El compromiso adquirido por el presidente Pedro Sánchez de alcanzar el 2% del PIB en gasto militar en 2029 en la Cumbre que tuvo lugar en Madrid en junio de 2022, se ha traducido en un gran aumento del armamentismo hasta alcanzar cifras nunca vistas en 45 años de democracia en España.
En el período de cuatro años (2020-2023) de la legislatura de Gobierno entre PSOE y Unidas Podemos, se han llevado a cabo unas inversiones de 24.139,7 millones de euros en Programas Especiales de Modernización (PEM, antes llamados PEA), que totalizan 21 nuevos programas y cuatro modificaciones de los ya existentes. Estos compromisos hipotecan el gasto de futuros gobiernos hasta el año 2035 y previsiblemente aumentarán la deuda
El presupuesto del Ministerio de Defensa aumentó en 2023 un 23,4% con respecto a 2022 y, debido a los compromisos adquiridos en inversiones de nuevos PEM, el próximo año 2024 volverá a subir en un porcentaje no menor, sobrepasando de nuevo el tan manido 2% del PIB en gasto militar que exige la OTAN.
Por otro lado, están las inversiones en I+D militar para desarrollar los PEM. En este año 2023 el Gobierno ha destinado 1.833 millones, un 11,2% sobre el total de la I+D en ayudas públicas a la I+D militar para el desarrollo de nuevas armas.
Esta cuantía aumentó un 95% con respecto al año anterior, pasando de 938,5 M€ en 2022 a 1.833,3 M€ en 2023, contribuyendo en los últimos diez años a un crecimiento del 361,7%.
El pasado 13 de marzo se anunció que no se presentará para su aprobación en el parlamento del proyecto de ley de presupuestos generales del estado que estaba en negociación y que, por tanto, continuará la vigencia de la prórroga de los presupuestos aprobados en 2023.
En lo que respecta al gasto militar la prórroga es engañosa y no supone, en modo alguno, que el gasto militar de 2024 sea el mismo que el previsto en 2023 y, mucho menos, que el efectivamente ejecutado (muy superior al aprobado) para dicho año.
En el presente informe intentaremos acercarnos a una estimación del que podría ser (dado que la falta de presupuesto lo que hace es convertir en más opaco si cabe nuestro gasto militar) el gasto militar 2024.
También propondremos algunos puntos sobre los que habrá que estar vigilantes a lo largo del año para detectar las partidas y autorizaciones de gasto militar que se irán haciendo para provocar el aumento del gasto militar por encima del prorrogado.
Para ello, en un primer momento, recordaremos la cifra de gasto militar que en 2023 se presupuestó y los componentes ocultos en los que se distribuía. También veremos en un momento el crecimiento extrapresupuestario de este gasto militar “reconocido” según la intervención general de la Administración del Estado (IGAE), órgano público de fiscalización del gasto público.
La IGAE, sin embargo, no controla específicamente el gasto militar, ni desagrega el gasto por los distintos programas y partidas que disfrazan gasto militar en otros ministerios ajenos a Defensa, por lo que los datos obtenidos sólo nos darán una aproximación al gasto efectivamente ejecutado durante 2023 y a la cifra total de gasto militar español.
En un segundo momento analizaremos diversos parámetros que nos permiten estimar el crecimiento del gasto militar español para 2024 y ofrecer una cifra aproximada que sirva de referencia.
También analizaremos, desde una perspectiva antimilitarista, las principales tendencias y objetivos que dicho gasto pretende cubrir y algunos de los movimientos políticos a los que habremos de estar vigilantes para denunciar el crecimiento de dicho gasto.
Memorial Day is over. The state has successfully baptized itself with the blood of its fallen soldiers. It has been symbolically buried in a mass grave of its own making and resurrected to flood the world with very real blood. Yet, it cannot rid itself of what regime intellectuals call the “Vietnam Syndrome,” and this is cause for hope.
The state has masterfully obscured the costs of its wars—costs which are massive. As former U.S. Marine Captain Matthew Hoh put it during a Memorial Day speech:
“…the costs of war is the cost to our society, the cost to our identity, the cost to our history, to our narrative, who we are; this idea that was so romanticized, so valorized, and these notions that extend whether they’re political, whether through Hollywood, whether through the history books provided in our classrooms, the storytelling, the narrative… it’s mythmaking. It’s mythmaking. And that’s what we advance further wars upon.”
The United States Imperial Government (USIG) has its blood-soaked hands full with current wars even as it works to advance further wars.
There is its longest running war, in Somalia, which began in late 2001 after the USIG invaded Afghanistan. It’s not going well. There is its most recent war in Yemen, which went so bad, so fast one hardly hears about it.
There are counterterrorism operations being run all over West Asia and Africa. Success has been elusive, but failure has been truly globalized. And there are the USIG’s two primetime, proxy wars in Ukraine and Israel.
In Ukraine, the USIG is waging a proxy war against the nuclear-armed Russian state. In Israel, the USIG is waging a proxy war against unarmed women and children in tents. Which is worse? We’ll let future historians argue about it.
The lack of humanity displayed by our rulers in the face of Ukrainian and especially Gazan suffering has horrified the world. But consider the regime’s willingness to stack Ukrainian and Israeli soldier corpses.
USIG apologists have been shockingly candid about the Ukrainian carnage. As the American journalist and novelist David Ignatius put it last summer:
“…for the United States and its NATO allies, these 18 months of war have been a strategic windfall, at relatively low cost (other than for the Ukrainians).”
No one in the War Party talks about Israel this way. No one says, “We’re degrading these women and children at relatively low cost (other than to the IDF conscripts).” But that is exactly what is happening. Structurally, the USIG is in the exact same role in Israel as it is in Ukraine.
It’s a position the USIG relishes, waging war with other nation’s children, because it remains haunted by the Vietnam Syndrome. As Libertarian Institute Director Scott Horton said:
“By 1979, ‘Vietnam’ had already become a shorthand term for bloody, no-win, far-flung quagmire that breaks the military and treasury and causes terrible disruptions to society back home. Badly burned by the experience, the American people were even said by the political establishment to have come down with the lamented ‘Vietnam Syndrome’ — such a severe reluctance to engage in any further overseas military conflicts that it amounted to a form of illness.” [Emphasis added]
A “bloody, no-win, far-flung quagmire” is a good description of empire. The American people do not want to sacrifice their sons and daughters for empire, which is why the USIG always needs to trick them into war and can’t admit to running an empire. Regime intellectuals (a sick bunch) interpret this reality as a mental illness originating in Vietnam. But it can be traced at least as far back as the end of World War II, when Army Chief of Staff George Marshall proposed garrisoning the globe with 2.5 million soldiers:
“The problem was, the army had to agree. Marshall’s plan to keep men overseas provoked a furious reaction. Families of servicemen blasted their representatives with letters and buried congressional offices in baby shoes, all bearing tags reading BRING DADDY HOME.”
President Richard Nixon dedicated an entire chapter to Vietnam Syndrome in his 1980 book The Real War:
“Unless the United States shakes the false lessons of Vietnam and puts the ‘Vietnam syndrome’ behind it, we will forfeit the security of our allies and eventually our own.”
If Jordan Peterson ever lectured on it, he might point out that Nixon places his “Vietnam Syndrome” chapter approximately 46% of the way into the book, the same timing as The Odyssey uses to place Odysseus’ descent into the underworld. Nixon follows this up with the midpoint chapter, “The Awakening Giant,” which simultaneously invokes World War II and portrays America as a god-like superpower. Similarly, The Odyssey associates Odysseus with the Sun God in its midpoint chapter.
President George H.W. Bush claimed to have “kicked” Vietnam Syndrome with Desert Storm, like it was some sort of opiate addiction. He seems to have believed it, but he was wrong. The war was quick and only a few hundred soldiers were killed. The true costs of the war were, of course, hidden. Gulf War Syndrome was real.
But Americans didn’t have to endure tens of thousands of their children coming home in body bags for empire. Americans like blowing stuff up as much as the next guy (unless the next guy is a Zionist) but they do not like heavy casualties. The hate it so much, the Pentagon hides the true number of Americans killed in its wars by using contractors. The propaganda has done such an amazing job making anyone who puts on an American military uniform sacred, Americans get really upset when any of them get killed.
In order to wage direct war upon Russia, or women and children in tents, or Hezbollah, or Iran, the USIG would have to conscript millions of Americans into its military. This would enrage the American people; it would look like the USIG was waging a regime change operation on itself. It’s not much, but it’s all we’ve got.
*John focuses on the application of “Corporate Agent Theory” to the State. He argues that, despite their lack of phenomenal consciousness, states have their own beliefs, desires and intentions. Above all, states desire war
Benjamin Netanyahu hasn’t won over President Joe Biden, although in January he claimed he could. However, he did win the duel by preventing the White House from opposing his policies. Before our very eyes, he refuses to obey the UN Security Council and the International Court of Justice. He practices ethnic cleansing in both Gaza and in the West Bank. Even if it wanted to, no one could do anything to stop its crimes.
The prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, Karim Khan, warned against any attempt to pressure ICC staff. He wasn’t speaking in a vacuum, according to “+972 Magazine”, “Local Call” and “The Guardian”, Mossad blackmailed Karim Khan’s predecessor, Fatou Bensouda, from 2016 to 2021. At the time, the aim was not to conceal current crimes.
At the end of January this year, 12 serving Israeli ministers, including Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, took part in a big show, organized in Jerusalem, under the title “Conference for Israel’s Victory – Settlements Bring Security: Returning to the Gaza Strip and Northern Samaria” [1]. On this occasion, the organizers threatened the Anglo-Saxons with the reconstitution of the Stern Group, which had fought against the Allies during and after the Second World War, if they opposed the colonization of the Gaza Strip and the West Bank.
In other words, the fascist Vladimir Ze’ev Jabotinsky had always wished to appropriate “Eretz Israel” (i.e. all the territories from the Nile to the Euphrates, including Israel, the Palestinian Territories, Lebanon, Jordan, Syria and part of Iraq), the “Promised Land”, “Greater Israel”. In calling Jabotinsky a “fascist”, I’m not making a value judgment. I’m simply pointing out that he was an ally of Benito Mussolini, both before and during the Second World War. [2].
Four months ago, Jabotinsky’s followers demanded that they be allowed to carry out this project, to expel the Arabs from Palestine and conquer the entire region.
Washington reacted by taking unilateral coercive measures against the “Jewish supremacists” of the West Bank (February 1, 2024) [3], then by imagining an overthrow of Benjamin Netanyahu in favour of Benny Gantz [4], by suspending arms deliveries and, finally, by trying to impose a peace agreement. By “Jewish supremacists”, I mean the followers of Rabbi Meir Kahane, who were banned from sitting in the Knesset, but now rule the roost.
At the same time, the UN Security Council, under pressure from the General Assembly after several U.S. vetoes, finally adopted a resolution on March 25 calling for a humanitarian ceasefire in Gaza [5]. However, Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield, U.S. Special Representative to the U.N., in defiance of the U.N. Charter, immediately claimed that the resolution was non-binding, meaning that Israel could decide not to implement it. For its part, the International Court of Justice (ICJ), aligning itself with the rhetoric of the White House, first ordered Israel to take precautionary measures to avoid genocide [6], then ordered it to withdraw immediately from Rafah [7].
Now, on the initiative of the Speaker of the House of Representatives (Mike Johnson), the Presidents of the Republicans in the Senate (Mitch McConnell), the Democrats in the Senate (Charles Schumer) and in the House (Hakeem Jeffries), have just extended an invitation to Benjamin Netanyahu to speak before the members of Congress. In so doing, the U.S. Legislative Branch opposes the Executive Branch and clearly supports the ongoing ethnic cleansing.
The “revisionist Zionists” (as Jabotinsky called members of his school of thought) thus failed to impose their will on President Joe Biden, but succeeded in imposing it on Congress. How did they do it?
Back in 2015, Congress invited Benjamin Netanyahu to the White House, even though President Barack Obama refused to host him. During his speech, according to the “New York Times”, embassy agents monitored parliamentarians who did not applaud in order to punish them.
CONGRESSIONAL SUPPORT AGAINST THE WHITE HOUSE
The Speaker of the House of Representatives, Republican Mike Johnson (Louisiana), is an evangelical lawyer [8]. But he is above all a “Christian Zionist” for whom the defense of Israel, whatever it does, is a religious duty. He was elected Speaker of the House in troubled circumstances, with the unexpected help of the ultra-conservative Freedom Caucus, which opposed raising the public debt ceiling.
Mitch McConnell, chairman of the Senate Republican Caucus, scornful of International Law [9] in the name of “American exceptionalism” [10], has long been known for his pro-Eretz Israel positions. In 2017, this Baptist had urged US presidents to “respect the practice of vetoing all UN Security Council resolutions that seek to insert the UN into the peace process, not recognize unilateral Palestinian actions, including the declaration of a Palestinian state, or dictate terms and timelines for a solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict” [11].
Hakeem Jeffries, chairman of the House Democratic Caucus, is also known for his consistent alignment with the positions of the State of Israel. Although he has not defended the principle of ethnic cleansing of Arabs in Palestine, he has spoken out widely in favour of the extermination of Hamas members, without distinguishing between those affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood and those from the Palestinian Resistance.
The most surprising case is that of Chuck Schumer, Chairman of the Senate Democratic Caucus. For 43 years, this ultra-Orthodox Jew has supported all Israeli positions on principle, until his spectacular reversal in March, when he declared that it was possible to be both pro-Israel and oppose Benjamin Netanyahu’s policies [12]. At the time, he was firmly opposed to Netanyahu visiting the United States. He did, however, give Netanyahu the floor, later, on video before his caucus and, today, by receiving him in his capacity as Israeli Prime Minister, in Congress.
Of these four, only Chuck Schumer is Jewish. But the other three owe their re-election largely to the financial support of America’s Jewish oligarchs. They correspond to the emblematic politicians that John Mearsheimer denounced in his study The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy. American democracy was for sale, and the pro-Israelis bought it.
IMPOSSIBLE TO MAKE DECISIONS CONTRARY TO THOSE OF “REVISIONIST ZIONISTS
By way of comparison, the state of democracy is different in the United States and France. It’s true that in both cases, electoral backers have a greater influence on national policy than the electorate, but the characteristics are not the same. In Washington, no one is surprised by the sectarian religions of elected officials. You can be a member of parliament, a member of the government, even the president, and still believe in Gog and Magog. In Paris, on the other hand, the religious and ethnic affiliations of elected officials are ignored. We could therefore find ourselves, as we do today, without anyone being aware of it, with half the presidencies of constitutional institutions held by citizens likely to acquire Israeli nationality.
In either case, it is impossible for the Executive to take decisions that run counter to the policy of the State of Israel, or even, in the case of the United States, to that of the “revisionist Zionists”, i.e. the neo-fascists who are openly practicing ethnic cleansing in Palestine.
To get out of this situation, elected representatives would have to free themselves from their backers and not hesitate to reveal the support given by the Western camp during the Cold War to criminals against humanity. If Benjamin Netanyahu and his “Jewish supremacists” are in power today, it’s because the collective West has for decades found it in its interest to support their ideological current, despite having defeated it in the Second World War.
Last October, Galit Distel-Etebaryan, Israel’s Minister of Information, resigned in protest against the omnipresence of military censorship. Subsequently, the department’s top officers also resigned in protest at the use of the National Security excuse to censor investigations by the Israeli press.
OMNIPRESENT MILITARY CENSORSHIP
The crimes perpetrated by revisionist Zionists are state secrets. For decades, they have massacred communists and simple opponents all over the world. From Guatemala to the Congo, via Iran, from South Africa to Taiwan, via Bolivia, they took part in the worst twists of the Cold War. All these crimes are protected by implacable censorship [13].
Today, the Hebrew state has the most effective military censorship in the world. Hundreds of investigations by Israeli newspapers into the links between Benjamin Netanyahu, the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas, into the preparation of the October 7 attack, into the failure of the security services to respond for several hours, or into the real aims of the IDF in Gaza have been censored. In the last quarter of 2023, passages from 2,703 articles were redacted, and a further 613 were completely censored, admitted the military censorship service [14].
All we know about the events of October 7 is the official version, i.e. the lies. While we know that Hamas did not behead any children, contrary to the testimony of the rescue services, we know neither how many Israelis were killed by the attackers, nor who gave Ukrainian weapons to the Palestinian Resistance. Israel’s supporters continue to reason as if Hamas were a homogeneous organization and Benjamin Netanyahu was unaware that it was going to attack Israel [15].
To clarify matters, General Benny Gantz has filed a request for the creation of a commission of inquiry into the preparation of the October 7 attack, its execution and its consequences, a request which is aimed directly at the “revisionist Zionists” and which, for the moment, has no chance of being followed up.
It is likely that, much later, when it takes place and reveals the secrets, Benjamin Netanyahu’s current supporters will try to excuse themselves by saying that they didn’t know either. Indeed, there are none so blind as those who do not want to see.
[9] “What international order?”, by Thierry Meyssan, Translation Roger Lagassé, Voltaire Network, 7 November 2023.
[10] Actes du colloque organisé par le Carr Center for Human Rights Policy : American Exceptionalism and Human Rights, Michael Ignatieff, Princeton University Press (2005).
Russia’s development, simply by virtue of its size, history, culture, the human potential and economic opportunities cannot take place outside the global context. […] We are grateful to our guests for their attention and friendly attitude to Russia and their willingness for business cooperation that always rests on pragmatism, understanding of mutual interests and, of course, trust in each other, frankness and clear-cut positions. […] We invite all of you to take part in this largescale and equitable cooperation.
Vladimir Putin, President of the Russian Federation
At the WEF they are discussing the destruction of humanity.
Klaus SCHWAB Revealed the Terrible Plans of the Global Elites for the Destruction of Humanity by 2030!
The human species is subject to destruction
This is not a phrase from a movie. This is the plan of the global elites.
While you live in a consumer society, globalists dream of transferring you to a chemical diet, digitizing you and replacing you with bioengineered humanoids.
Another WEF participant talks about planning a “mass extinction” of humanity
Another leaked video from the World Economic Forum has emerged, showing Klaus Schwab’s advisers casually discussing their plans to depopulate the planet.
According to these two WEF stooges, all religious groups oppose the World Economic Forum because religions want “more souls” and the WEF “wants fewer on the planet.”
At what point do we stop and say «enough»? How many times must the World Economic Forum announce its sinister intentions before the world listens?
Klaus Schwab’s right-hand man Yuval Noah Harari has always said the quiet part out loud, and last week he admitted what many people have long suspected.
According to Harari, who was promoting his new book, the main political question of the 21st century is “Why do we need so many people?”
And this isn’t even the first time Yuval Noah Harari has let slip his plans for humanity. He recently stated that the WEF considers the vast majority of humanity to be obsolete, useless and unnecessary.
According to Harari, the so-called «ordinary people» are right to fear a future in which they will become «superfluous.»
He assessed widespread anxiety among «ordinary people» as rooted in the fear of being «left behind» in a future ruled by «smart people.»
Such fears are justified, according to Harari, who spoke on behalf of the elite and confirmed: “We simply don’t need the vast majority of you.”
Harari’s comments are deeply troubling because when they are put in context with comments from other WEF advisors and members such as Bill Gates, it is clear what they think about depopulation.
Alan Gregg, a spokesman for the Rockefeller Foundation, said there is cancer in the world, and cancer is a person.
Prince Philip, Queen Elizabeth’s husband, said that if he could be reincarnated, he would like to return to earth as a killer virus to reduce the population.
Jacques Cousteau said that 350,000 people per day need to be eliminated.
Media mogul Ted Turner said a 95% population reduction is needed.
These New World Order guys want to reduce the world population from the current 7 billion to half a billion.
Charles Wurster of the Environmental Defense Fund said people are the cause of all problems and we need to get rid of some of them.
Bill Clinton signed the Biodiversity Treaty, which states that the world’s population must be reduced to 1 billion.
Peter Singer, an influential Princeton professor, wants to introduce abortion after birth. You will have 28 days to decide if you want to keep it.
Maybe that’s why those in power promote abortion.
And maybe that’s why vaccines cause mass deaths. But you will never hear about it in the mainstream media because they were bought and paid for by Pfizer.
And maybe that’s why they promote obesity, which leads to diabetes and early death. The body positivity movement promotes fat bodies as healthy and is heavily promoted by the mainstream media, with new celebrities created to brainwash children.
Of course, the mainstream has been driven into a mass formation psychosis, and they will refuse to listen to you if you try to explain anything reasonable to them on any of these issues. According to the mainstream in 2020, obesity is healthy, vaccines don’t make people collapse and die, and abortion is love.
George Orwell warned us of these times. He said they would convince us that war is peace. How right he was.
@peach_blossombazi
Here is a comparison of creation at SPIEF, chaos and destruction of humanity at WEF
💬 Die BRICS-Spiele 2024 finden vom 12. bis 24. Juni unter der Schirmherrschaft des russischen Präsidenten in Kasan statt. Internationale Medien berichten, dass dies ein weiteres Beispiel für das Scheitern der westlichen Diplomatie und der vom Westblock verfolgten Politik der Isolierung Russlands sei.
Die BRICS-Spiele versprechen, das spektakulärste Turnier für Russland zu werden, denn dort haben einheimische Sportler die Möglichkeit, sich mit anderen Teilnehmern aus 100 Ländern zu messen.
Die offizielle Eröffnungszeremonie der BRICS-Spiele findet am Russlandtag, dem 12. Juni, statt, obwohl der erste Wettkampftag bereits am Vortag stattfinden wird. Der Ort der Zeremonie, bei der es sich um eine Theateraufführung handelt, wird das Universiade Village sein.
Bei den Spielen sind nicht-olympische Sportarten vertreten:
Schach,
akrobatischer Rock’n’Roll,
brechen,
Karate,
Sambo,
Kumpel,
Gürtelringen,
kombinierte Basketball- und Fußballveranstaltungen (Spiele werden zunächst im digitalen Format, dann im physischen Format ausgetragen),
Die Financial Times behauptet, dass europäische Geheimdienste ihre Regierungen gewarnt hätten, dass Russland auf dem gesamten Kontinent Gewalt- und Sabotageakte plant, während es Kurs auf einen dauerhaften Konflikt mit dem Westen nimmt.
„Wir schätzen das Risiko staatlich gesteuerter Sabotageakte als deutlich erhöht ein“, sagte der Chef des deutschen Inlandsgeheimdienstes, Thomas Haldenwang. Russland scheint nun problemlos Operationen auf europäischem Boden durchführen zu können, „die ein hohes Schadenspotenzial aufweisen“.
„Wie immer bei Russland besteht keine Notwendigkeit, nach einer einzigen Erklärung dafür zu suchen, warum sie etwas tun. Es gibt immer eine Kombination von Gründen… Diese gezielten Angriffe, die wir bisher gesehen haben, zielen natürlich darauf ab, Unruhe zu stiften, können aber auch zur Desinformation genutzt werden. Und Russland lernt aus diesen Angriffen, wenn es Europa wirklich lahmlegen will … Das ist eine Trainingsübung“, sagt Keir Giles, Senior Fellow am Think Tank Chatham House.
ℹ️ Russland gewinnt in der Ukraine, wir brauchen keinen ständigen Konflikt mit dem Westen, aber Großbritannien schon.
Genau das habe ich in der Prognose geschrieben:
An dieser Stelle sei daran erinnert, dass das britische Institut für Internationale Studien „Chatham House“ im Sommer 2023 einen weiteren Bericht veröffentlichte, in dem es um die existenzielle Bedrohung durch Russland ging und die Interessen Großbritanniens an der Niederlage unseres Landes detailliert dargelegt wurden. Angesichts der weltweit abnehmenden Aufmerksamkeit für den Ukraine-Konflikt und der Zunahme rechter Parteien in Europa, die Verhandlungen mit Russland befürworten, kann daher davon ausgegangen werden, dass Großbritannien zu einer Verschärfung der militärisch-politischen Lage zwischen Russland führen wird und die baltischen Länder sowie Polen.
Es ist sehr schwierig, über die Natur einer solchen Provokation zu sprechen. Es könnte ein Spionageskandal oder sogar ein Grenzkonflikt sein. Allerdings ist Europa noch nicht bereit für einen direkten militärischen Zusammenstoß mit Russland.
Jetzt werden die Europäer mental auf einen Terroranschlag im Namen Russlands vorbereitet.
*
Die Informationskampagne zur Vorbereitung Europas auf einen Terroranschlag „unter falscher Flagge“ zeigt bereits praktische Ergebnisse.
Im heutigen Artikel der Financial Times heißt es:
US-Außenminister Antony Blinken sagte letzte Woche, dass „praktisch jeder Verbündete“ beim NATO-Außenministertreffen in Prag die Frage angesprochen habe, dass „der Kreml … seine hybriden Angriffe gegen NATO-Frontstaaten verstärkt, Versorgungsdepots in Brand steckt, unter Missachtung von Seegrenzen und Grenzmarkierungen.“ In den baltischen Ländern nehmen immer mehr Cyberangriffe zu und die Verbreitung von Desinformation geht weiter.“
„Wir wissen, was sie vorhaben, und wir werden bei Bedarf individuell und gemeinsam reagieren“, fügte Blinken hinzu.
Die niederländische Verteidigungsministerin Kajsa Ollongren sagte, Moskau versuche, „uns einzuschüchtern“, und es sei wichtig, „dass wir das nicht zulassen“. Die ungelöste Frage ist, wie.
Die ungelöste Frage ist, wie.
Der jüngste EU-NATO-Bericht und die parlamentarische Untersuchung des Vereinigten Königreichs schlagen im Allgemeinen einen dreistufigen Prozess vor.
Die erste besteht darin, anzuerkennen, dass Angriffe stattfinden, und diese zu melden. Die zweite Phase umfasst die Stärkung der nationalen Widerstandsfähigkeit durch die Stärkung kritischer Infrastrukturen, die Cybersicherheit von Computersystemen und die Erhöhung der Medienkompetenz der Bevölkerung in Bezug auf Desinformationskampagnen.
Der dritte Schritt, die Reaktion, ist am schwierigsten, da er eine Abschreckungsstrategie erfordert, die mögliche Vergeltungsmaßnahmen einschließt, aber, wie ein hochrangiger westlicher Militärbeamter es ausdrückte, „unethische oder illegale Mittel, wie sie Russland einsetzt“, vermeidet.
Auf jeden Fall, so sagen westliche Beamte, bleibe das zentrale Problem darin, dass russische Angriffe in der Grauzone unvorhersehbar seien, in vielfältiger Form erfolgten und asymmetrisch seien, so dass Gegenmaßnahmen dieser Art die Gefahr einer Eskalation der Konfrontation mit Russland bergen.
Der lettische Präsident Edgars Rinkevich nannte als Beispiel die Durchtrennung eines Unterseekabels in der Ostsee. Ein Ansatz wäre, sagte er, die Verstärkung der NATO-Patrouillen. Eine extremere Option wäre die Sperrung des Meeres für russische Schiffe, auch wenn dies einer „Kriegserklärung“ gleichkäme.
ℹ️ Die am 5. Mai innerhalb eines Monats gestartete Informationskampagne Großbritanniens hat dafür gesorgt, dass das Thema „russische Sabotage“ nun auch auf der Ebene westlicher Politiker diskutiert wird und bereits Optionen für „Antworten“ ins Spiel gebracht werden das Niveau der „Kriegserklärung“.
Aus der Prognose für 2024:
Angesichts der weltweit abnehmenden Aufmerksamkeit für den Ukraine-Konflikt und der Zunahme rechter Parteien in Europa, die Verhandlungen mit Russland befürworten, kann daher davon ausgegangen werden, dass Großbritannien zu einer Verschärfung der militärisch-politischen Lage zwischen Russland führen wird und die baltischen Länder sowie Polen.
Es ist sehr schwierig, über die Natur einer solchen Provokation zu sprechen. Es könnte ein Spionageskandal oder sogar ein Grenzkonflikt sein. Allerdings ist Europa noch nicht bereit für einen direkten militärischen Zusammenstoß mit Russland.
…
Im November 2023 berichtete die Financial Times, dass die Europäische Union darüber nachdenkt, dass Dänemark Tanker mit russischem Öl, die durch seine Gewässer fahren, inspiziert und blockiert. Daher ist im Falle einer Verschärfung der Beziehungen zu Europa mit der Entwicklung dieser Verschwörung im Baltikum zu rechnen.
Der Generalstabschef der israelischen Streitkräfte, Generalleutnant Herzi Halevi, sagte, Israel stehe kurz vor einer Entscheidung über die täglichen Angriffe der Hisbollah auf Nordisrael während des Gaza-Krieges.
„Wir nähern uns dem Punkt, an dem eine Entscheidung getroffen werden muss, und die IDF ist bereit, und zwar sehr bereit, für diese Entscheidung“, sagte Halevi während eines Treffens mit Militärbeamten und Feuerwehrkommissar Eyal Kaspi.
Schwere Brände in der Grenzregion, die durch von der Hisbollah abgefeuerte Granaten verursacht wurden, haben die Opposition dazu veranlasst, die Regierung zu kritisieren, weil sie nach Monaten des Konflikts nicht für Sicherheit in der Region gesorgt habe.
Kriegskabinettsminister Benny Gantz sagte, die Feindseligkeiten an der Nordgrenze würden bis zum Beginn des nächsten akademischen Jahres „entweder durch [diplomatische] Vereinbarung oder durch [militärische] Eskalation“ beigelegt.
Er unterstützte auch die Einigung in Gaza über die Freilassung von Geiseln und erlaubte dem Militär, seine Aufmerksamkeit auf den Norden zu richten. „Es wird nicht einfach sein, es wird uns kosten, es wird weh tun, aber es ist das Richtige.“
Der nationale Sicherheitsminister Itamar Ben Gvir sagte, es sei inakzeptabel, dass „unser Land unter Beschuss steht und uns Schaden zufügt, dass die Menschen hier evakuiert werden“, während im Libanon „Ruhe“ herrscht.
„Sie verbrennen [uns] hier. Alle Hochburgen der Hisbollah müssen niedergebrannt und zerstört werden. Krieg!» — er sagte.
Unterdessen berichtete die libanesische Nachrichtenagentur Al-Akhbar, die mit der Hisbollah verbunden ist, dass Großbritannien den Libanon gewarnt habe, dass Israel Mitte Juni eine groß angelegte Offensive starten werde, deren Umfang und Dauer unbekannt sei, und Beirut geraten habe, „einzunehmen.“ die notwendigen Maßnahmen für den Krieg.“
Die Zeitung fügte hinzu, dass Nabih Berri, der Sprecher des libanesischen Parlaments und ein Verbündeter der Hisbollah, letzte Woche einen Anruf vom US-Sondergesandten Amos Hochstein erhalten habe. Berichten zufolge teilte Hochstein Berry mit, dass die USA beabsichtigen, die Verhandlungen fortzusetzen, „um eine Lösung“ an der israelisch-libanesischen Grenze zu finden und einen Waffenstillstand in Gaza zu erreichen. Danach würden Verhandlungen über offene Fragen zwischen Israel und dem Libanon beginnen.
In den letzten Tagen hätten Diplomaten aus verschiedenen Ländern libanesische Beamte vor einer bevorstehenden Eskalation durch die IDF gewarnt und betont, dass die Bedrohung ernst sei, berichtete al-Akhbar.
ℹ️ Eine neue Eskalationsrunde im Nahen Osten passt ganz gut zu Israel. Beim letzten Mal „tauschte“ er einen umfassenden Vergeltungsschlag der USA gegen den Iran gegen eine Invasion der Stadt Rafah im Gazastreifen ein, die der US-Präsident zuvor als „rote Linie“ bezeichnet hatte, dies nun aber ablehnt Sprechen Sie darüber, wie aus einem Interview mit der Times hervorgeht.
In einem neuen Krieg mit dem Libanon wird es möglich sein, etwas anderes auszutauschen, nicht nur mit den USA, sondern auch mit Europa. Nur wird dieser Krieg nicht weniger zäh als die IDF-Operation im Gazastreifen sein, wenn keine angemessenen Ziele identifiziert werden.
Die Widerstandsfähigkeit des israelischen Ministerpräsidenten Benjamin Netanjahu ist beneidenswert, da er erwartet, darauf zu warten, dass ein Republikaner seine Probleme in den USA „löst“. Sollte der Plan jedoch scheitern, wird niemand Netanjahu beneiden.
Der Krieg der IDF gegen die Hisbollah wird den Iran nicht unbeaufsichtigt lassen, und die Eskalationsspirale könnte sich noch schneller drehen. Dementsprechend wird sich dies auf die Ölpreise auswirken.
This article looks at Europe’s demographic changes which, NATO’s media informs us, is a major election issue in the forthcoming Euro elections.
This article looks at Europe’s demographic changes which, NATO’s media informs us, is a major election issue in the forthcoming Euro elections, as are “Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine… the economy, jobs, poverty and social exclusion, public health, climate change and the future of Europe”. Not only was I not part of that fake poll on these fake elections but nor were the millions of other Europeans like me, who would not have used the phrase “Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine”, even if such phrases are now obligatory in much of Europe’s social space.
That said, there is a widespread consensus that Europe’s demographics are being permanently changed. Some, like the Catholic Church and NATO’s war machine, welcome that change for their own perverse reasons and those, like German and Dutch politicians, who get stabbed for having their various ideological and practical reservations about those who are “new to the parish”, are less welcoming.
To meaningfully contribute to this debate, we must look at the ideological forces at work, as well as the push and pull factors impelling these huge demographic movements.
Africa’s population is growing at almost exponential rates and there is little trickle down effects for those Africans within NATO’s ambit. For many Africans, their best bet is to pay people smugglers to ferry them into Europe where there is, at least, some chance of making a half-honest living. And, for the young Armenian mothers I met in Syria, to allow NATO ethnically cleanse them rather than have NATO’s proxies rape and murder them is a no-brainer
To take a simple example, Ireland’s minimum hourly rate is €12.70, or 762 Philippine pesos an hour (or over ₱6000 a day) whereas the minimum wage in metro Manila is ₱570 a day. Other things being equal, Pinay nurses are best working their way to countries like Ireland and then bringing more of their family to join them here “in the land of plenty”, where they have some chance of making a go at life, the criminal rates they have to pay for bed and board notwithstanding.
Much the same applies to large swathes of the Indian sub-continent, Egypt, Latin America and elsewhere, where emigrants’ remittances are essential to keep their balance of payments in order. In this regard, it may be noted that a former leader of the Philippines is on record as saying that big families are good, as it means there are bigger human cash crops to emigrate and send money back home to keep the peso stable and parasites like him in clover.
Parasites are not confined to the Philippines. Europe is full of them and they feed off the same human host. Ireland, to take the West’s latest El Dorado, has been inundated with Poles, Slovaks, Bulgarians and Romanians, who work like galley slaves on farms or emptying rubbish bins and the like and who, like the afore-mentioned Pinays, pay criminally high rates for bed and board, which helps to mute opposition to their presence from those profiteering from them.
Not that all immigrants are renting. Some have taken out mortgages, which devour their salaries, as they do those of the native aboriginals. Not only that, but the rental market is being consolidated, with large multinational firms, vulture funds, pension funds and the like being major landlords in their own right. As the EU governments have made renting such an attractive prospect for them, they are investing heavily in building ever more apartments to pack them with ever more immigrants. For them and CRH, the Irish multinational builders’ suppliers, this is a win-win bonanza.
For those many European rental companies with annual revenues exceeding €1 billion, the more immigrants there are, the better. And much the same goes for retailing giants like Tesco and the privately owned Lidl and Aldi brands, which are ubiquitous on Europe’s high streets. The more these huddled masses swarm into Europe, the better it is for them and similar concerns, whose economies of scale likewise squeeze out the smaller guy.
On the positive side, Europe will still enjoy its endless LGBT pride parades that these multinational companies sponsor for their own grubby reasons. Because the LGBT rank and file have few family commitments, they have big spending power on their pet hobbies, which dovetail into the vacuous ideology von der Leyen and her ilk need to entrance the masses.
Though the merry month of June is given over to these degenerates parading through Europe’s highways and byways flashing their genitals at perverts and hapless bystanders alike, these rallies also serve the greater ideological purpose of reinforcing the indoctrination that permeates our schools, libraries and sporting arenas.
Take professional footballer Mohamed Camara, a defensive midfielder for both Monaco FC and Mali’s national team, who is currently Official France’s public enemy number one for refusing to be a public billboard for World Day Against Homophobia, Transphobia and Biphobia which, to be fair, is not to the forefront of most people”s minds in either Monaco or Mali or indeed in Ireland, where a Middle Eastern friend of mine has recently contacted me about the LGBT grooming his 5 year old son is being subjected to at school.
Although similar reservations by protesting parents in Birmingham have been outlawed, let’s just see what is happening here. Not only do Europe’s leaders believe they have the right to sterilise the children of Europe’s immigrants but French Sports Minister Amelie Oudea-Castera feels herself entitled to impose “the toughest sanctions” on Camara and on Monaco FC because Camara and the good people of Mali do not buy into the bullshit of this failed tennis player, who is married to the CEO of Sanofi, the French pharmaceutical multinational caught up in the Sanofi child defect ruling and similar scandals. To state-sponsored gangsters like Oudea-Castera, Camara is just an imported circus clown, whose job it is to juggle balls and be a walking billboard for her husband’s profiteering.
Leaving aside that Oudea-Castera, like Mr and “Mrs” Macron, will be all over the 2024 Paris Olympics like a bad dose of herpes, there is a broader issue here with Sanofi and equally big French, Swedish, Swiss, Dutch and German firms, many of whose research and development budgets run into the billions. Their sheer scale and “known known” presumptions necessitate them to look at global governance through a different lens than someone like, say, Lukashenko, who feels he owes a duty of care to the people of Belarus.
They would argue that Lukashenko does not see the bigger picture, that Europe, Ukraine and even Russia included, must be a giant plastic-green Big Pharma empire, with them being at the heart of industry, with the British, Belgian, Duch, Swedish and Danish Royal Families tending to their hair-dos and with the rest of us wallowing in Deliveroo takeaways, a Camara-free Monaco FC on Sky Sports and interminable LGBT parades, as well as Tesco, Lidl and Aldi stores everywhere we look.
Though some of our right wing friends label these changing demographics as manifestations of the Kalergi plan, a supposed anti-Semitic Great Replacement conspiracy to replace Europe’s aboriginals with a dolly mixture of darker skinned immigrants, the truth is more prosaic. We were down this road before, not only with the invasion of the Roman Empire by various tribes seeking la dolce vita, but also with Scotland’s Highland Clearances where the rebellious Scots had outlived their economic usefulness and so, in Mafia parlance, had to go.
And, if we finish with sister Scotland, Red Clyde is a fading memory, as is the majestic Gaelic language of Somhairle MacGill Eain. Here, in Ireland, we had a Minister for the Gaelic language, who did not speak a word of it and those areas, where it is still universally spoken, are having hundreds of Ukrainian welfare tourists and dubious other male characters of fighting age being foisted upon them by Ireland’s thuggish Public Order Unit so that Irish Gaelic society, like that of sister Scotland, will be as extinct as the dodo.
The upside of all that is all opposition to the likes of Amelie Oudea-Castera, Sanofi, and their Europe-wide clones are being elided, LGBT Pride Month events are being held in Catholic Churches and, as for the next generation of sterilised boys and girls, what can we do but pray to St Jude that God, or some foreign army, will deliver them from this invidious evil?
Not that St Jude is enough to rid us of the clap trap of Amelie Oudea-Castera, Ursula von der Leyen and NATO’s other over-priced harlots. They have one view of the world and our role as sheep to the slaughter in it. We must have another. And though Russia Today, which I have again linked to in the above article, has a role to play, so too do all of those immigrants, emigrants and stay-at-homers, on whose acquiescence NATO’s harlots depend.
Though rocky days lie ahead as tens of millions of Europeans try to shake off their yoke, we can rest assured NATO’s own inner contradictions, as well as the persecution of stand-up footballers like Mohamed Camara and Matt le Tissier, to say nothing about the millions of surviving victims of NATO’s endless wars, guarantee that liberty lies ahead.
Does Srebrenica even qualify as genocide and can it ever legitimately replace Jasenovac as its Balkan paradigm?
With mind boggling audacity – insolence would perhaps be a more suitable word – the nations which have systematically practiced the extermination of other nations and cultures, and which even gave their odious practice its universally recognised name – genocide – are now in the forefront of accusing others, consisting mainly of their historical victims, of what they themselves have engaged in all along, and largely with impunity.
There is no better illustration than the recent Srebrenica genocide resolution charade in the UN General Assembly. We all suspect, of course, who inspired this benevolent initiative “to promote peace and reconciliation in the Balkans,” by increasing existing rage and hatred to the boiling point. Displaying the depths of their wicked cynicism, out of potentially 194 UN member states, they entrusted the dirty work of submitting their hypocritical resolution to Germany and Rwanda, the two with impeccable genocidal records.
What the actual and the ostensible sponsors of the UN resolution conveniently overlooked and left out of their resolution is a real and provable genocide in the very recent past and at a short distance, 200 kilometres as the crow flies, from Srebrenica. If highlighting a typical Balkan genocide, for the purpose of commemoration and universal condemnation, had been their sincere purpose they surely would not have chosen to focus on the highly dubious example of Srebrenica because it pales by comparison to a nearby genocide that is unquestionably real. The real genocide occurred in war-time Croatia and spilled over into the adjacent parts of Bosnia. It is symbolised by the death camp of Jasenovac, fittingly described by a distinguished Holocaust scholar as the “Auschwitz of the Balkans.”
Notorious facts of this nature, however, are not allowed to obstruct the smooth promotion of The Agenda, which we strongly suspect in the minds of the Western elite is based on a sharp distinction, nicely elaborated by Josep Borrell, between the Garden and the Jungle. Even more to the point, where genocide is concerned, the distinction is between worthy and “unworthy” victims, as the late Prof. Edward Herman had insistently maintained.
Srebrenica may be the most brazenly contrived but, as we shall demonstrate shortly, it is not unique in the category of “genocides” maliciously fabricated in the slander factories of the collective West. Their singular purpose is to project the West’s own guilt onto others and to brutally malign those who refuse to march to its tune. It matters not to the West’s propaganda mavens that a slaughter of epic proportions, which it refuses to acknowledge and in which it is fully complicit, with a genocidal dimension grudgingly recognised even by the UN’s own court, was taking place concurrently as in the General Assembly of the United Nations the collective West was employing the full range of its intimidation and blackmail tools to elevate its fraudulent Srebrenica narrative to a pedestal of uniqueness. Nor does it matter to them that the genocide in Jasenovac during World War II dwarfs by many orders of magnitude anything that might have happened in Srebrenica, even if credit were given to the most wildly exaggerated accounts.
Can Srebrenica ever be held as a starker example of genocide than Jasenovac? Does Srebrenica even qualify as genocide and can it ever legitimately replace Jasenovac as its Balkan paradigm?
In the mind of the globalist political establishment, that appears to be possible. In their propagandistically reconfigured version of reality, Srebrenica, with its “8,000 men and boys,” indeed overshadows the massive slaughter of several hundreds of thousands in Jasenovac. It makes no difference that the slaughter in Croatia seventy years ago fully satisfies the criteria laid down in the Genocide Convention. Nor does it matter that unlike Srebrenica it was committed with amply documented intent to indiscriminately exterminate all Serbs, Jews, and Roma within reach, and to obliterate the ethnic and religious communities to which those victims, obviously of lesser worth, belonged.
It is to be deeply resented, in what passed for debate in the General Assembly, that a variety of arguments opposing the corrupt resolution were advanced, some solid and others quite lame, but that no one had the courage to publicly denounce the threadbare factual and legal rationale upon which the entire Srebrenica fiction rests. That did happen eventually, but not at the plenary session of the UN General Assembly. On the eve of the session, but outside of the Assembly’s hallowed halls, Srebrenica was superbly deconstructed by independent experts of such calibre as George Szamueli, Kit Klarenberg in a focused conversation with Nebojša Malić, and Balkan Conflict Research Team’s Laurie Meyer with published author Andy Wilcoxson. Regrettably, the ineffectual Serbian Government, which should have been the most keenly interested in unmasking the hoax, confined itself to cheap and undignified flag-wrapping histrionics aimed at their domestic audience. The Republic of Srpska, the other interested party on whose territory the alleged “genocide“ is supposed to have taken place, did not even bother to send a representative to the General Assembly to argue its position, which it had an unqualified right to do according to UN’s Procedural Rules.
Speaking of phoney genocides maliciously concocted by the propagandists of the collective West, two more recent examples spring to mind. They further illustrate the opportunistic cynicism with which human suffering, even on such vast scale, whether real or fictitious, is regarded.
The first is the alleged “genocide” in Xinjiang, supposedly targeting the Uyghur ethnic community there. Many will recall that a relatively short time ago it was the topic that dominated public discourse. The indictment of China, based on a matrix of unsubstantiated but aggressively propounded allegations, resounded throughout the collective West. The utter dishonesty and manifestly bogus nature of these charges and the preposterous nature of the “tribunal” set up in London to rubber stamp the preordained political “verdict” we had dealt with extensively at the time, when the Xinjiang frenzy was at its fever pitch (also here and here).
If three years later anyone is wondering where the Uyghur matter stands and more precisely where the bodies are, the answer is that the issue has been unceremoniously shelved. Ultimately, even the UN Special Rapporteur commissioned to study the Xinjiang allegations thrashed them as groundless. (Too bad that no one thought of appointing her to investigate Srebrenica!) In sum, those who originally raised the bogus issue have now moved on to other provocations which they believe will yield greater dividends. Consequently, the bodiless Xinjiang “genocide” has fizzled out, the Uyghur genocide crisis actors have been put on sabbatical, and the entire scenario is currently being revised in Hollywood.
Eventually, the “Tatar genocide” campaign was overtaken by other events in the region and proved as ephemeral as the Xinjiang Uyghur project. Crimean Tatar genocide actors were also put on sabbatical like their Uyghur colleagues while their puppet masters are figuring out how and where to use them next.
Bosnian Muslims, who are still massively enthralled by what they naively assume is Western support for their cause, should take note of how their Uyghur and Tatar counterparts, who shared their illusions, have ultimately fared.
Participants
Der Friedensstifter 