민트 프래스에서 뽑은 것입니다.
노드스트림2 폭파범이 미국 이다....라는 Seymour Hersh 폭로 기사를 미 주류 언론이 얼마나 철쩌하게 무시 하는가...를 빈정거린 글 입니다.
노드스트림2 폭파..는 그 자체로도 엄청난 사건입니다..
미국은 우크라인 전쟁 오래 전 부터 독일과 러시아간의 천연 자원 관계를 노골적으로 반대해 왓고
이것이 미국의 패권 구상에서 어떤 의미를 갖고 잇는지 정도는...노무현교 꼴통들 정도의 지력으로도
알 수 잇습니다......
하지만 미국이 저런것을 폭파 시킬 만큼 무식하지는 않다....는 막연한 기대가 잇엇지만
설마 하던 일이 너무 쉽게 터진 것이지요.
당연히...관련 뉴스와 전문가들, 여론 형성가들, 스스로 잘낫다고 생각하는 온갖 잡것들 ...아갈통 달린 년놈들이라면 줄줄줄줄 다 기어 나와
별의 별놈의 말들을 다 나발 거려야 할 것인데....현실에서는 믿어 지지 않을 만큼 조용합니다..
어느 곳에서 교통 사고 하나 난 듯 한 기사로 넘어 가 버립니다.
이런것이 정보의 제조과정이 없이 가능 한 일일까?
이 글에 따르면 미 언론에서 Seymour Hersh 주장을 기사화 한 언론은 4 곳 뿐입니다.
Seymour Hersh 주장의 근거나 과학성은 차치 하더라도
우선 황당 무게 한 것은 ...이 엄청난 사건에 대한 미 행정부의 반응이나 ...사건의 가장 큰 1차 피해자인 독일 행정부의 반응, 더 나아가 eu 전체의 반응이 정상적인 상식으로는 도무지 이해가 되지 않습니다.
9.11 테러가 터졋는데..기사 한줄 보도 하고 끝 내 버린격이라..
푸틴이 손을 덜덜 떨엇다..푸틴의 건강이 매우 않 좋다...는 증거다..
러시아 구테타 조짐이 잇다..푸틴 권력의 붕괴 가능성이 매우 높다 ...식의 개소리만 줄기차게
나발 거려 되는 ...기존의 언론의 모습과는 너무 다르다는 것이지요.
-러시아 놈들이 한살짜리 여자아이 강간햇다....까야야야야.......악..........................
너암 촘스키는 ...서구 민주주의 체체의 이런 조작을 ...제조된 동의...라고 빈정거렷지요.
즉....자유언론이라는 허울로 만들어 던저 주는 그 진실이다는 것이 미안하지만 진실이 아니고..그들이 그들의 필요에 따라 제조해서 던저준 상품이라는 것이지요.
-우리 교주님이 청와대에서 처 잡수신 640만 불은 뇌물이 아니고 생계형 범죄 이쉬다....
-아.....처 먹은 뇌물이 뽀록나 억울하게 돌아가신 우리 교주님....존나 보고 시포라...
민주주의 체체 하에서의 여론은 그것이 무엇이던 다 제조된 것입니다....
포장 없이 시장에 던저진 상품은 없듯이 ...진실인듯한 포장을 쓰고 잇는 것 뿐이지요..
노드 스트림2의 폭파는 그 자체로도 매우 중대한 사건입니다.
이런것이 미국이던 노르웨이던,,,국가 차원의 힘이 한 짓이 아니라면,,,,어떤 단체에 의한 명백한 테러행위이고..
이런 엄청난 테러를 ..테러라면 하던 쓉질도 그만 둘 정도로 환장을 하는 미국이 어떻게 그리도 조용 할 수 잇는 것인지 ....도무지 설명이 되지 않습니다.....
또 무지막지한 음모를 만들어 누군가에 덮어 씨우고 전쟁이라도 해야 할 것 아닙니다..
예수에 환장한 온갖 기독교 미친개들 다 기어 나와 ...이슬람을 조지던지...짱꼴라를 조지 던지 ...뭔가 해야 할 것인데..
믿어 지지 않을 만큼 조용합니다..
미 행정부가 테러에 대해 이리도 차분하고 무 반응을 보인 적은 일찌기 없엇습니다.
더욱 놀라운 것은 ...가스관 폭팔의 직격탄을 맞은 독일을 비롯한 유럽국가들의 반응입니다.
수급의 차질이나 가격 폭등은 말 할 것도 없고...당장에 추운 겨울을 지내야 할 국민들의 불만을 감안하더라도..
도데체 누가 이딴 천인공로할 짓을 처 햇는지....반드시 밝혀 내어 ...인류사적 보복을 할 것이다....따위의 현학적인
성명 하나 나오지 않습니다.
이런 자유민주주의 국가들의 엄청난 침묵을 도데체 어떻게 해석을 해야 하느냐 는 것이지요..
말로만 "유럽의 중심""우리끼리의 유럽""유럽의 독자성" 를 나발 거리지만,,,미국이 쬐금 씨게 나오니....바로 깨깽 해버린 것이 아니고....무엇으로 해석을 해야 할까요??
우리는 노드스트림2의 사건을 통해 제조된 동의가 어떻게 현실에서 구현되고 잇는지 ...실 시간으로
보고 잇는 중 입니다.
https://consortiumnews.com/2023/02/16/implications-of-us-destruction-of-nordstream-2-pipeline/
Implications of US Destruction of Nordstream 2 Pipeline
With a new Great Wall between Russia and the West, Graham E. Fuller wonders what kind of role lies ahead for either the U.S. or Europe on the international scene.
China’s embassy in Berlin, January 2010. (Jochen Teufel, CC BY-SA 3.0, Wikimedia Commons)
By Graham E. Fuller
grahamfuller.com
The disturbing and detailed reportage by a Pulitzer Prize winning journalist Seymour Hersh on Washington’s sabotage of the Russian Nordstream 2 gas pipeline to Germany now provides new perspective on the momentous series of geopolitical trends that began with the war in Ukraine.
My own assessment of the Russian invasion written one year ago offered an analysis that was, and still is, markedly at variance with the Washington-dominated narrative of the course of Ukraine events.
A few thoughts from then:
—I condemned the Russian military invasion of Ukraine, and indeed of any government that launches a war (President George W. Bush’s invasion of Iraq included).
—My belief that the Russian invasion was nonetheless far from “unprovoked” but rather quite clearly provoked by Washington in its longstanding willful insistence on pushing NATO’s armed alliance ultimately right up to the very borders of Russia, where ancient Kievan/Russian cultural roots are deeply linked with early Russian/Orthodox Slavic civilization.
Yet Washington denies the validity of any Russian “sphere of influence” in Ukraine while the U.S. itself still maintains its own strong sphere of influence throughout Latin America — witness the Cuban missile crisis. (And can you imagine a Chinese military base in Mexico to bolster Mexican sovereignty?)
NATO’S April 2008 summit in Bucharest, Romania, where Ukraine’s “aspirations to join NATO” were formally welcomed. (Archive of the Chancellery of the President of the Republic of Poland, Wikimedia Commons)
—Russia repeatedly warned over the years that implacable NATO expansion into Ukraine was a real red line; knowledgeable American scholars and many former American ambassadors to Moscow consistently warned of those dangers. Yet their voices were ignored; even today calls for U.S. strategic caution are outside of any discussion in Washington.
—In short, this was a war that never had to be. (우크라인 전쟁은 충분히 피 할 수 잇는 전쟁이엇다)
—But whatever the pros and cons of NATO expansion , there is little doubt that Washington has triumphed in the information and “spin” battle in the Western media, hands down. All mainstream media parrot the same Washington narrative — an extraordinary media unanimity in a supposedly “independent” Western press.
(It might be nice to believe that the near total unanimity of voices in the Western media is simply the result of ringing support for “democracy” in Ukraine. But might it be amiss to consider all this unanimity as part of the growing power of government-influenced corporate media to dominate the public agenda?)
—I stated my belief last year that Russia would prevail in the war. I still believe that. But I did not foresee the degree to which the war would morph into a massive and growing confrontation between Western and Russian arms.
—The unprecedented sweeping vilification of Russia, of Russian President Vladimir Putin personally, and Russian culture and arts in general had no parallel even during my long years at C.I.A. during the Cold War — making peaceful resolution of this now “civilizational war” ever more distant.
– I even speculated that once the fighting settled on the Ukraine battlefront that NATO would emerge, not strengthened, but weakened and more divided reflecting deepening European doubts about the wisdom for Europe in following Washington into dangerous and costly wars in pursuit of American self-perceived strategic interests.
I believe Europe will come to experience deep buyers’ regret over Washington’s risky policies, but I am far less confident now, for reasons below.
The Nordstream Sabotage Watershed
NATO defense ministers meet at the military alliance’s headquarters in Brussels on Feb. 15. (DoD, Chad J. McNeeley)
The stunning recent and detailed reportage of direct American sabotage of the Nordstream 2 gas pipeline represents a major geostrategic watershed in two senses:
First, the implications of Washington’s act of war with disastrous economic impact upon Europe will not subside easily. But more importantly this event has demonstrated America’s successful cowing of any public commentary on the event — across U.S. media but more so across all European media itself, including in the most economically victimized state —Germany. We observe stunning, nearly inexplicable silence over this major international event.
And Russia has gotten the message — American policies and statements have deeply reinforced Russia’s long-standing belief that the West is implacably hostile to any Russian role in the West — going back to the bitter and irrevocable split of Christendom between Rome and the Eastern Orthodox Church in 1054( 로마 교황 정교회 간의 상호 파문 사건)That was later followed up by two devastating European invasions of Russia (Napoleon and Hitler).
Growing European trade ties — especially Germany — with Russia since the end of the Cold War have been thrown on the trash heap by NATO expansion east. The hostility of East-West relations has been reinforced and deepened.
Washington has no desire to work out a new common-European security policy that includes Russian interests as well. And these U.S. policies have helped ensure that Russia’s future now firmly lies in the East–Vladivostok and with China in a shared rejection of U.S. global hegemony.
The New East-West Great Wall
Moscow’s business center. (Mos.ru, CC BY 4.0, Wikimedia Commons)
The rise of a new Great Wall that blocks off Russia from Western Europe is one of the most striking outcomes of this war: European officialdom seems to have cast in its lot, perhaps reluctantly but irrevocably, with the American strategic goals in the world.
Those goals now even speak of creating a new “NATO Pacific” designed to challenge Chinese power economically and strategically in China’s own backyard — at great potential economic cost to Europe.
But for all this demonstration of Washington’s hold over Europe, it is also striking to note how the great majority of the world has indeed not gone along with U.S. strategic ambitions to weaken and humble Russia or to impose Washington’s own geopolitical architecture on most of the rest of the world.
물론 더 두고 봐야 할 일이지만,,,우크라인 전쟁을 통해 얻은 것이 잇다면 이것이라고 할 수 잇겟습니다....더 이상 미국 멋대로 할 수 잇는 세계가 이미 아니라는 것이고...미국이 좋던 싫던 이미 멀티폴라의 시대는 와 잇다....는 확신입니다.
Broadly speaking Latin America, the Middle East and Africa do not perceive their strategic interests as aligning with Washington’s. Apart from some lip service criticism of Russia, few states including large segments of Asia and India itself have imposed any meaningful sanctions against Russia.
More vividly, we see the emergence of new non-Western alliances such as the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa) with many other major states lining up to include Turkey, Iran and Saudi Arabia. These states of the Global South are also developing plans for new international reserve currency designed to undercut the ability of Washington to dictate international policy through U.S. dollar-based sanctions.
Redefining Eurasia
Eurasia, orthographic projection. (Keepscases, CC BY-SA 3.0, Wikimedia Commons)
A new Eurasia is rising, driven by the bold and geopolitically visionary Chinese Belt and Road Initiative. But just what is this new Eurasia now?
With a new Great Wall between Russia and the West, where now is the “Euro” in Eur-asia? Europe ceases to be even at the tail end of “Eurasia,” potentially cut off physically from the Belt and Road that runs through Russia and much of the Global South.
Europe may have to find its way strategically and economically elsewhere in the world.
For Washington that’s just fine; the U.S. will consistently seek to constrain ties of other countries with Russia or China.
The stunning silence of U.S. and European media reportage on the sabotage of the Nordstream pipeline sadly represents a clear sign that Europe frankly lacks the courage or vision to pursue a policy independent of Washington’s strategic game plan.
Washington’s power so far has heavily constrained Europe’s global ties, and intensified Washington’s dominance over Europe politically, economically and above all psychologically. It is hard to see how Europe will be able to extract itself from this restrictive American embrace to become a constructive and needed independent player on the international scene.
Indeed America itself seems sadly to have lost any kind of positive vision in how to deal with the rest of the world. The essence of American foreign policy now is almost entirely negative: block Russia, block China, and prevent their development and expansion of their international reach.
현대 우익의 사상적 대부..칼 수미트는 국민국가의 요체를 외부에 적을 만드는 것이라고 햇습니다.
꼭 국민 국가 단위에서만 적용 되는 것도 아니고...집단화 되는 모든 것의 근대적인 작동원리 입니다.
수구 꼴통들의 빨갱이 사냥질도 ..외부의 적을 만드는 것이고
노무현교 꼴통들의 토착왜구 사냥질도 외부의 적을 만드는 것이지요.
이렇게 만들어진 외부의 적은 내부 결속을 위해 더 할 나위 없는 수단이지만,,
이런 외부의 적은 끊임 없는 퇴행적 폭력만 양산해 냅니다.
결국은 그들 자신이 그 폭력의 피해자가 되는 것이지요.
악독한 상대방이 아닌, 정의로운 자신을 만드는 것이 장수의 길입니다..
수구 꼴통들이나..노무현교 꼴통들..미제 꼴통들의 형태는 같습니다.
This does not present a very inviting menu of positive policy options for most of the rest of the world — a world that seeks to avoid costly involvement in Western wars and to pursue their own economic development. They show signs now of visceral negative reactions to the perpetuation of Western ex-colonial powers seeking to impose their own stale geopolitical and economic agendas on the rest of the world.
This is the reality of the outcome of the war in Ukraine. Washington seems determined to pursue its increasingly illusory goal of maintaining international hegemony, now packaged in spurious claims of supporting “democracy versus authoritarianism.” Not many buyers there.
How long will the U.S. continue to flail in endless foreign wars to desperately prove to itself and the world that it is still No. 1?
Graham E. Fuller is a fluent Russian speaker, former C.I.A. operations officer and former vice-chair of the National Intelligence Council at C.I.A. for long term forecasting.
This article is from grahamfuller.com