anti-nucleaRist bloG #211/ 08 Feb 2014 ©
N.A.T.O.’s Gladio, & nuclear disarmament?
What’s so UN-usual about the new-Rome is that they’re Totalitarian, and the only historical comparison starts w 1905 when the amer-Fascists (big-Wigs, Torie-bankors) supported the Russia’s oligarchic-Czars who were also monarchs—over that of allowing “peace a chance”. Altho Prof. Herman does not ‘challenge’ the edifice nor deifice of NSDU-238 usages, nor does he mention the extent of “nuclear-Molecularism is not Defense nor priority” he does mention illegal INvasions, and despicable civilians killings. His context does not qualify as an anti-Nuclearist Revolutionary aspect, nor commitment. One must not assume that Operation Gladio was a program to interface w the next war-Usages of the nuclear-Molecular, in that Euro case the cause of protecting the transportation and use of NSDU-238, until N.A.T.O. could broaden w.o. arming all states from the new-Rome—for N.A.T.O. purposes.
The premising stage was dire-Cast before operation Gladio became hegemony-Prospectus or not! “R”
“NATO was also linked to “Operation Gladio,” a program organized by the CIA, with collaboration from NATO governments and security establishments, that in a number of European states set up secret cadres and stashed weapons, supposedly preparing for the threatened Soviet invasion, but actually ready for “internal subversion” and available to support rightwing coups. They were used on a number of occasions by rightwing paramilitary groups to carry out terrorist operations (including the Bologna bombing, and many terrorist incidents carried out in Belgium and Germany).
Gladio and NATO plans were also used to combat an “internal threat” in Greece in 1967: namely, the democratic election of a liberal government. In response, the Greek military put into effect a NATO “Plan Prometheus,” replacing a democratic order with a torture-prone military dictatorship. Neither NATO nor the Johnson administration objected. Other Gladio forces, from Italy and elsewhere, came to train in Greece during its fascist interlude, to learn how to deal with “internal subversion.”
In short, from its inception NATO showed itself to be offensively, not defensively, oriented, antagonistic to diplomacy and peace, and intertwined with widespread terrorist operations and other forms of political intervention that were undemocratic and actual threats to democracy (and if traceable to the Soviets would have been denounced as brazen subversion)… in the midst of the NATO bombing war against Yugoslavia, in April 1999, NATO held its 50th anniversary in Washington, D.C., celebrating its successes and with characteristic Orwellian rhetoric stated its devotion to international law while in the midst of its ongoing blatant violation of the UN Charter. In fact, the original 1949 NATO founding document had begun by reaffirming its members “faith in the UN Charter,” and in Article 1, undertaking, “as set forth in the UN Charter, to settle any international disputes by peaceful means.”… The April 1999 session produced a “Strategic Concept” document that laid out a supposedly new program for NATO now that its “mutual defensive” role in preventing a Soviet invasion had ceased to be plausible. “
NATO: the Imperial Pitbull
By Edward S. Herman February, 2009
Disarmaments or dis-Membering the planet’s Ecology the ways of the new-Rome, today! Disinformation and misinformation coupled w oppression and repressive measures rather than accountability and the people’s voice stinks when speaking-out is demanded for democracy’s remnant of peace and wholesome planet. The hospitable empire does not exist as matter of justice or IN-justice but as excoriation of demising the very air and water we’ve tried to progressively maintain. Add the annointments of Radionuclides usages NPP’s and clean-Ups from 1943 and you get “Oligarchy is not plutocracy”. Yet, plutocracy is plutocracy! Would ”disarmament” cause financial pain to the NRC, is one question for reneging on clean-Ups continuing? Would disarmament actually reduce the plutocratic course of military-Hegemony ripping-off the we-People, too? What then, would disarmament do if we did not a “radionuclides-measurements citizens corps” BEFOREHAND? “R”
“Disarmament will prevent catastrophic accidents
Nuclear weapons are very dangerous whether or not they are actually used in war. In the November/December issue of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, Nate Jones describes how a routine NATO military exercise in 1983 led the Soviets to place their nuclear arsenals on high alert because they believed the United States was about to attack. Knowledge of the misperceptions, accidents, and near-misses that he and writers like Eric Schlosser describe—incidents that could have resulted in nuclear exchanges of devastating proportions—would be enough to make any sensible person understand that the risks posed by these weapons far outweigh any purported benefits in an era of relative peace among major powers.
Disarmament will save money.
At a time of fiscal restraint, the savings from reducing US arsenals would be significant, even when taking into account the costs of dismantlement. The United States spends $30 to $35 billion per year to maintain its current deployed nuclear force of some 1,500 weapons, and only about $6 billion per year for dismantling and cleanup under the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty with Russia. If Washington continues to reduce nuclear arsenals, the net savings would add up to real money over time.
If the United States does achieve major savings through weapons cuts, there will of course be congressional debate about where the funds should go. The trick will be to ensure that the money used to build and maintain the nuclear weapons complex in the past is used to build civilian public infrastructure in the future. Such expenditures could mean more efficient transportation systems; repairs to buildings, roads, and schools; and funding for research and development of civilian technologies that contribute to durable economic growth. Confidence that the savings will be sensibly redirected will encourage skilled workers, businesses, and local governments to sign on to nuclear disarmament.
Disarmament will make the US economy stronger.
One problem with the cost-saving argument is that weapons programs, whether nuclear or conventional, have in the past been sold as jobs programs. Unions and contractors in nearly every congressional district press to keep the employment and industrial base that weapons production provides. In the short run, and especially at times of high unemployment, it is true that government spending on weapons and military personnel provides jobs.”
Why vote for nuclear disarmament?
Kennette Benedict, Bulletin of Atomic Scientists http://thebulletin.org/why-vote-nuclear-disarmament#.UqdCgZM2Drs.mailto
Operation Gladio and basic “paranoia” were as much the excuse-making for a formulative approach to manipulative sovereignty had not been ingestated because the criminal aspects were already too renown before 1932, and afterward, not one European nation-State had surmised nor the US-Republic other ‘international-Banking and Stated dEpt rhetoric enterprising, because the “career-Diplomats” were not at al relegated nor trained in “espionage, nor munitions, nor assassinations nor counter-Insurgence w espionage!. Thus, a semi-Transparent and semi-Flattened factoral could either be manufactured and maintained as secrecy or suspended thru ”black-Ops” w.i. the miltary re-ORganizing post-War dept to Dept’s of Navy, of Air Force, of Army and then, Coast Guard a year and more later. This made military preoccupation less hazardous, yet morosely, more indicative of the “military-State” then soon became the adversity as bad as the Third Reich, was internally, but not “externally” ingestated!
When1946 came along and the OSS had not yet been reconnoiteured, the opportunity was then kept in making enterprise, not de-Militarization, and the cold-War was incepted for “counter-Insurgency to begin. The fact is that Truman had made all this insufferable and therefore the we-Peeps were kept in the DARK, quite too literally. The main theme I had as a kid, then teen, is “what was the nuclear surreptition” and what is “nuclear-Animosity”? “R”
“Then in May 1940 the Netherlands were occupied by the German Army and the Dutch government together with the Dutch royals and privileged figures of the political, military and economic sphere had to leave Dutch soil hastily and chaotically for Great Britain. GS III, the Section Intelligence of the Dutch General Staff, had warned too late of the German attack and had thus failed bitterly in what would have been its most important task. Due to the hasty retreat there was logistic distress in many areas, and the Dutch ministers who in May 1940 arrived in London could hardly carry out their work for a lack of crucial documents. For many within the military and security services it was clear that such a chaotic escape was never to happen again and that after the war preparations against a potential future invasion had to be taken very seriously.”
N.A.T.O.’s secret Armies–operation Gladio & Terrorism in Western Europe
by Daniele Ganser Oct 2006 pdf (10-15-11).pdf
Being sent overseas is now a polluting aero-Jet flight there but pTSD returns also polluting
a voice from the VOId, the peace-Warrior
–notes: bLog #272 peace-Remnant
Tags/ N.A.T.O. linked, Operation Gladio, CIAs linked, Plan Prometheus, U.N. Charter, Edward S. Herman, Nuclear weapons, are very dangerous, Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty with Russia, weapons cuts, Confederate savings, weapons programs, fanatic Pentagons, new-Rome. world militarization, arming all nations, no peace, nuclear disarmament, Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, Netherlands, Dutch royals, dutch Generalstaff, logistic distress, chaos