Tag: Russia
Declassified: How America Planned to Invade Italy To Save It from Russia
As accusations fly that Russia manipulated the 2016 American election to put Donald Trump in the White House, some Americans are remembering that the United States also fiddled with elections in numerous nations during the Cold War, including Chile, Iran and Central America.
One of the most notorious examples is Italy, where the CIA mounted an aggressive—and successful—campaign to limit Communist success in the 1948 election, including handing bags of money to conservative Italian political parties (a tradition hardly unknown in American politics). From 1948 to 1968, the CIA gave more than $65 million to Italian parties and labor unions.
But instead of cash, the United States could have sent in the Marines to give Italy the government that America thought it deserved. As late as 1960, America was still contemplating using military force if the Communists took power. Of course, the United States would always have responded militarily if the Soviet Army invaded Italy during the Cold War. But note the difference: American intervention would have been prompted not by Soviet tanks, but rather if the Communists took power through a coup—or by winning an election.
The details have emerged in a newly declassified Pentagon study released by the private watchdog organization, the National Security Archive.
In 1954, the Joint Chiefs of Staff urged that if a Communist government took power in Italy, “the United States, preferably in concert with its principal Allies, should be prepared to take the strongest possible action to prevent such an eventuality, such action possibly extending to the use of military power.”
That position didn’t suit President Dwight Eisenhower, whose World War II experiences as Supreme Allied Commander in Europe made him smarter than most about how to keep an alliance like NATO together. Eisenhower warned that he “could not imagine anything worse than the unilateral use by the United States of its forces to overthrow a Communist regime. This simply could not be done except in concert with our allies.”
Nonetheless, the National Security Council approved a paper that stated: “In the event the Communists achieve control of the Italian government by apparently legal means, the United States, in concert with its principal NATO allies, should take appropriate action, possibly extending to the use of military power, to assist Italian elements seeking to overthrow the Communist regime in Italy.”
Note the words “apparently legal means.” Perhaps the attitude among American leaders during the Cold War was that “Communist government” and “legal” were oxymorons, and that no Communist government could have genuine legitimacy (which had certainly been the case of the Eastern European regimes that rode into office on the backs of Soviet tanks in 1945). Nonetheless, the U.S. Sixth Fleet would have performed the ultimate act of electoral nullification, by using force against a Communist Party that—as did happen in the 1940s and 1950s—enjoyed strong popular support.
Even as late as August 1960, just months before John F. Kennedy took office, an NSC paper proposed that regardless of whether the Communists took power in Italy by illegal or legal means, the United States should be prepared to use military force—unilaterally if need be—to “assist whatever Italian elements are seeking to prevent or overthrow Communist domination.” This was fifteen years after the chaos and devastation of World War II. While Italy has never been known for stable governments, in 1960 it was not still the political and economic basket case under the rule of Allied military government.
In the end, “Eisenhower and Dulles were willing to intervene militarily only if the Communists forcibly seized power and then only in concert with other European nations,” concludes the study’s author, Ronald Landa. And that was wise: as Eisenhower himself realized, U.S. tanks rolling into Rome—or supporting right-wing Italians overthrowing their own government—would have been a propaganda godsend for the godless Communists in Moscow.
All of which has nothing to do with the question of whether Russia influenced the U.S. election. Except as a reminder that political manipulation has been performed by many nations.
READ THE DOCUMENTS
|
|
|
|
The original source of this article is The National Interest
Copyright © Michael Peck, The National Interest, 2017.
Michael Flynn Did Not Violate The Logan Act
In December when Michael Flynn talked with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak, Flynn said it was to discuss logistics of a call between President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin. Apparently they also discussed the sanctions imposed by outgoing President Barack Obama on Russia for their assumed and alleged “hacking” of the U.S. election in November.
By way of retaliation, based on the allegations of meddling in the election, Obama imposed sanctions that included kicking out 35 Russian officials and closing down two Russian-owned compounds in the U.S. President Putin said the next day that he had no intention of retaliating against Obama’s sanctions, but said he’d wait and deal with the Trump Administration.
Flynn, when recounting his discussion with the Russian Ambassador, obviously talked about Obama’s sanctions, but averred that he hadn’t. And technically, this was Flynn’s error – he lost the confidence of the President and the Vice President by not telling them that sanctions were in fact discussed. Even in his press conference this week President Trump said Flynn wouldn’t have been doing his job if he hadn’t discussed Obama’s sanctions. The sin was not in discussing the sanctions, the sin was in not telling his bosses that he had.
And this is where the political assassination of Michael Flynn occurred. According to the Washington Post, an intelligence source contacted them revealing, illegally, that the December 29th call between Flynn and Kislyak did include discussion of the Obama sanctions. It’s a felony to disclose intelligence data and information. And in order for an intelligence insider to leak something so inconsequential, it was obviously intended to cause political damage to the administration. There really can be no other viable explanation as to why someone in our intelligence apparatus would go public with such a disclosure.
Many have attempted to claim that Flynn violated the Logan Act, since he was not yet functioning in his new appointment as the National Security Advisor. This is a red herring. The Logan Act dates to 1799, when a state legislator with no ties to any administration tried to assert himself as a personal negotiator for final peace with France. The anti-Jefferson Federalists did not like this private initiative, so they passed the Logan Act to make private ventures intent on negotiating personal treaties over international feuds a crime. A representative of an incoming or an outgoing administration is functioning in their official, or official-to-be, capacity, and are not acting a private citizens. Apparently Flynn was addressing Obama’s sanctions against Russia, not negotiating for them. And as President Trump said this week, Flynn would not have been doing his job properly if he didn’t broach the subject of Obama’s sanctions.
Leaked John Kerry Audio Reveals Obama Intentionally Allowed The Rise Of ISIS
Absolutely stunning and something we always suspected – A leaked audio of Secretary Kerry reveals Obama intentionally allowed the rise of ISIS!
From Conservative Treehouse:
There are moments within investigative research when your jaw can stand agape as you recognize the scope of what you are reading or hearing. A brutally down-played audio of Secretary John Kerry is just such an occasion.
♦ In August of 2014 President Obama (wearing a tan business suit) gave a press conference where he stated he “did not have a strategy” against ISIS. –Video Link–
♦ Two months later, in October of 2014, Josh Earnest gave a press conference where he stated: “Our ISIS strategy is dependent on something that does not yet exist” –Video Link–
However, on September 30th 2016 the New York Times quietly released a leaked audio recording of Secretary John Kerry meeting with multiple factions associated within Syria.
When you listen to the audio recording it becomes immediately obvious what was going on when both of those 2014 statements were made by the White House. In addition, you discover why this jaw-dropping 2016 leak/story was buried by the U.S. media and how it connects to over 5 years of perplexing U.S. mid-east policy.
This evidence within this single story would/should forever remove any credibility toward the U.S. foreign policy under President Obama. It also destroys the credibility of a large number of well known republicans. What the recording reveals is substantive:
♦ First, only regime change, the removal of Bashir Assad, in Syria was the goal for President Obama. This is admitted and outlined by Secretary John Kerry.
♦ Secondly, in order to accomplish this primary goal, the White House was willing to watch the rise of ISIS by placing their bet that ISIS’s success would force Syrian President Bashir Assad to acquiesce toward Obama’s terms and step down.
♦ Thirdly, in order to facilitate the two objectives, Obama and Kerry intentionally gave arms to ISIS and even, arguably, attacked a Syrian government military convoy to stop a strategic attack upon the Islamic extremists killing 80 Syrian soldiers.
Pause for a moment and consider those three points carefully before continuing. Because this audio (below), along with accompanying research now surfacing, not only exposes these three points as truth – but also provides the specific evidence toward them.
The problem in the Obama/Kerry’s secret strategy became clear when ISIS grew in sufficient strength to give the White House optimism for the scheme – however, instead of capitulation Assad then turned to Russia for help.
When Russia came to aid Bashir Assad the Syrian Government began being able to defeat ISIS and the Islamic Extremist elements within Syria. For the hidden plan of Obama/Kerry (and also McCain, Graham, et al), Russia defeating ISIS, al-Qaeda and al-Nusra, upended their objective.
The revelations within this leaked audio are simply astounding. The 40-minute discussion took place on the sidelines of a United Nations General Assembly in New York. The meeting took place at the Dutch Mission to the United Nations on Sept. 22nd 2016:
[…] Kerry’s off-record conversation was apparently with two dozen ‘Syrian civilians’, all from US backed opposition-linked NGO’s in education and medical groups supposedly working in ‘rebel-held’ (aka terrorist-held) areas in Syria.
This opposition conclave also included ‘rescue workers’ which can only be ambassadors from the White Helmets, a pseudo NGO which serves as Washington and London’s primary PR front in pursuit of a “No Fly Zone’ in Syria, and it’s being bankrolled by the US, UK, EU and other coalition states to the tune of well over $100 million (so far). (link)
Listen to the audio.
Key Kerry moments at 02:00, and again at approximately 18:30 forward.
The discussion from 18:30 through to 29:00 are exceptionally revealing and should be listened to by anyone who has wondered what was going on in Syria. Kerry even makes mention of the “Responsibility to Protect, or R2P” principle:
Read more…
Audio:
This elevates Obama and all those complicit to war criminal status worthy of prosecution.
Could this apply?
18 U.S. Code § 2384 – Seditious conspiracy
If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.
(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 807; Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, § 330016(2)(J), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2148.)
Along with Obama and Kerry, Representative Adam Kinzinger, Senator John McCain, and candidate Evan McMullin could be sent away for this too.
Previously:
What’s Really Going On In Syria? Are We Being Lied To?
Load More