Several times I pointed with my articles to the fact, which double standards of the West apply when it comes to the assessment of governments.
Washington separates the leadership of countries in good and bad, depending on whether they serve their interests or not.
As said Henry Kissinger ?
'The US has no friends, the US has interests'
In which category the classification takes place depends on whether a country obeys the orders of Washington or not.
This division into good and bad often changes.
That had Saddam Hussein (Iraq) known, just like Muhamar Ghaddafi (Libya), or Zine Ben Ali (Tunisia), or Hosni Mubarak (Egypt) or Bashar al-Assad (Syria), just to name a few.
With these guys, the West has for decades maintained the best relations, because they were 'our dictators' who served our interests.
Suddenly they were converted to evil dictators, because no longer useful to the interests.
They were either experiencing a color revolution and toppled, or swept away by a war of aggression and murdered.
For Assad, they are still working on it.
Parsifal, June 25, 2015
First friends then enemies ... top Saddam Hussein meets Donald Rumsfeld ... below Muhamar Ghaddafi meets Barack Obama.
Since they no longer served the interests of Washington, they were first coated with a war and then 'removed'.
With Viktor Yanukovych was just applied the same procedure.
He was the darling of Washington, as long as a good boy as he lead Ukraine to the West.
He was between 2002 and 2005 and again in 2006 and 2007 Prime Minister of Ukraine, and from February 2010 President.
But when he refused, for understandable reasons, to sign the Association Agreement with the EU, he was first by a propaganda campaign torn as an evil dictator and then removed with a violent coup in February 2014.
But Washington's puppets Zionist Arseniy Yatsenyuk and Zionist Petro Poroshenko were used as a (Fascist *) junta.
A typical case, beforehand good and then bad, so must be done a regime change.
Saudi Arabia is an example of a good dictatorship that serves the interests and therefore may do everything.
The regime there is probably the worst, most homicidal and inhuman of the world, but that's all no problem for America and Europe.
On human rights violations is benevolently overlooked and treated the royal despot, constantly courted and kept in power.
Obama, Cameron, Hollande and Merkel often journey there and make because of the petrodollars the best bargains, mainly arms deals.
Eventually, if the Saudi regime is no longer toes the line, it will be dropped, call the evil dictatorship and undergo a regime change.
Now I can already imagine the propaganda and statements of Western politicians.
'We are completely bewildered, because we now have learnt the Saudi regime oppresses women, does not allow them motoring, and for lowest crime chops man hands off and executes the death penalty by beheading with a sword.
This we can not allow, and therefore the regime must go'.
But meanwhile does allow the West these brutal methods for 80 years, since the discovery of oil wealth and exploitation by Western oil corporations.
As long as the Saudi regime sells the oil only for dollars, as long as Washington guarantees the preservation of power.
This deal has negotiated Kissinger in early 70's, after the gold backing of the dollar was lifted.
The carried forward enforcement of ethics, morality, human rights and democracy, is just a show for the stupid and naive audience.
If a regime serves the interests of America, then it may do everything and suppress the population and take all freedoms.
Conversely, a country can be very democratic, respect human rights even more so when it does not serve the interests of America, it is flattened.
See what happened to Chile when Kissinger gave the CIA the order the democratically elected government of Salvador Allende, which was more socialist oriented to remove by a violent coup and replace by a fascist military dictatorship.
With Belarus the Empire State has also attempted regime change.
President Alexander Lukashenko has been designated by the former American Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice as 'Europe's last dictator', which must therefore go.
Has not worked out so far.
Whereas there is a state leader who already is much longer in power and can be truly called the last dictator.
But again, he is not bothered because he is 'our dictator'.
To whom it is ?
To Milo Ðukanović of Montenegro.
He was President of the Republic of Montenegro (1998-2002) and several times (1991-1998, 2002-2006 and 2008-2010) Prime Minister of his country.
Since December 2012, he is again the Acting Prime Minister of Montenegro.
Ðukanović ruled uninterruptedly in different form already for 27 years, which corresponds to a permanent dictatorship.
Not even Josef Stalin had been so long in power in the Soviet Union.
Why do we hear no criticism of these very long 'reign' on the part of Washington or Brussels ?
Why do we allow him card blanche, although investigations running against Ðukanović in Italy and Germany because of cigarette smuggling on a large scale ?
The guy's a criminal and is part of the Balkan Mafia.
Yes why ?
Because he promised to lead the country as soon as possible in the European Union and NATO.
Aha, it serves our interests, then of course, not the usual mud-slinger is cranked, as the West makes it otherwise with unpleasant state leaders that they want to get rid of.
What we learn from this ?
Washington, Brussels, London, Paris and Berlin do not care really whether a state leader of any country to comply with the human rights, acting democratically, and implement and defend the so-called 'Western Values' (laughing).
That's completely irrelevant.
It may be the most brutal dictatorship, it is only important that the regime obeys the commands.
If it follows and acts in the interests of the West, then the regime has a charter to be able to do with the public what it wants.
But if a government does not follow and if it wants to go its own independent way, even if it is still legitimized as democratic, then it will be defamed, portrayed as vicious and putsches away.
That is, every time we hear by Western politicians and media, this or that president is an other 'evil dictator' and the 'new Hitler', Saddam was so called, as well as Ghaddafi, Dr. Assad and Putin, then we know, AHA, these leaders do not what they are told from Washington, they are not following orders and decide for themselves what is best for their country.
You can then often assume what we are then told bad things about it is not true but the opposite may very assuredly be true.
It's all about to establish a bogeyman in order to provoke and stage a coup in order to remove this person and replace by someone who obeys.
How often, Washington has been trying to assassinate Fidel Castro in Cuba ?
They have also tried with the debarment of CIA mercenaries at the Bay of Pigs, to overthrow the government by force.
Against the President of Venezuela Hugo Chávez they have done several times assassinations.
Because the governments of Cuba and Venezuela do not submit the dictates of Washington.
What we learn from history, if a revolution does not work when a coup will not work if sanctions do not work if even the target person survived an assassination attempt, the war machine is used to carry out regime change.
See what they did with Saddam Hussein.
Washington has tried all methods to get rid of him.
First, bribery, then a boycott, then an uprising and then assassinations.
When he survived it all, Washington had to pull as a final step an aggressive war justified with lies.
Yes, they have attached to him the ownership of non-existent weapons of mass destruction, which threaten the whole world.
So it came to the war of aggression against Iraq, it was invaded the country, occupied and captured him and then hung.
That it did not exist the dangerous weapons and the threat was a pack of lies then no longer mattered.
The same procedure one tries with The Iran for decades.
An other country that not subjects the dictates of Washington and therefore had to be invented the story about a nuclear weapons program.
The sanctions have not let the country collapse, the color revolution has not overthrown the government, and assassinations also brought nothing, so we threatened with war.
Against Russia and President Putin for some time this strategy is applied, as Russia is the largest country in the world and he himself are the American world domination most in the way.
Therefore, he really must go.
Therefore, Putin and Russia is pelted with filth, the worst lies are told, and tried with a foreign funded 5th Column to incite the Russian people.
Therefore harsh sanctions are imposed and a financial war started to destroy the Russian currency.
But since this has not led to the goal and Putin enjoys a popularity of over 80 percent in the population, the war machine now comes into the play.
Therefore, the current upgrade and deployment of NATO troops and heavy weapons to the border with Russia.
Washington is determined to a war and is ready to carry out a nuclear first strike.
To enforce their (bad) dream of a world empire, are no-holds-barred, including the destruction of Europe.
The Cold War was only therefore not hot because West as East mutually realized and understood nuclear annihilation.
This insight, however, came to a complete loss in Washington after the collapse of the Soviet Union, because the US has declared itself the winner.
Now they are so arrogant, so boastful, and so sure-footed and think that one can lead a nuclear war and itself thereby get away undamaged:
So cracked are the psychopaths in Washington.
Your support to have the B.O.L.E. (incl. all articles) open and free for everyone is much appreciated.
The psychoanalyst Dieter Duhm writes that
'the ideological confessions are interchangeable as long as the inner structures are the same'.
Duhm calls this the 'most basic fundamental fact of political life'.
What distinguishes a mass murderer of an average citizen ?
The famous Swiss psychologist Alice Miller discovered in their biographical studies:
In both works the same structure of latent violence.
And if the experience of humiliation is almost made of an entire people, then accrues in a society a murderous potential of hatred and congested aggression, which enthusiastic lunges onto a prefixed enemy and eventually discharges into pogroms and wars.
Political channeling of dammed life energies
All imperialist systems know this psychic underground and use it for their own political interests - of Nazism, as well as the United States in its propaganda for the 'war on terror' (de facto war on brown people).
The power structures could not maintain itself if these were not available on a subconscious response in all of humanity.
What Hitler would have been without the projection of millions of heated Germans ?
What made the impoverished postcard painter from Braunau to the 'Führer' of the 'Aryan Race' was the demonic power of dammed life energy throughout the population that found a common channel and expression by his Nazi ideology.
Hitler and his men took not care to rational arguments, but solely relied on emotionally effective agitation.
In the psychological subsoil of Germany was ticking a bomb - and Hitler knew how to make it explode.
What happened in Germany between 1933 and 1945, was the culmination of an epochal cruel madness of 6.000 years of patriarchal history of war.
It was the result of a worldwide trauma, which was etched with the most terrible methods in humanity.
After centuries and millennia, in which the experiences of forced displacement, genocide, rape and war has been repeatedly imprinted into the human soul, the world's population lived under a genetic programming of fear, defence, mistrust and violence.
This information-pattern - the morphogenetic field of the war - dominated mankind to this day and is passed continuously.
The perpetrators of today are the victims of yesterday.
The perpetrators of tomorrow are the victims of today - until we realize the insanity and break the cycle.
As Fascism could rise
Hans de Boer, who fought already in his youth in the resistance against Hitler and later reported about the cruel power structures of imperialism, said:
'Indifference is the fascism of our time'
The more indifferent people are, the lower their active participation in the political process and global, the more subtle totalitarian systems can operate and the more undisturbed, they can destabilize countries of other continents and exploit.
The existing society pretends to be cosmopolitan and tolerant, and environmentally friendly, but is based on an unspoken agreement of what can be said and what may not.
If one dares to cross this convention and to ask questions that threaten the ideological foundation of the society, for example, whether the attacks on September 11 were not commissioned by the US government itself, then you will be assigned a label 'Conspiracy theorist' or 'anti-Semite', etc. and well covered by the media turned off.