mit möglichen Krisen in der Arktis intensiviert.”

Lawrow tätigte seiner Aussagen russischen Staatsmedien zufolge in Kommentaren für eine Dokumentarserie. Wie der Autor des Artikels, Christoph Gschoßmann, schreibt, hinderte Russland zuletzt US-Bomber an einem Arktis-Überflug.

Der russische Außenminister sagte weiter:

“Unser Land ist voll und ganz bereit, seine Interessen militärisch, politisch und aus Sicht der Verteidigungstechnologien zu verteidigen.”

Nur sieben von acht Arktis-Staaten sind in der Nato – Russland nicht

Der nördlichste Punkt der Erde umfasst das Territorium von gleich acht Nationen: Norwegen, Schweden, Finnland, Dänemark, Kanada, den Vereinigten Staaten, Island und Russland und alle bis auf Russland sind NATO-Mitglieder. Finnland und Schweden traten der NATO erst kürzlich bei.

Lawrow gab zu verstehen, dass “die Arktis nicht das Territorium der nordatlantischen Allianz ist” und betonte, dass auch nicht-arktische Länder wie China und Indien dort Interessen hätten.

Zusammenarbeit von China und Russland in der Arktis?

Erst kürzlich warnten die USA vor einer Zusammenarbeit von China und Russland in der Arktis, nach dem sie einer zunehmende Zusammenarbeit beider Großmächte in der strategisch wichtigen Region beobachteten, wie die Vize-Verteidigungsministerin der USA, Kathleen Hicks, sagte. Durch den Klimawandel, genauer, das Abschmelzen des Eises in der Arktis, entstehen in diesem Gebiet neue Möglichkeiten, was Schifffahrtswege und Ressourcen betrifft.

Kremlin.ru, CC BY 4.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0, via Wikimedia Commons

Hicks stellte heraus, dass China “ein wichtiger Geldgeber für die russische Energieausbeutung in der Arktis” sei und es zudem eine verstärkte militärischen Zusammenarbeit beiden Länder fest, die “gemeinsame Übungen vor der Küste Alaskas ausführen“, sagte Hicks anlässlich der Veröffentlichung der Arktis-Strategie des Pentagons für 2024. Weiter sagte sie:

“All diese Herausforderungen werden durch die Auswirkungen des Klimawandels verstärkt,”

Wie Gschoßmann feststellt üben die USA bereits für den Krieg in der Arktis.

Russland stellt Zahlungen an Arktischen Rat ein

Bereits im Februar hatte Russland seine jährlichen Zahlungen an den Antarktischen Rat – ein zwischenstaatliches Forum der arktischen Anrainerstaaten – eingestellt, nachdem die anderen Mitglieder die Teilnahme Moskaus nach deren Invasion in der Ukraine boykottiert hatten. Die Zusammenarbeit wurde allerdings mittlerweile teilweise wieder aufgenommen.

Wie weiter verlautet, sorgte unlängst Russland mit einer Militärpräsenz in der Arktis für Aufsehen. Mitte September nahm Russlands Nordflotte an einem strategischen Großmanöver der Marine in den arktischen Gewässern ein. Sowohl die Nordflotte als auch ein Luftwaffenstützpunkt, von dem aus strategische Bomber zu Angriffen auf die Ukraine aufsteigen, befinden sich im hohen Norden Russlands.

Auch die Bundesregierung will in der Arktis mitmischen

Erst kürzlich äußerte die BRD-Regierung, dass sie vor allem aus sicherheits- und klimapolitischen Gründen ihr Engagement in der Arktis weiter ausbauen wollen. Wie die Außenministerin der BRD, Annalena Baerbock (Die Grünen), aus Anlass des Kabinettsbeschlusses zur neuen deutschen Arktisstrategie erklärt, habe sich “das geopolitische Umfeld auch im hohen Norden dauerhaft verändert” und weiter sagte sie:

“Russland verstärkt seine strategische Präsenz in der Region und tritt gegenüber den Nato-Anrainern der Arktis immer aggressiver auf.”

Die Ministerin fügte hinzu, dass die Arktis für die Sicherheit in Europa von “zentraler Bedeutung” sei, weswegen die Bundesregierung ihre Arktispolitik anpasse:

“Wir setzen auf enge Zusammenarbeit mit unseren Nato- und Wertepartnern in der Region, um auf die gestiegenen sicherheitspolitischen Herausforderungen zu reagieren und die internationale regelbasierte Ordnung auch in der Arktis zu verteidigen.”

Wird sich eine biblische Prophezeiung bald erfüllen?

Bereits vor einiger Zeit wies ich auf eine von Michael M. Collins vorgebrachte Verbindung der USA mit den zehn verlorenen Stämmen Israels und eine berühmte Prophezeiung aus Hes. 38-39 hin. (S. dazu auch hierhier und hier. Demzufolge würde in der “Endzeit” Russland – wie Collins aus der Prophezeiung herausließt, zusammen mit China und möglicherweise auch Indien – über den Nordpol in Amerika einfallen. (Ich behandle diese Thema auch ausführlich in meinem Buch Biblische Wahrheiten.)

O que “expansão” da OTAN, alardeada por seu secretário-geral, trouxe?

Global Times – 21 de setembro de 2024

Illustration: Liu Rui/Global Times
Ilustração: Liu Rui/Global Times

O secretário-geral da OTAN, Jens Stoltenberg, que está deixando o cargo, vangloriou-se de suas realizações durante seu mandato em seu discurso de despedida na quinta-feira, afirmando que, em 10 anos, o número de soldados da OTAN em seu flanco oriental aumentou de zero para dezenas de milhares, o número de tropas em alta prontidão aumentou de milhares para meio milhão e o número de seus aliados que gastam pelo menos 2% do PIB em defesa aumentou de três para 23. Montenegro, Macedônia do Norte, Finlândia e Suécia entraram para a aliança, aprofundando suas relações com os países da “região do Indo-Pacífico”. Stoltenberg também resumiu cinco lições que são fundamentais para o “sucesso” contínuo da OTAN no futuro, pedindo aos EUA e à Europa que não se envolvam em isolacionismo, declarando que “a liberdade é mais importante do que o livre comércio” e que a OTAN “não deve cometer o mesmo erro com a China” que cometeu com a Rússia.

No contexto da atual situação precária da segurança europeia, a autoexaltação de Stoltenberg soa como “pegar o roteiro errado”. No entanto, ao analisar o mandato de 10 anos de Stoltenberg, a “expansão” da OTAN de fato se destaca como um tema central. Além dos pontos que ele mencionou em seu discurso, as estatísticas mostraram que os gastos militares da OTAN aumentaram em mais de 30% durante seu mandato, atingindo um recorde de US$ 1,185 trilhão em 2024. Como uma aliança militar transatlântica, a OTAN também viu uma expansão estratégica, geográfica e baseada em conteúdo sob a liderança de Stoltenberg. Ela não apenas rotulou a China como um “desafio sistêmico”, aumentando repetidamente a “ameaça chinesa” e acelerando a “pacificação da Ásia” pela OTAN, mas também incorporou questões como cadeias de suprimentos e segurança tecnológica e econômica em sua agenda.

A principal questão é: além de autoproclamar a OTAN como “forte, unida e mais importante do que nunca”, o que exatamente essas expansões trouxeram para o mundo? Quanto do aumento de 30% nos gastos militares foi para os bolsos do complexo militar-industrial dos EUA, quanta ansiedade em relação à segurança foi espalhada pelo mundo e quanto disso foi feito às custas dos meios de subsistência, do bem-estar e da estabilidade social da Europa? É mais seguro ou menos seguro para os países da OTAN provocar um confronto com a China, seguindo a estratégia dos EUA para a China? É bom ou ruim securitizar e transformar em armas a cadeia industrial, a cadeia de suprimentos, o ciberespaço e outros campos, e injetar a mentalidade de confronto ao estilo da OTAN em áreas que poderiam ter cooperação e interação saudáveis?

Se quisermos fazer uma avaliação mais séria e completa da última década de Stoltenberg no cargo, essas são questões que não podem ser ignoradas, e as respostas são exatamente o oposto das conquistas que ele destacou. Com a Europa enfrentando agora uma situação de segurança tão precária, qual é a responsabilidade da OTAN?

Foi a expansão da OTAN que plantou as sementes da crise da Ucrânia, e sua extensão para a região da Ásia-Pacífico exportou as tensões geopolíticas para além da Europa. Sob a liderança de Stoltenberg, a OTAN se alinhou ainda mais aos objetivos estratégicos dos EUA, e todas as mudanças da OTAN refletiram as intenções estratégicas dos EUA. A avaliação histórica de Stoltenberg, além de ser o segundo secretário-geral da OTAN há mais tempo no cargo devido às divisões internas da aliança, provavelmente incluirá sua imagem como “executor leal” das políticas de Washington e sua “vanguarda”.

A OTAN deveria ter terminado com a Guerra Fria; sua sobrevivência e desenvolvimento sempre dependeram da criação de ansiedades de segurança e do envolvimento em conflitos, repetidamente. Por um lado, a OTAN alega ser uma aliança regional, mas, por outro lado, sob o pretexto de garantir sua própria segurança, ela se expande continuamente em nível global. Ela afirma ser uma organização defensiva, mas, em nome da defesa, promove a dissuasão e estimula o confronto. Stoltenberg tenta retratar a OTAN como protetora da segurança regional e até mesmo global, mas a retórica de que “a força militar é um pré-requisito para o diálogo” é apenas outra maneira de dizer “o poder faz a razão”.

Superficialmente, esse discurso parece muito mais uma declaração presunçosa de prontidão para a guerra deixada por Stoltenberg para a OTAN, mas, na verdade, as palavras nas entrelinhas não conseguem esconder o dilema e a perda da própria OTAN. Em meio à incerteza política interna nos EUA, qual será o futuro da OTAN e onde estará a segurança sustentável da Europa? Por trás de Stoltenberg, os países europeus e o mundo ficam em uma situação ainda mais dividida.

Na verdade, os 75 anos de história da OTAN provaram que ela não tornou a Europa ou o mundo mais pacífico e seguro. A existência e a expansão contínua da OTAN se tornaram a causa principal dos dilemas de segurança. Pelo contrário, a “longa paz” foi alcançada em lugares com menos intervenção da OTAN e mentalidade de confronto. O valor do discurso de despedida de Stoltenberg e da expansão da OTAN da qual ele se vangloriou está em dizer ao mundo que o mundo atual não precisa de uma OTAN que provoque confrontos de campo e espalhe uma mentalidade de Guerra Fria, muito menos uma OTAN em expansão global. Pedimos que a OTAN se “aposente” junto com seu secretário-geral que está deixando o cargo, juntamente com os conceitos ultrapassados da mentalidade da Guerra Fria e do jogo de soma zero, as práticas erradas de defender a força militar e buscar a “segurança absoluta” e os comportamentos perigosos que perturbam a Europa e a Ásia-Pacífico o mais rápido possível.


Fonte: https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202409/1320114.shtml

Создайте подобный сайт на WordPress.com
Начало работы