As the saying goes: "All roads lead to Rome", so it can be said:
"All traces lead to the US-American, private think tank Council on Foreign Relations, CFR for
short, as far as NATO's backers are concerned."
The fact of the CFR's unprecedented concentration of power and its global network allows only one conclusion to be drawn:
NATO must be seen as one of its instruments to advance the global goals of the CFR, up to
and including a centralized world government.
The alleged "safeguarding of peace" serves solely to legitimize their existence and their operations - in the service of the CFR.
Firstly, NATO is fueling all the warmongering - whether with propaganda, threats such as
NATO's eastward expansion or real armament, etc.
In Europe, the possibility of war is more present than at any time since the Second World War.
Secondly, NATO along with all the warmongering - up to and including war hysteria - serves as a welcome diversionary
tactic to advance the CFR strategists' real goals: namely, to establish the cornerstones of a centralized world government.
On April 4, 1949 - a good 75 years ago - NATO was founded as a defensive alliance against the then Soviet Union.
NATO stands for "North Atlantic Treaty Organization", also known as the "Atlantic Alliance" or the "North Atlantic Pact".
NATO now consists of 32 European and North American member states.
The most important principle of the alliance is the so-called mutual assistance clause in Article 5 of the NATO Treaty:
"The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America
will be considered an attack against them all."
NATO Article 5 therefore states that if one NATO member is attacked, the whole of NATO is de facto attacked.
The NATO Council declares a state of alliance, which has only been declared once before: after the
terrorist attacks in the USA on September 11, 2001.
The general public - as can be read on the German government's website - praises NATO as "the
most successful security alliance in the world".
It has guaranteed Europe's security for 75 years.
A good two years after the Russian invasion of Ukraine, 67% of the German population currently see a very strong or strong
threat to peace and security in Europe, according to a telephone survey conducted by ARD DeutschlandTrend on April 4, 2024.
82% of people consider NATO to be important for securing peace in Europe.
According to the "Security 2024" study, 52% of the Swiss population are in favor of closer
ties with NATO - 30% are in favor of joining NATO.
The question of the extent to which NATO secures peace in Europe divides opinion and concerns the population more than ever.
This documentary examines precisely this question and takes a look behind the scenes at NATO.
1. Has NATO secured peace in the past? - The most important NATO operations
In the following, we will take a closer look at some of the most important NATO operations.
These are official NATO-led operations and not operations conducted by NATO countries on their own initiative.
All their military operations took place in the post-Cold War period, i.e. after 1991.
The first of these operations took place in Bosnia from July 1992, in the form of sea blockades,
no-fly zones or so-called peacekeeping forces.
Operation Deliberate Force in Bosnia and Herzegovina from 30.8.-20.9.1995
In 1994 and 1995, mortar shells hit the Markalé market in Sarajevo.
Around 100 civilians died in the process.
The mortar shells were immediately blamed on the Serbs.
A commission of inquiry to determine responsibility for this was refused.
This authorized NATO to drop 1,026 bombs on 338 targets throughout the Serbian-controlled part of Bosnia.
In two and a half weeks, jets from eight NATO partner countries flew a total of 3,515 missions.
Around 27 civilians were killed in the air raids and the same number of soldiers.
To date, the situation in Bosnia has not really led to peace.
Operation Allied Force in the former Federal Republic of Yugoslavia from March 24 to June 10, 1999
Operation Allied Force was the code name of a NATO military operation against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia.
The approximately 200 fighter jets deployed dropped 28,018 explosive devices - including cluster
bombs - and 10-15 tons of uranium-coated ammunition.
There was neither a UN mandate nor the occurrence of an alliance case.
NATO justified the airstrikes with an alleged "humanitarian catastrophe".
However, according to several reports, including from the OSCE , there was no humanitarian
catastrophe or ethnic cleansing before the war began.
After the war began, however, there were 10,000 dead soldiers and policemen;
489-528 civilian deaths according to Human Rights Watch;
1,200-2,500 civilians killed according to Yugoslavian estimates;
devastating long-term effects such as miscarriages and serious illnesses caused by uranium ammunition.
According to estimates, 125,000 people died from the long-term effects.
The death rate in Yugoslavia and Serbia rose by 2.5% year on year.
And the infrastructure was destroyed: 110 hospitals, 480 schools, 19 railroad stations, 60 bridges and industrial plants.
Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF) in Afghanistan, the Philippines, Georgia, Kyrgyzstan, the Horn of
Africa, Somalia and the Sahara from 7.10.2001-28.12.2014
In response to the attacks of September 11, 2001, the US government declared the so-called war on international terrorism.
The NATO Council then decided to classify the attacks as an attack on the United States under Article 5, the
mutual assistance clause of the North Atlantic Treaty.
One of the measures in this war on terror was Operation Enduring Freedom.
Around 70 nations were involved in the operation, which was led by a US central command.
The operation ended on December 28, 2014.
It was replaced by the NATO mission "Resolute Support", which lasted until September 11, 2021.
This was no longer a combat mission, but rather advisory and logistical support for the Afghan government.
NATO left behind anything but peace and security in Afghanistan.
Within a short space of time, the Taliban had taken control of large parts of the entire country.
According to Welthungerhilfe, the humanitarian situation is "catastrophic".
Many observers regard the international mission in Afghanistan as a failure.
What NATO and its allies have left behind are an estimated 240,000 casualties.
43,000 civilian deaths alone by 2012.
Over 3,500 NATO soldiers lost their lives - 59 of them from the German Bundeswehr.
International military operation in Libya from 19.3.-31.10.2011
On 17 March 2011, UN Resolution 1973 authorized the UN member states to establish a "no-fly zone over Libya" to
supposedly protect the civilian population and support the insurgents against the government troops.
On March 31, 2011, NATO took command of the entire military operation to enforce UN Resolution 1973.
NATO flew a total of 7,587 airstrikes with 260 fighter jets.
The result was 50,000 civilian deaths and 50,000 civilian injuries.
Most of the economic infrastructure was destroyed and facilities of the large water network were bombed.
NATO's deployment in Libya has done anything but secure peace.
Libya has been rocked by violent conflicts since the fall of head of state Muammar al-Gaddafi in 2011.
Political instability and the collapse of public order and the economy continue to shape the daily lives
of people in the North African country to this day.
In addition, millions of refugees arrived in Europe via Libya.
Before the alleged "humanitarian" emergency in Libya, the country under Muammar al-Gaddafi had one of the highest per capita
incomes with the highest social achievements in all of Africa.
The claim that Gaddafi had killed 6, 000 people turned out to be a lie.
After the fall of al-Gaddafi, the humanitarian catastrophe was just beginning!
Further wars by and with NATO countries
The NATO-led operations caused untold suffering with hundreds of thousands of victims and devastating long-term effects!
In addition, there are other wars by and with NATO countries such as: Vietnam War 1965-1975, during which the US military
used the highly toxic herbicide "Agent Orange" on a large scale.
This caused immense long-term damage to the environment and genetic material, fetal malformations and miscarriages.
According to the government, 400,000 Vietnamese had died by 2009.
1st Iraq War or 2nd Gulf War 1990/91
2nd Iraq War and 3rd Gulf War in 2003, in which the coalition of the willing under US leadership fired 1,
000 to 2,000 tons of armor-piercing uranium ammunition.
Civil war in Syria since 2011
Military intervention in Yemen 2011-2015
All these wars have one thing in common:
The evils inflicted by the war were greater than the supposed injustice it was supposed to
eliminate in order to secure peace in the country.
This violates the principle of the international law of war.
And these wars have one more thing in common: they were built on lies.
In his book "Illegal Wars: How NATO countries sabotage the UN", Swiss historian Dr. Daniele Ganser has shown how
illegal wars have been waged in the past and present - without an alliance and without an explicit UN mandate.
This is why wars are morally justified with supposed "humanitarian disasters" or other lies.
But how is this possible and how is it implemented?
And if NATO's operations did not secure peace in the past, should they do so in the present?
2 If NATO's operations did not secure peace, was it pure failure or cunning calculation?
To answer this question, we need to take a look behind the scenes at NATO.
Who is behind NATO and what are their goals?
Who was behind the founding of NATO?
As the saying goes: "All roads lead to Rome":
"All traces lead to the US-American, private think tank Council on Foreign Relations - CFR for
short, as far as NATO's backers are concerned."
US lawyer William Bundy credited the CFR study groups with helping to create the framework of
thinking that led to the Marshall Plan and NATO.
Bundy was an analyst at the CIA foreign intelligence service.
When World War II began in Europe in September 1939, the US State Department proposed a
program of independent analysis and study.
This was assigned to the CFR study groups.
The project, which became known as War and Peace Studies, was intended to guide American foreign policy in the coming years of
war and the challenging new world that would emerge afterward.
The CFR website also states that "the matter was strictly confidential".
Quote: "Because the whole plan would be 'thrown overboard' if it became public knowledge that the State
Department was working with an outside group (the CFR).
The Rockefeller Foundation agreed to fund the project, reluctantly at first, but after being
convinced of its importance, with almost 350,000 dollars .
In the following five years, almost 100 men took part in the "War and Peace Studies", "
The chairman of the War and Peace Studies steering committee was Norman H. Davis .
Davis was a board member of the CFR from 1921 and president from 1936-44.
Allen Welsh Dulles and Hanson W. Baldwin (1903-1991) headed the "War and Peace Studies" armaments group,
where the basic ideas and designs for NATO were developed.
Allen Welsh Dulles was a board member of the CFR from 1927-69 and president from 1946-50; he was head of the CIA from 1953-1961.
As CIA Director, Dulles authorized covert assassinations of Fidel Castro , Patrice Lumumba and Rafael Trujillo , among others.
Lumumba was murdered by a firing squad.
He had previously played an important role in leading the Congo out of Belgian colonial rule in a peaceful manner.
Dulles was responsible for the government overthrows in Iran and Guatemala.
Under his leadership, the CIA secretly supported two rival conflict parties in South and Central America at the same time.
Dulles even had weapons supplied to the Cuban revolutionaries.
According to the principle of "divide and conquer".
This principle describes a military, political or rhetorical strategy aimed at dividing the opposing camp.
Dulles also initiated the CIA research program MK ULTRA in 1953.
The mind control program included thousands of human trials with several documented deaths.
The historian Dr. Daniele Ganser came to the conclusion in his work that the murder of President John
F. Kennedy was also commissioned by Allen Dulles.
Dulles was a 33rd degree Freemason.
Is it therefore not surprising that NATO does not secure peace at all, since its basic idea was worked out with the
help of a man, Allen Dulles, on whose hands there is blood?
An article from July 1983 in the British specialist publication "International Affairs"
sheds light on the subsequent founding of NATO.
The title is: "The Pentagon Negotiations in March 1948: The Start of the North Atlantic Treaty".
According to the authors Cees Wiebes and Bert Zeeman, this article was intended to supplement the official NATO historiography.
Quote: "According to the official NATO historiography, the negotiations that led to the signing of the
North Atlantic Treaty began in Washington on July 6, 1948.
However, it has been known for some years that negotiations on a security treaty between the United States and the
Western European states had already been held before this date.
These negotiations took place at the end of March 1948 in the strictest secrecy between the United States, the
United Kingdom and Canada at the Pentagon in Washington.
One of the participants in these secret consultations speaks of 'the decisive (and secret) Pentagon talks in March 1948
in which the North Atlantic Treaty was actually conceived'."
The "International Affairs" article also names the people who conducted the negotiations in
the Pentagon between March 22 and April 1, 1948.
Here too, the traces of the delegation participants lead, how could it be otherwise, to the CFR:
Lewis W. Douglas , head of his delegation.
He was United States Ambassador to the United Kingdom from 1947-1950.
He was a member of the Rockefeller Foundation from 1935 and on the Executive Committee from 1936-1939.
He was on the board of the Council on Foreign Relations from 1940-1964.
Theodore Achilles , a US diplomat in Peru, was also a member of the CFR.
Alfred Gruenther , General of the US Army, was commander-in-chief for all NATO operations from 1953-1956.
Robert Cecil , was a British diplomat and co-founder of "Chatham House" in July 1920, a private think tank based in London.
One year later, the US counterpart, the CFR, was founded in New York.
Until 2004, Chatham House was also known as the Royal Institute of International Affairs.
Key projects are funded by the Rockefeller Foundation, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and NATO, among others.
Robert Cecil was a Freemason.
Lester B. Pearson , head of the Canadian delegation, was the 14th Prime Minister of Canada from 1963 to 1968.
He was a member of the Bilderberg Group and a participant at the 1964 Bilderberg meeting.
The Rockefeller Foundation, the CIA and the CFR were again involved in setting up the Bilderberg Group.
The aim was to set up recurring conferences with European and US politicians and business leaders.
3. objectives of NATO = objectives of the CFR
In order to understand the underlying objectives or purpose of NATO, the CFR's objectives must be understood.
The CFR is modest on its website:
It serves to "help us better understand the world and the foreign policy decisions facing the United States and other countries."
But an organization is unlikely to build up an unprecedentedly extensive network just to perform an advisory function!
For decades, the CFR occupied almost all key positions in the US government and provided several hundred top officials and advisors
in each administration - whether Democratic or Republican.
Richard Harwood, the former executive editor and ombudsman of the Washington Post, wrote approvingly of the Council on
Foreign Relations that its members "most closely resemble what one might call the ruling establishment of the United States.
(...) They don't just analyze and interpret US foreign policy; they help make it."
Members of the private Council on Foreign Relations include:
several US presidents and vice-presidents of both parties;
almost all US Secretaries of State, Defense and Treasury;
most of the chiefs of staff and commanders of the US military and NATO;
some of the most influential members of Congress (especially foreign and security policy makers);
Almost all national security advisors, CIA directors, UN ambassadors, Fed chairmen, World Bank
presidents and directors of the National Economic Council;
numerous prominent academics; numerous directors of banks, think tanks, universities, NGOs, and Hollywood;
as well as the key members of the 9/11 Commission and the Warren Commission
In addition, the CFR includes companies that belong to the global giants of big business, big
banking, big tech, big data, big media and big pharma.
In short, the CFR has unparalleled reach and power.
However, the power and influence exercised by the CFR extends far beyond its members:
In England, the CFR has a sister organization known as the Royal Institute of International Affairs
(RIIA), also known as Chatham House, founded in 1920;
In Europe, the CFR established the European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR) in 2007;
With the Council of Councils (CoC), the CFR brings together member organizations from 24 countries, including Russia and China.
The Russian CFR member organization "Council on Foreign and Defense Policy" (SVOP) runs the discussion club "Valdai", in
which Russian President Vladimir Putin regularly participates.
The biweekly print magazine "The New American" summed it up as follows in its July 2021 issue.
It was a special edition to mark the 100th anniversary of the CFR with the title: "CFR: Still the power behind the throne".
"The history of the CFR is a chronicle of a century-long war against national sovereignty and the relentless effort to
establish an all-powerful world government that CFR globalists have often referred to as their 'New World Order'. (...)
Indeed, the CFR wields unprecedented influence in political, financial, economic, media and academic circles. (...)
He is the public face, the central nervous system of what critics call the 'Deep State' - the unelected
'permanent government' that has taken control of our country."
The issue ends with the words, quote, "The 'Deep State's' hellish grip on our nation - and on the entire world - will not be broken
unless more Americans (and more people worldwide) wake up, expose the CFR's growing control,
and resist its diabolical New World Order agenda."
On February 17, 1950, Wall Street banker James P. Warburg, an adviser to Franklin D. Roosevelt, told a US Senate
committee: "We are going to have a world government whether we like it or not (...) by consent or by conquest."
He was also a member of the CFR, as was his father, Paul Warburg, who is known as the "father" of the Federal Reserve System.
The extent to which NATO plays a key role in implementing the agenda of a centralized world
government can be seen in the following chapters.
4. how is it possible to sell NATO operations as "securing peace"? - "The propaganda matrix" of the CFR
The successful implementation of geopolitical strategies, in particular the justification of military means to
ostensibly secure peace, would be unthinkable without the effective influencing of public opinion.
A 22-page study by Swiss Policy Research (SPR) from September 2017 presents "The Propaganda Matrix" of the CFR:
"How the CFR controls the flow of geostrategic information."
"Swiss Policy Research" is an independent research and information project on geopolitical
propaganda in Swiss and international media.
The study explains "how the CFR created a largely closed, transatlantic information loop in which almost all
relevant sources and reference points are controlled by members of the Council and its partner organizations."
In the USA, almost all well-known media outlets were actually founded by CFR representatives or bought up decades ago.
In Germany, the integration of leading media people - in addition to the Bilderberg Group - takes
place in particular via the so-called Atlantic Bridge.
It was founded in 1952 by CFR and World Bank President John J. McCloy, together with CFR member and banker Eric Warburg.
In Switzerland, the structural integration of the major publishers is primarily achieved via the Bilderberg Group and through
increasingly close cooperation with German Atlantikbrücke media.
News agencies
News agencies play a special role in the information matrix.
In fact, for international events, almost all the text and images used by CFR media come from just three global news agencies:
the American Associated Press (AP), the British-Canadian Thomson-Reuters, and the French Agence France-Presse (AFP).
While Reuters and AP are directly involved in the Council, AFP is owned by the French state, which in turn is integrated into
the transatlantic structures via the Bilderberg Group and NATO.
Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) & PR agencies
Even without non-governmental organizations, it would be almost inconceivable to sell
military operations to the general population.
These deceive the people into believing that they are more independent and credible.
In fact, the directors of Amnesty International (AI), Human Rights Watch (HRW) and many other ostensibly humanitarian
organizations have been involved in the CFR for decades.
Many others are financed and directed by CFR billionaires such as George Soros.
Swiss Policy Research (SPR) writes that such NGOs are always deployed when a military
intervention needs to be legitimized in humanitarian terms.
As early as 1991, Amnesty International publicly "verified" the "incubator lie" invented by an American PR firm and
thus contributed significantly to the launch of the Gulf War.
Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have also called for "humanitarian" military interventions in the Balkans, Afghanistan
and Libya on the basis of questionable or even false claims.
The claim that Gaddafi had killed 6,000 people turned out to be a lie, according to Swiss Policy Research.
The Gulf War had only just ended and the incubator lie had been uncovered when the US PR agency Rudder Finn was
already active in the Balkan wars, preparing the publicity ground for the subsequent NATO intervention.
The director of Rudder Finn at the time explained in a later interview why his company spread false
reports of Serbian "death camps" in Bosnia, for example:
"We have not confirmed the existence of death camps in Bosnia, we have only made it known
that (the US magazine) Newsday has claimed this.
(...) We had a job to do and we did it.
We are not paid to be moral."
Supposedly humanitarian organizations such as Avaaz or Campact with their online petitions should also be mentioned.
Instead of support for the rainforest, they suddenly demand a "no-fly zone" over Libya.
5. NATO operations can be sold as "securing peace" because not only the "propaganda matrix" but
also NATO itself is firmly in the hands of the CFR
Swiss Policy Research writes: "The CFR has maintained its own training program for officers for decades, so that it is
estimated that around 75% of all senior US military officers have now been trained by the CFR - including almost
all Chiefs of Staff, NATO Supreme Commanders and Area Commanders since the Second World War.
In this way, the Council has built up an ideologically trained, imperial armed force that is
otherwise almost only known from totalitarian regimes."
On the CFR website you can read about the military training program:
"The program allows the selected officers to expand their knowledge of international relations by spending a year at CFR
headquarters in New York (...) through intensive participation in the active program of CFR meetings and events, as
well as interaction with the diverse membership of the CFR."
The traces of the NATO Secretaries General and Supreme Allied Commanders Europe - SACEUR for short
- also point to the Bilderberg Group and the CFR.
The Secretary General represents the organization in public as NATO's supreme representative.
He is always from Europe.
The SACEUR is always a US general or admiral and has supreme military operational command.
A considerable number of the Secretaries General and SACEURs were participants in Bilderberg conferences.
The list of names can be found in the credits.
6. NATO as an instrument - not to secure peace, but rather to advance the global goals of the CFR,
up to and including a centralized world government
The fact of the CFR's unprecedented concentration of power and its global network allows only one conclusion to be drawn:
NATO must be seen as one of its instruments to advance the global goals of the CFR, up to
and including a centralized world government.
The alleged "safeguarding of peace" serves solely to legitimize their existence and their operations - in the service of the CFR.
One geopolitical goal of the CFR strategists is certainly to secure, if not expand, the military
supremacy of the US army and NATO in the world.
According to an update from June 2023, the US armed forces have an estimated 750 military
bases in more than 80 countries outside the USA.
In Germany, there are 119 military facilities.
A visual database shows 56 NATO bases worldwide.
The US military base "Camp Bondsteel" in Kosovo is worth mentioning.
This was set up after NATO's "Operation Allied Force" against Yugoslavia in June 1999.
The base covers 386 hectares (3,860,000 m²) and is home to up to 7,000 soldiers from the US Army and allied troops.
The "strategy of tension" as a geopolitical instrument of the architects of a world government to
further expand their political and military world power
But every geostrategist who wants to further expand his political and military world power does not primarily
rely on conventional - so-called - "hot" wars, but on keeping the population in "fear and terror".
This is also known as the "strategy of tension".
The following definition can be found in Krimpedia:
"The strategy of tension as a political term refers to the measures promoted or carried out by state bodies to stir
up fear or uncertainty among their own population or state.
(...) In addition, a strategy of tension can serve to justify repressive state actions and interventions by
strengthening the population's desire for state intervention."
Doesn't that sound familiar?
The supposed coronavirus pandemic sends its regards.
It was only possible to justify repressive measures with the help of "fear-mongering and insecurity".
But back to the term "strategy of tension".
The term "strategy of tension" was first used in 1969 in an article in the British Sunday newspaper Observer.
He was referring to covert operations by the Italian state.
Between 1969 and 1984, there were several terrorist attacks in Italy, resulting in more than 200 deaths and around 600 injuries.
These were blamed on the "Red Brigades", a radical left-wing group.
Extensive investigations by the Venetian investigating magistrate Felice Casson lead him onto the trail of one of the actual
perpetrators, the right-wing extremist Vincenzo Vinciguerra.
He made an extensive and momentous confession.
Vinciguerra testified that he had been covered up by people from the state apparatus and that the assassination
had been part of a comprehensive strategy, which Casson later described as a "strategy of tension".
This approach was aimed at discrediting the traditionally strong Communist Party in Italy in
order to prevent its participation in government.
Casson investigated further and, after researching the archives of the military intelligence service SISMI ,
uncovered the existence of a highly secretive complex structure within the Italian state.
These were so-called "stay-behind organizations" , which in Italy were called "Gladio".
Gladio emerged from the cooperation between the Italian "intelligence service of the armed forces" SIFAR and
the CIA and had been integrated into NATO since 1964.
Correctly understood. These were NATO secret armies that were set up after the Second World War by the US secret
service CIA together with the British secret service MI6.
In the event of a Soviet occupation of the countries, they were to fight as guerrillas and liberate Western Europe.
In his research project on the NATO secret armies, Swiss historian Dr. Daniele Ganser found evidence that similar networks
existed in France, Germany, Greece, the Netherlands, Belgium, Spain, Portugal, Norway, Luxembourg, Denmark, Austria, Finland,
Sweden and Switzerland in addition to the operation in Italy.
According to historian Daniele Ganser, "terror (...) is more suitable than any other
military strategy for manipulating the population."
According to Ganser, methods of creating and manipulating fear are intended to make the (local) population receptive
or hostile to "certain political or economic measures".
How can a population be better manipulated and made receptive to a centralized world
government than by creating fear and insecurity?
However, the methods used to terrify a population do not only refer to terror with armed
force, but also to any kind of war rhetoric.
For example, the so-called "Cold War" between the USA and the Soviet Union between 1945 and 1991 led
to a veritable arms race, including a nuclear one.
A direct open war with the use of weapons was avoided, but the mutual threat of nuclear war under the term
"deterrence" conjured up for the first time the possible self-extinction of humanity ("overkill").
The conflict took on an extremely threatening character on several occasions, so that the possibility of a
"hot" war between the superpowers was always in the air.
In this way, the population was kept under "tension" and "uncertainty" at all times.
This played into the hands of governments and the arms industry to deprive people of their civil
rights and freedoms or otherwise make a profit.
The same pattern can also be seen in the current rhetoric surrounding the Ukraine-Russia conflict.
After the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, it was NATO's turn.
Correctly understood! With the so-called eastward expansion of NATO from 1999, the geopolitical strategists
succeeded in maintaining the potential for conflict with Russia and keeping their own population under tension.
When NATO first expanded eastwards in 1999, it was Poland, the Czech Republic and Hungary;
2004 Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia;
2009 Albania and Croatia;
2017 Montenegro; 2020 North Macedonia;
2023 Finland; 2024 Sweden
Ukraine's accession to NATO would be the absolute pinnacle of the policy of confrontation and tension with Russia.
If Ukraine were to join NATO, the mutual assistance clause would be triggered and all NATO states would be at war with Russia.
It can be assumed that this would result in the war spreading to the whole of Europe - if not the whole world.
In an interview with Deutschlandfunk radio in March 2024, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg reiterated that he could not
say exactly when Ukraine would be admitted to the alliance: "But we are working hard to
make sure it happens as quickly as possible."
US Secretary of State Antony Blinken said on the sidelines of the ceremony marking NATO's 75th
anniversary, quote: "Ukraine will become a NATO member.
Our aim at this meeting is to help build a bridge to their accession."
Blinken, you guessed it, is a member of the CFR.
There has long been a controversial debate about whether there was such a promise during negotiations
in 1990 that NATO would not be expanded eastwards.
The fact is that there is no binding and treaty-based commitment to the Soviet Union or to Russia.
Vladimir Polenov, a member of the Russian delegation at the 1990 negotiations, said: "It was a mistake not to put these
assurances to the Soviet Union in writing that NATO would not be expanded in the east. That was a very big mistake."
Whether with or without a promise should not matter to the CFR strategists.
NATO has fulfilled its purpose of maintaining the "strategy of tension".
However, there is another revealing promise between the Russian and US governments:
In the April 14, 2014 issue of the Berliner Zeitung, the German writer Rolf Hochhuth mentioned that the Kremlin
and the White House have had a secret agreement since 1952:
"... according to which, if the Cold War were to degenerate into a hot one, no window pane would be broken in Russia
and America, but "only" Poland and Germany would be wiped out:
The most monstrous betrayal of an ally that anyone who still reads history has ever heard of ..."
Such a strategy of fighting a war on the backs of the European population is something the
CFR strategists can certainly be trusted with.
CFR strategist Allen Dulles, as CIA director from 1953 to 1961, finally set an example by supplying
rival conflict parties with weapons at the same time.
An article from April 22, 2024 in the journal "Foreign Affairs", which is published quarterly on behalf of
the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), shows that this is not just a far-fetched theory.
The title of the article says it all: "Europe - but not NATO - should send troops to Ukraine"
The German investigative journalist Thomas Röper commented on the article, quote: "Anyone who reads (...) carefully will
realize that Putin's statement that the US is fighting in Ukraine to the last Ukrainian is unfortunately absolutely true.
What's more, the article shows that the authors would also like to fight to the last European..."
The authors also make it clear that the USA and NATO would be in the clear:
"And since European forces would be operating outside the NATO framework and NATO territory, any casualties would not
trigger an Article 5 response and call the US into action.
Russia's opponent would not be NATO, but a coalition of European states that would strive for
a balance against naked Russian imperialism."
A textbook strategy, as shown in the educational film "How do modern wars work?":
The "aggressor" gets his chosen countries to march against his biggest rival with their own weapons and armies.
Only when all countries have shot their last ammunition, lost their best people and are ruined, does the real enemy of mankind,
the true aggressor and warmonger, intervene in order to defeat everyone together (...) (or) to be celebrated as the savior."
See also the so-called Stratfor speech from 2015 by US geostrategist George Friedman.
According to the report, the USA sees its greatest threat in a possible German-Russian alliance.
A war in Europe with Germany and Russia would be in the interests of US supremacy policy.
Think of the famous statement made by the British Lord Hastings Ismay in his office as the first Secretary General of NATO:
NATO was founded "to keep the Soviet Union out, the Americans in and the Germans down", in German: "To keep the
Soviet Union out, the Americans in and the Germans down."
Can this statement really only be understood in the context of the founding of NATO, as the
tabloid media do, or is it still valid today?
7 Conclusion: NATO cannot be regarded as a guarantor for "securing peace" - certainly not in Europe - but as a guarantor
for the builders of a new world order, and this in two respects
For the builders of a new world order under central leadership, NATO fulfills its purpose in two ways:
Firstly, NATO as a warmonger
Firstly, NATO is fueling all the warmongering - whether with propaganda, threats such as
NATO's eastward expansion or real armament, etc.
In Europe, the possibility of war is more present than at any time since the Second World War.
The Bundeswehr website refers to an "Operations Plan Germany" (OPLAN DEU for short).
The "Operational Plan Germany" is a "national defense plan" with the following objectives:
On the one hand, literally: "to protect and defend Germany, its territorial integrity and its
citizens together with other state and civilian actors".
On the other hand, to "ensure the deployment of Allied forces over and through Germany to NATO's eastern flank."
The warmongering rhetoric reached a further climax on May 31, 2024.
The NATO foreign ministers met in Prague.
Preparations for the summit in Washington in July 2024 and NATO support for Ukraine were on the agenda.
The headline in the tabloid media read: "The USA and Germany allow their weapons to be used
against positions in Russia, but only near Kharkov.
The Ukrainian government had already urged on June 3 that the "scope of use" of
Western weapons be extended to Russian territory.
It should only be a matter of time.
The right to defense is derived from international law, says NATO."
Alliance Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg has called on the allies to continue supplying Ukraine with weapons and ammunition.
Russia's response came immediately: Russia sees the NATO action as a serious escalation and is threatening a massive response.
Dmitry Medvedev, President of Russia from 2008 to 2012 and Deputy Head of the Security Council of the Russian
Federation since 2020, wrote on his Telegram channel:
"Such "individual assistance" by NATO states against Russia ... represents a serious escalation of the conflict.
The former Ukraine and its NATO allies will receive a response of such destructive force that the alliance itself will
simply not be able to resist being drawn into the conflict."
At the 27th International Economic Forum in St. Petersburg in early June 2024, Russian President
Vladimir Putin spoke of an "asymmetric response".
He described a so-called "symmetrical response", that Russia wanted to attack NATO territory, as "bullshit".
Putin said: "We are thinking that if someone considers it possible to deliver weapons to the combat zone to carry out
attacks on our territory (...), why should we not have the right to place such weapons in regions of the world where
attacks are carried out on sensitive objects of those countries that do this in relation to Russia?"
Secondly, NATO as a diversionary tactic
Second, NATO, along with all the warmongering - up to and including war hysteria - serves as a welcome diversionary
tactic to advance the CFR strategists' real goals: namely, to establish the cornerstones of a centralized world government.
Military superiority is only one of several factors.
One of the most important cornerstones for establishing a new world order is control and power over health and finance.
In the area of health in particular, the new WHO pandemic treaty and the revised International Health Regulations are
intended to centralize control over "health measures" worldwide.
The WHO - which, like the UN, was designed in the CFR study groups - would then be given sole
authority to interpret diseases and decide on measures.
Another central cornerstone is sovereignty over finances.
The introduction of digital central bank currencies is currently being prepared in the
background worldwide - including Russia and China.
According to the German financial expert Ernst Wolff, every citizen and every company should
only have a single account at the central bank.
This would allow the state to centrally determine the money supply, manage and control
money flows and set interest rates as required.
Quote Ernst Wolff: "Citizens will very quickly realize that the state could not only track every single transaction, but also
impose individual interest rates, individual tax rates or even penalties on them, tie the money to a social
credit system based on the Chinese model or cut them off from all financial flows altogether."
These are just two examples of how power and control are to be centralized worldwide and transferred to a "world government".
NATO serves firstly to ensure military supremacy and secondly to distract from all kinds of
world domination efforts that are in full swing.
Kla.TV has uncovered these efforts in many programs.
You can find some of them in the blue info box.
Dear viewers, you may now feel overwhelmed by all these facts and see no way out.
Kla.TV often receives feedback from the audience that we only point out problems and don't present any solutions.
At this point, however, we cannot apologize for the fact that our solutions are not rooted in the visible area.
In the face of all these massive threats, we have been drawing our strength and hope for decades from a
higher dimension, to which Ivo Sasek repeatedly testifies.
For all those who do not want to give up hope, we would like to draw your attention to our wide range of light-filled
conferences at www.ivo-sasek.ch/veranstaltungen and www.sasek.tv.
Finally, watch three short excerpts from Kla.TV founder Ivo Sasek's speech, which he gave at
the International Friends Meeting on May 4, 2024.
Sasek talks about the weapon of distraction from what is actually a hidden world war and about a salutary way out of it.
Dear ones, we urgently need to learn to understand that times have changed.
The wars currently being waged in the same way, i.e. the physical wars with their tanks, helicopters, cruise missiles
and the like, have a completely different function today.
Do you know which ones?
These conventional wars that are being waged at the moment, they serve mainly as a weapon of distraction
from the actual hidden world war, do you understand?
The wars themselves, think carefully about this sentence I am speaking, the wars themselves that are being waged right now are
diversionary tactics to cover up the much larger ongoing war.
If they succeed in vaccinating the whole world - this gene therapy - can you understand how that works?
The current hybrid war, on the other hand, actually encompasses the last and final human being on this planet.
As Uncle Bill (Gates) predicted: "Only when every person under this sky has been vaccinated will we
be safe ..." - You know, Uncle Bill, Bill Gates.
- So the hidden attacker, he expects it.
He wrote that down 120 years ago, I have it in writing.
The hidden attacker expects to be recognized by us only when it is already too late, because then any opposition
can be checkmated at the touch of a button using digital, cashless total surveillance technology.
Now, in these days of ours, on this day of unlocking - as I call it today - God is drawing his hardest,
sharpest arrow, his most powerful weapon, as it were.
What weapon is that? Are we talking about physical weapons here?
No, no, no. Not at the moment.
You see, millennia have taught us that physical weapons only ever lead to worse wars and even deadlier weapon creations.
We have learned that.
And the true and only truly salvific weapons of God are therefore the weapons of the spirit.
The weapon of the word. The strongest there is under heaven.
The truth, for example, spoken, but not, as before, as a weak or even law-killing human word - but the truth,
spoken according to the effects of power and powerful authentications of ontic power.
Can you see the difference?
This means that we are only allowed to use one weapon in this announced final battle.
The full "Unlocking Day" speech, which was broadcast live in 53 countries, can be found at www.kla.tv/29017.
The red carpet is rolled out and the anthem blares out.
The flag rises proudly to the sky - "Peace! Peace!" is said so often.
Over 50 dead at the same time, thousands of injured lament their suffering.
Black smoke rises to the sky, people scream for peace at the top of their lungs.
Like a golden sun in the firmament, we wish for peace, as a goal in the end.
Peace is not a distant goal, peace is the way.
Peace, a vehicle on which you move.
Peace, peace, peace begins WITHIN me.
Peace, peace, peace, that is God IN me.
Which reigns deep in my heart, exists far beyond logic and reason, manifests itself as communal peace within us.
Wars are raging on five continents and people are dying every day.
Not enough, new things are being instigated - North Korea, Russia or Iran.
The throat tightens, the pulse rises. How much more misery before peace appears?
The fist clenches like a stone. Hey, if there is peace in you, there will be peace.
Like a golden sun in the firmament, we wish for peace, as a goal in the end.
Peace is not a distant goal, peace is the way.
Peace, a vehicle on which you move.
Peace, peace, peace begins WITHIN me.
Peace, peace, peace, that is God IN me.
Which reigns deep in my heart, exists far beyond logic and reason, manifests itself as communal peace within us.
Peace, peace, peace also begins WITHIN you.
Peace, peace, peace, that is God IN you.
This peace creates oneness with all, even if it's crazy, hey, there is such power.
Peace, peace, peace begins WITHIN me.
Peace, peace, peace, that is God IN me.
Which reigns deep in my heart, exists far beyond logic and reason, manifests itself as communal peace within us.
Peace, peace, peace begins WITHIN me.
Peace, peace, peace, that is God IN me.
Which reigns deep in my heart, exists far beyond logic and reason, manifests itself as communal peace within us.
Peace, peace begins IN me.
Peace, peace, that is God IN me.