The Scandal Involving Greenpeace In Russia
South Front, Feb 9 2022
Last week, several Russian media outlets accused Greenpeace of subversive activities inside the country. Indeed, the quasi-political activity of Greenpeace in Russia has significantly intensified amid the Ukrainian crisis. This time, the target was the program of the parks arrangement in Moscow. Recall that the UN has recently recognized Moscow as the best metropolitan location in the world in terms of “infrastructure development” and “quality of life.” Greenpeace appealed to Muscovites in order to bring mass protests: “No to the barbaric “arrangement” of Moscow’s forest parks.” Before the announcement by the Moscow government of its plans, many of the same groups created in social networks, were overwhelmingly comprised of bots, which were filled with emotional publications, about how the authorities plan to destroy the ecosystem of Moscow and calls to take part in protests. Greenpeace has long ago gained a reputation as a purely commercial structure that corporations use in infighting or as an instrument of pressure from the US. The most egregious scandals were related to Africa and Latin America. Greenpeace always tries to justify itself publicly in such situations, but each time it gets worse and worse. In the Russian case, Greenpeace traditionally states that its branch exists on private donations, while providing a funding structure. It shows that 77% of the funding is from foreign Greenpeace funds, which, in turn, are funded by the Turner Foundation, Rockefeller Brothers Fund, MacArthur Foundation, Rasmussen Foundation, Packard Foundation and other well-known conductors of the “soft power” of Washington and Brussels.
In Russia, Greenpeace opposes garbage reform and the construction of modern W2E plants for thermal waste processing. Many hundreds of such enterprises are successfully operating all over the world, including European countries, without any pressure from Greenpeace. The organization demands that the Russian authorities abandon nuclear power plants, which looks like idiotic concept against the background of the recognition of nuclear energy and gas as “green” in the EU. Greenpeace demands that the Russian authorities stop the development of new oil and gas fields and much more, which will cause irreparable damage to the Russian economy and, by the way, to the environment. Lobbying for the preservation of traditional dumps is another topic. Apparently, it follows a simple logic: dumps stink, getting people to protest against them is not a difficult task, and if there are no dumps, there is not such a useful tool for influence. A feature of mass events managed by Greenpeace is their high manageability. Protests arise quickly, and the topics of these protests are also quickly forgotten. They are nullified or transferred to the political level. It all depends on the customer of the events and on the financial benefit for Greenpeace. Greenpeace is a logical brainchild of the era of the dictatorship of global capital. Of course, there are many real environmental enthusiasts working within the organization, but they are directed by the same “effective managers” from Wall Street.
Civilian Casualties Reported Following Turkish Drone Strikes On Northeastern Syria
South Front, Feb 9 2022
On Feb 9, Turkish combat drones targeted two vehicles to the west of the town of Amuda in the northern countryside of Syria’s al-Hasakah. The first vehicle, which was reportedly carrying fighters of the SDF, was targeted as it was moving on Amuda-al-Darbasiyah road, while the second vehicle, which was carried civilians, was hit near the town of Bherah. According to the Hawar News Agency, the strike on the second vehicle killed a child, 11-year-old Muhammad Ali Kallah, and injured three other civilians, 13-year-old Maher Issa Kallah, 40-year-old Omar Ghanem and 25-year-old Alaa Gedo Ahmed. The Turkish drone strikes also damaged a main power line, cutting electricity of more than 40 villages and towns in the northern countryside of al-Hasakah. Turkish combat drones have been very active over Kurdish-held areas in northern and northeastern Syria recently. On Feb 6 alone, two positions of SDF near the village of Arab Hassan in the northeastern countryside of Aleppo were targeted. The Turkish escalation against the SDF has begun to provoke the Syrian Arab Army. The army has already responded to few recent attacks on Kurdish-held areas that wounded some of its service members. A more serious confrontation may break out soon.
US Expert Warns France And Germany Will “Throw The Americans Under The Bus”
Paul Antonopoulos, South Front, Feb 9 2022
Biden said after his meeting with Scholz that he will “end” the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline from Russia to Europe if Moscow sent troops into Ukraine. Biden said during a joint press conference with Scholz:
If Russia invades there will no longer a Nord Stream 2. We will bring an end to it.
When pressed for more details on just exactly how the US can achieve this, Biden could only mutter:
I promise you, we’ll be able to do it.
The American president of course found it difficult to answer this question because his country is not involved in the Nord Stream 2 project and has very little influence over it. The only thing Washington can hope for is that sustained pressure on European allies will make them capitulate to their demands. However, the reality is that Germany, Europe’s most important country alongside France, has its own economic interests that must be served and not compromised for the sake of the US. Berlin has defended its ability to complete the pipeline, despite the fact that the US opposes the project in any way possible. Washington has no interest in the fact that the Nord Stream 2 pipeline is vital for the German economy and industry. Nonetheless, to try and appease Washington, Scholz stressed to journalists:
We’re absolutely united. We will do the same steps, and they will be very, very hard to Russia.
This is on the assumption though that Russia will invade Ukraine, something that the Kremlin has continually stressed it has no ambition of doing despite the constant warnings and rhetoric emanating from Washington. Both Berlin and Paris understand that Russia does not want to invade Ukraine and desperately want the manufactured crisis to end. Brandon Weichert, author of “Winning Space: How America Remains a Superpower” and a former US congressional staffer, said to the Express newspaper this week:
Paris is hesitant about getting too bogged down in a Russo-American fight over Ukraine for the same reason that Germany is desperate to avoid escalation in the particular fight over Ukraine. Paris, like Berlin, fears the prospects of their own countries becoming frontline states yet again in either a renewed Cold War between Russia and the US or, more frighteningly, an actual war.
Following talks on Friday in Moscow between Putin and Macron, the Financial Times, citing French sources, reported that Russia had “moved” towards de-escalating the situation around Ukraine. Specifically, the meeting was said to revolve around the withdrawal of Russian troops from Belarus after the end of their exercises in the country. According to sources, this will lead to further meetings and the signing of an agreement on “structured dialogue on collective security.” Macron had previously proposed a re-format of the European security system to include Moscow in it, but this offer went unanswered. This time, the French leader again noted that it is impossible to normalize the international situation without dialogue with Russia. the French president added:
We must protect our European brothers by proposing a new balance capable of preserving their sovereignty and peace. This must be done while respecting Russia and understanding the contemporary traumas of this great people and great nation.
In this way, Macron, despite some differences with Putin, has an immense respect for the Russian leader. Macron, just like his German colleague Scholz, is a realist and understands that discounting Moscow’s interests and concerns is not a realistic prospect if order, stability and peace is to be maintained in Europe, something that the Anglo Alliance (US and UK) are not interested in as they would not be directly affected by a potential continental war. As Weichert noted, among other reasons, France and Germany are also dependent on Russian energy supplies. Because of this, the two countries do not want to enforce the harsh restrictions that Biden demands. In the view of the former Congressional official, the two key allies would surely throw “the Americans under the bus, which they will because Paris thinks that would weaken America’s unwanted hold over European affairs.” In this way, the two European powerhouses, ignoring the incessant complaints from Poland and the Baltic states, are themselves deescalating a crisis in Ukraine that Washington and Kiev manufactured seemingly out of nowhere. In addition, although the Europeans are vowing to respond to any Russian invasion of Ukraine, and in this way shows “unity” with the US, they fully understand that Moscow has no plans for such an invasion. For this reason, Germany is completely unwilling to sacrifice its energy and industrial needs for the sake of appeasing Washington’s hostile anti-Russian policies.
US’ Uncorroborated Allegations About Moscow’s False-Flag Attacks Could Mask Its Own Plans
Uriel Araujo, South Front, Feb 9 2022
At a press briefing on Feb 3, while discussing the current Russian-Ukrainian crisis, State Dept spox Ned Price declared Russia seeks to “create a false flag operation to initiate military activity” and is considering producing a “propaganda video with graphic scenes of false explosions depicting corpses, crisis actors pretending to be mourners.” Price made such claims without providing any evidence whatsoever. This was not well received by journalists who repeatedly and emphatically asked for any corroborating evidence during the entire briefing. Such allegations are not new, though: Jen Psaki, the White House press secretary had already stated on Jan 18 that Washington has evidence indicating Moscow was planning a false-flag operation in the Donbas region at the Russian-Ukrainian border. After Saddam Hussein’s supposed “weapons of mass destruction,“ which were never found and yet justified the British-American invasion of Iraq, both London and Washington have lost a lot of credibility. Ironically, this crisis of credibility also fuels the popularity of conspiracy theories because many people are led to think that if their government and mass media lied about Iraq, then they could also lie about many other things.
It is also interesting to note that State Dept now mentions as a casual fact the existence of so-called “crisis actors” and “false flag operations,” something which was usually deemed as “conspiracy theories.” Such a word choice prompted AP journalist Matt Lee to say that Price was going into “Alex Jones territory,” referring to the controversial American radio show host. Psychology and social sciences experts have explained CTs as narratives people employ to make sense of difficult realities. Usually, social scientists do not take into consideration their factual merit or content, but rather look at them as a kind of “sign” that tells a lot about a society’s psychosocial atmosphere and its anxieties. Analyzing them would thus be similar to making sense of rumors, urban legends, and perhaps even dreams and myths. This is a valid approach. There certainly exists a conspiracist and paranoid style of thinking that is clearly not useful for any serious analysis of political and military scenarios. However, in daily usage, virtually anything may be labeled a conspiracy theiry. Such a label is often employed as a purely accusatory category. In fact, many accusations that used to be described as CTs may later be proven correct when new data comes to light.
One example is the US unethical and criminal medical experiment officially called the Tuskegee Study of Untreated Syphilis in the Negro Male (1932-1972), which infected over 400 African American men with syphilis, obviously without their consent or knowledge. It was conducted by the US Public Health Service and the CDC. Although it was originally dismissed as a conspiracy theory, today we know that the men were purposely not given treatment and about 100 died as a result of that. The problem is that it is not clear at all how exactly a “conspiracy theory” that has been proven correct differs from a completely false one. A more neutral manner of defining a “conspiracy theory” perhaps would be the following: any hypotheses that try to explain an event by invoking a secret plan, usually immoral, carried out by a group of individuals, that is a “conspiracy.” Conspiracies do exist and are, with some differences, described in criminal law also, but of course not every allegation about a conspiracy is true, and many are false. It is widely known that in the real world, the armed forces and intelligence agencies do engage in active measures and psychological warfare by means of psychological operations aimed at influencing emotions, and behavior of target groups or populations.
For example, the US Army Civil Affairs and Psychological Operations Command (Airborne), also known as CAPOC, is headquartered at Fort Bragg and was founded in 1985. In 2008, a scandal broke when it came to light that many military analysts often portrayed in the US news as independent experts were in fact retired officers still under the tutelage of the Pentagon in a campaign to shape the public opinion. One can also recall 15-year old Nayirah al-Ṣabaḥ’s widely publicized testimony before the US Congressional Humans Rights Caucus on 1990. She falsely claimed that during the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait she had witnessed Iraqi soldiers taking babies out of incubators in a hospital, leaving them to die. She was in fact the daughter of the Kuwaiti ambassador and the whole speech was war propaganda and a psychological operation to justify Washington’s military incursions in Iraq, even though not going so far in this case as to employ “crisis actors” or fake videos. As for false-flag operations, it is widely known that Nazi officer Reinhard Heydrich in 1939 fabricated evidence of a Polish attack against the Third Reich so as to influence German public opinion for war with Poland. This is known as the Gleiwitz incident. In 1962, the US DoD devised and proposed (but never executed) the incredibly immoral Operation Northwoods which would involve fabricating the hijacking of or even shooting down American planes and then blaming Cuba for it so as to justify war with Havana.
Agents provocateurs, false flag operations (some perhaps even involving “crisis actors”) and other such operations do exist in the real world, and they often take place in a gray area, both morally and legally. However, any allegation about it, to be taken seriously, must provide at least some evidence or clues, or else it must be seen as part of a narrative war or propaganda. Price’s uncorroborated allegations are thus ironic on many levels: there is in fact plenty of evidence suggesting Washington and Kiev are preparing a series of provocations and false-flag events to foment war, with multiple reports about toxic chemicals being stockpiled in some Donbas villages. Provocations and false-flag events: this has been indeed the American modus operandi since at least the 1964 Gulf of Tonkin incident involving the destroyer USS Maddox (which led the US to engage more directly in the Vietnam War), as James Bamford writes in his 2001 book Body of Secrets. Therefore, Price’s allegations about Russian false-flag operations should be interpreted as yet another American provocation and as part of Washington’s own psychological warfare aimed at influencing public opinion against Moscow. Ironically, such statements are given while the US, by means of its mercenaries in Ukraine, is possibly preparing its own false-flag attacks.
Niqnaq 