Wednesday, May 11, 2016

After Yugoslavia NATO changed from a mutual defence alliance to an organisation for military aggression.

After the break up of the Soviet Union, a point in history when many in the west mistakenly thought Russia had ceased to be a major power and the USA unilaterally declared victory in the cold war, people around the world looked forward to an era of peace and prosperity. They could not have been more wrong, in fact even the most cursory examination of history will show that Russia has seldom been an aggressor.

The formation of The North Atlantic Treaty Organisation  (NATO) and the development of nuclear weapons that delivered 'mutually assured destruction' kept us safe we were told as thousands of millions (this was before inflation made millions into small change for governments) were poured into pointless exercises in one upmanship. But what was the real driver of it all? 

While that period from 1945 to 1990, with its arms race and the balls out politics of 'the space race' was sold to voters and taxpayers in the west as being necessary expenditure to counter the threat of Soviet expansionism, the Soviet Union has never had territorial ambitions. The establishment of satellite states around its borders after World War Two was really a reaction to yet another invasion of Russia by a European power.

Something happened in the years after the break up of the Soviet Union however that has made the world a more dangerous place now than at any time since 1938. Having served politicians well since 1945 as a defensive alliance, the USA dominated NATO changed and became a part of the US Neocon drive to achieve global dominance.

There's an interesting new publication from Global Research pinpointing the exact event that first revealed the new role for NATO, defined for it presumably by the US Shadow Government, that faceless cabal of financiers, corporate investors, academics and old political dynasties that really calls the shots in Washington. Here's a taster ...

The world is enveloped in a blanket of perpetual conflict. Invasions, occupation, illicit sanctions, and regime change have become currencies and orders of the day. One organization – the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) – is repeatedly, and very controversially, involved in some form or another in many of these conflicts led by the US and its allies. NATO spawned from the Cold War. Its existence was justified by Washington and Western Bloc politicians as a guarantor against any Soviet and Eastern Bloc invasion of Western Europe, but all along the Alliance served to cement Washington’s influence in Europe and continue what was actually America’s post-World War II occupation of the European continent. In 1991 the raison d’ĂȘtre of the Soviet threat ended with the collapse of the USSR and the end of the Cold War. Nevertheless NATO remains and continues to alarmingly expand eastward, antagonizing Russia and its ex-Soviet allies. China and Iran are also increasingly monitoring NATO’s moves as it comes into more frequent contact with them.

Read all and order the book from Global Research


The Difference In Voting For Hillbillary or Trump Is Only One Promises War With Russia

Essential reading for our American readers who must soon decide who they want as their next president. Important too for non Americans who cannot influence the outcome of the election but are entitled to know why their arses might be blown from here to eternity sometime in the next few years.

Hollande Survives Confidence Vote As France Slides Deeper Into Chaos
French President Francois Hollande suvived a 'no - confidence' vote today but now faces deepening divisions within his own party as well as in the French population. Continuing mass protests by students and trade union members showed the battle of over his reforms to the country's labour laws are far from finished. Hollande has hardened opposition to his reforms after bypassing the French parliament to push them through.

Russian Foreign Affairs Dept Accuses Turkey Of Hindering Syrian Peace Talks

Armed Forces Minister: Obama ‘Woefully Ignorant’ of Threat EU Membership Poses
US Threat to Businesses Scares EU Members As Summit On Continued Sanctions Nears
Will There Be A Coup In Turkey?
Castrating Project Fear: Former-UK Army Chief Shoots Down Claims of Brexit Impact on NATO
Propaganda War: US Officials Working to Keep Russia, Europe at Odds
NATO Warships in the seas Odysseus Sailed Spell Trouble For EU
FUKUS axis troops (France, UK, USA) Unable To Halt ISIS March Towards Libyan Oil
Ignorance Is Strength: European Parliament Ready To clamp Down On Free Speech
Former NATO Boss Explains Why US Did Not Oppose ISIS 'With Extreme Prejudice'

Elsewhere: [ The Original Boggart Blog] ... Daily Stirrer ...[Little Nicky Machiavelli]... [ Ian's Authorsden Pages ]... [Scribd]...[Wikinut] ... [ Boggart Abroad] ... [ Grenteeth Bites ] ... Ian Thorpe at Flickr ] ... [ Tumblr ] ... [Ian at Minds ] ...  [ Authorsden blog ] ... [Daily Stirrer News Aggregator

Pundits Said It could Not Happen: Trump Now Tied With Hillary In Latest National Poll

The Experts have developed a habit of being wrong in their predictions about the progress of Donald Trump's presidential campaign. Following Trump's not yet official victory in the contest for the Republican nomination, the consensus among mainstream media commentators was that loudmouth businessman would "never" be able to catch up to Hillary's support at the national level". This too now appears to have been a mistake.

According to the Reuters/Ipsos poll released earlier today, Donald Trump's support has surged since his competitors, too far behind in numbers of delegates won to have any realistic chance of overtaking him, quit the race and he is now statistically tied (the 1% difference is withing the margin of error) with Democrat Hillary Clinton among U.S. voters, in what Reuters describes as "a dramatic turnaround since he became the Republican party's presumptive presidential nominee."

In the survey (charts linked above), 41 percent of likely voters supported Clinton, the Democratic front-runner, and 40 percent backed Trump, with 19 percent as yet undecided. The poll had an error marging of plus or minus 3 percentage points suggesting that it is possible that Trump may have already overtaken Hillary nationally.

What makes the reversal particularly notable is that as recently as last week, Mrs Clinton led Trump by around 13 points in the poll. With more negative publicity attaching itself to Hillary and her campaign every week as the scandals refuse to go away, it is possible Donald Trump has already overtaken her and will continue to gather momentum as he did in the Republican primaries campaign.

Surprisingly perhaps, according to deeper analysis of the poll, nearly half of Bernie Sanders' supporters are willing to cast their vote for Trump compared to only a quarter for Hillary, in what is shaping up as a presidential election in which it is not so important that the winning candidate will not be the one who is most liked, but least disliked.

As this blog has said since January, the success of Sanders and Trump was not due primarily to their policies or personal qualities (although by political standards Bernie seems to be an honest man,) but to the fact that they were anti - establishment candidates and rode the wave of anger and repugnance voters feel towards the cosy, self serving consensus of the political establishment.

The results signal that a close fight is shaping up between the two White House rivals as the campaigns get very dirty. More importantly perhaps, it promises a lot of entertainment because the "debates" between Hillary and Trump (who reputedly hate each other) will surely break all political TV and media records, even as American society and global influence decay like Dracula on a sunny day.


What Did Donald Trump Say To Earn a Liberal Lynch Mob On His Case

American ‘progressive liberals’ are getting their knickers in a right old twist about alleged ‘racist’ remarks made by the presumptive Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump who said something unforgivable about a Hispanic US federal judge. So what exactly was it he said about this bean – bandit judge that led intellectuals and academics to call for his murder?

Elsewhere: [ The Original Boggart Blog] ... Daily Stirrer ...[Little Nicky Machiavelli]... [ Ian's Authorsden Pages ]... [Scribd]...[Wikinut] ... [ Boggart Abroad] ... [ Grenteeth Bites ] ... Ian Thorpe at Flickr ] ... [ Tumblr ] ... [Ian at Minds ] ... [ Authorsden blog ] ... [Daily Stirrer News Aggregator]