Connect with us

Red Pill

News

Did Victoria Nuland just set in motion regime change in Macedonia?

Vicky Nuland is up to no good in FYROM, as the US begins pushing buttons to stop any further advancement of the Greek Stream energy pipeline from Russia.

Published

on

7 Views

Why does this matter to Nuland?

  1. Greek Stream
  2. Turk Stream
  3. Stop Russia’s Turk Stream from entering Europe via Greece Stream, up through Macedonia.

The US has planted a very radical and loyal Albanian bulwark in the middle of the Balkans (after breaking apart Yugoslavia) to activate on an as needed basis in situations just like these, where Greece (or any other Balkan nation) decides to step out of line with the Empire’s plan to marginalise Russia and keep control of Europe.

Via Reuters…

Explosions and heavy gunfire rocked a town in northern Macedonia on Saturday as police moved against what authorities described as an “armed group”, heightening fears of instability in the ex-Yugoslav republic after months of political crisis.

Medical workers said at least four officers had been seriously wounded after special police units in armoured vehicles launched an operation in a suburb of Kumanovo, some 40 km (25 miles) north of the capital Skopje in an area that saw fighting during an ethnic Albanian insurgency in 2001.

The town was sealed off and 10 hours after the operation began shortly before daybreak a Reuters photographer reported hearing intense automatic gunfire and two loud explosions.

Helicopters circled the ethnically-mixed region of some 100,000 people and an interior ministry spokesman said he had information on “casualties” but refused to say how many.

The events are likely to deepen concern in the West over stability in Macedonia, where the government is on the ropes over allegations by the main opposition, the Social Democrats, of illegal wire-tapping and widespread abuse of office.

The opposition has begun small but daily protests demanding the resignation of conservative Prime Minister Nikola Gruevski, and is threatening to rally thousands on May 17.

Observers fear political leaders on either side may try to stoke ethnic tensions as leverage.

Interior ministry spokesman Ivo Kotevski said that police had acted “on previously received information about an armed group”. He told a press conference the gunmen were planning “terrorist acts” and had “infiltrated” the country from a neighbouring state, without saying which.

Opposition leader Zoran Zaev, who has been releasing damaging wire tapes he says were recorded by the government and leaked to him by a whistleblower, appeared to suggest the drama had been concocted.

“I call on Nikola Gruevski to immediately come before the citizens and explain who wants to destabilise Macedonia, why and with what purpose,” he said in a statement.

“This dark scenario will not work. The citizens see who has an interest in such a scenario.”

An estimated 30 percent of Macedonia’s 2 million people are ethnic Albanians. Guerrillas took up arms in 2001, clashing with security forces before the West brokered a peace deal offering the Albanian minority greater rights and representation and the insurgents entered government.

But implementation has been slow and tensions sometimes flare. Many in Macedonia, regardless of ethnicity, are frustrated at the glacial pace of development and integration with the West, with the country’s bid to join the European Union and NATO blocked by a long-running dispute with Greece over the country’s name.

The Saker has an excellent, in depth analysis of Vicky Nuland’s latest regime change adventure. We suggest taking the time to read through it because this may be another European tragedy played out in the next few months. For now we thought this excerpt from the Saker’s post adds some great context to the dilemma in the Balkans.

Media serving the overthrow

Campaign to promote the protests and overthrow of the government of Nikola Gruevski is led by media such as Radio Free Europe, Al Jazeera Balkans and Nova TV, funded by USAID, Netherlands, Open Society and many others from the famous group of donors in charge of “soft power” that prepares the overthrows of the unsuitable regimes.

It is true that a police officer beat Neshkovski to death, but it is also true that there isn’t a slightest possibility that Zaev is led by the concern for the tragic fate of the murdered young man, and his only goal is to overthrow Gruevski.

Unfortunately, for this goal he found the worst possible sponsors, and besides the religious tensions within the Islamic community, the eternal tension with the Albanian minority, whose extremists openly threaten with a secession of western Macedonia, Zaev, in the name of so-called “freedom, democracy, justice and fairness” plays with the destiny of all Macedonian citizens and the fate of his homeland.

Some foreign analysts published a comprehensive analysis about the connections of Zaev with American billionaire George Soros, and Macedonian ‘Kurir’ (Courier) wrote that the moves of the Macedonian opposition leader are dictated exactly by those that don’t wish well for Macedonia. “To large extent, his moves are dictated by Soros’s institute which is financing media work as extended arm of the opposition and it loudly and violently support. Lately, for journalists paid by Soros, set themselves in advisory capacity of Zaev. What is worrying is the fact that people employed by Soros in the media were the ones that for long time advocate for escalation of events and spread hate speech. It is obviously, Zoran Zaev is not able to plan nor his next step. He did not know which way to head faced with the disclosure, the facts, evidence, and confessions.” as written on 20th of April in English edition on Macedonian Kurir. (http://kurir.mk/en/?p=44510)

But let’s suppose that the Kurir is Gruevski’s newsletter and serves for media bickering between government and the opposition. If so, that certainly can’t be said for investigative journalist Wayne Madsen, who describes in detail the background of the arrival of new US ambassador to Skoplje Jess Bailey, who for years worked in Turkey, but also has excellent connections in the Balkans, where his arrival was immediately felt.

The role of Victoria Nuland

Madsen in his analysis ‘Nuland attempts Kiev Version 2.0 in Skopje’ (http://m.strategic-culture.org/news/2015/02/16/nuland-attempts-kiev-version-2-skopje.html) extensively explains the role of Victoria Nuland, US Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs, in developments in Macedonia and that the project of overthrowing of Gruevski was decided among American neo-cons, which through the CIA, NED, NDI, Soros’ Open Society Foundation and Freedom House completely dominated the Macedonian social democrats from SDSM. Madsen writes that “Zaev and Sekerinska are said by Macedonian insiders to be nothing more than fronts for former Prime Minister and President Branko Crvenkovski who continues to head up the SDSM and accept large amounts of largesse from such CIA NGO laundry to foment a themed revolution against Gruevksi’s right-of-center VMRO-DPMNE government.” Macedonian police in raids conducted in Skopje and Veles seized five laptops, three desktop computers, 19 mobile phones, 100 compact discs, 17 hard-drives and nine digital books – material that reveals connections of Nuland and her collaborators with conspirators against the government. Madsen writes that, according to the confiscated materials, all of them were connected with the Soros NGOs. In addition, all the bank accounts of a group of people close Zaev were linked with pure cash deposits of CIA.

Zaev actually just speaks of “freedom and democracy”, “human rights and justice” in general, and leads no policy other than destructive one, which has the sole goal of overthrowing the current government. Experiences of Georgia, Ukraine and all other countries that in this way established a new “democratic government” are warning to the Macedonians to think well whom they will support, even if it goes against their traditional beliefs. Many in Macedonia will never suppor VMRO-DPMNE, but they should equally be aware that the Social Democratic Alliance of Macedonia has nothing to do with socialism and democracy, as well as many European parties of that name.

References:

http://thesaker.is/it-has-started-or-wise-up-macedonians/

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2015/05/09/uk-macedonia-police-idUKKBN0NU0EU20150509

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Advertisement
20 Comments

20
Leave a Reply

avatar
20 Comment threads
0 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
1 Comment authors
amcikxxxxw9yemrfe5xyt78wmfermwsdx30m85cgcr83n5rwxym8cnrsdfruxm3cm9wy7vf5kcwxjc3ytxk0crtsxergsdankara kevasesi necat aktas Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
finmsk
Guest
finmsk

Republika in March cites Russian expert Vlaislav Ginko: some politicians in USA’ll intrude in internal politics of
Macedonia http://english.republika.mk/russian-economist-ginko-support-for-nato-eu-is-not-as-big-as-the-public-thinks/

trackback

… [Trackback]

[…] Read More here: redpilltimes.com/did-victoria-nuland-just-set-in-motion-regime-change-in-macedonia/ […]

trackback

… [Trackback]

[…] Informations on that Topic: redpilltimes.com/did-victoria-nuland-just-set-in-motion-regime-change-in-macedonia/ […]

trackback

… [Trackback]

[…] Read More Infos here: redpilltimes.com/did-victoria-nuland-just-set-in-motion-regime-change-in-macedonia/ […]

trackback

… [Trackback]

[…] Read More Infos here: redpilltimes.com/did-victoria-nuland-just-set-in-motion-regime-change-in-macedonia/ […]

trackback

… [Trackback]

[…] Read More here: redpilltimes.com/did-victoria-nuland-just-set-in-motion-regime-change-in-macedonia/ […]

trackback

… [Trackback]

[…] There you will find 12518 more Infos: redpilltimes.com/did-victoria-nuland-just-set-in-motion-regime-change-in-macedonia/ […]

trackback

… [Trackback]

[…] Read More here: redpilltimes.com/did-victoria-nuland-just-set-in-motion-regime-change-in-macedonia/ […]

trackback

… [Trackback]

[…] Read More Infos here: redpilltimes.com/did-victoria-nuland-just-set-in-motion-regime-change-in-macedonia/ […]

trackback

ccn2785xdnwdc5bwedsj4wsndb

[…]below you will uncover the link to some sites that we feel you must visit[…]

trackback

c5e7nstcc78e4x5cn7w4567465

[…]below you’ll locate the link to some web pages that we believe you should visit[…]

trackback

… [Trackback]

[…] Informations on that Topic: redpilltimes.com/did-victoria-nuland-just-set-in-motion-regime-change-in-macedonia/ […]

trackback

… [Trackback]

[…] Find More Informations here: redpilltimes.com/did-victoria-nuland-just-set-in-motion-regime-change-in-macedonia/ […]

trackback

… [Trackback]

[…] Read More here: redpilltimes.com/did-victoria-nuland-just-set-in-motion-regime-change-in-macedonia/ […]

trackback

Title

[…]although sites we backlink to beneath are considerably not associated to ours, we really feel they may be actually worth a go as a result of, so possess a look[…]

trackback

… [Trackback]

[…] Read More here: redpilltimes.com/did-victoria-nuland-just-set-in-motion-regime-change-in-macedonia/ […]

trackback

Title

[…]The data mentioned in the article are several of the ideal available […]

trackback

Title

[…]we came across a cool website which you could possibly love. Take a search in case you want[…]

trackback

Title

[…]we came across a cool web page that you could take pleasure in. Take a look in the event you want[…]

trackback

… [Trackback]

[…] Informations on that Topic: redpilltimes.com/did-victoria-nuland-just-set-in-motion-regime-change-in-macedonia/ […]

Latest

Trump’s wish to take the US out of NATO leaves NeoCons seething

The US President has seen the truth of the irrelevance of NATO, but there is enormous resistance to change.

Seraphim Hanisch

Published

on

Tucker Carlson, Fox News and Russian and American news outlets alike have picked up the story that US President Donald Trump has on numerous occasions, opined that the United States would do well to depart from the North Atlantic Military Organization, or NATO.

This wish caused enormous fury and backlash from those opposed, which, oddly enough include both Democrats and Republicans. Their anger and alarm over this idea is such that the media networks through much of the US are alive with the idea of impeaching the President or bringing 25th Amendment proceedings against him for insanity!

Take a look:

Tucker Carlson, as usual, nailed it.

NATO was formed to make Western Europe secure in the face of a perceived Soviet threat. In 1991, the USSR collapsed and the threat of Ivan the Communist bad guy collapsed with it.

But 28 years later, NATO is still here. And, why?

Well, many “experts” continue to point at Russia as a threat, though after that statement no one seems honestly able to elucidate precisely how Russia would, in fact, threaten any nation, take over it, or conquer the world. Indeed, if anyone seems to understand the perversity of being in charge of the whole world, it seems to be Russia, as expressed by politician and LDPR leader Vladimir Zhirinovsky (see how this is so here).

Zhironovsky observed that China is the other nation that is running at full force, but viewing the problems the US is having with being the leader of the world, China stops short of trying to attain this position itself. The question becomes “What does a nation that rules the world actually do then?”

President Trump appears to be seeing the same question, or some similar variant based on the same theme. NATO serves no constructive purpose anymore. Despite the conflicts in Ukraine and Saudi Arabia and Yemen, Israel and Syria, there simply are no great threats in the world as it stands today. While there are certainly still wars, none of these wars represents an existential threat to the United States.

Why wouldn’t a US leader want out? In fact, there is further no existential threat to Europe from any present war, nor is there a threat from Russia itself. In fact, Russia has been entering into business relations with many European countries who wish to buy cheap and easily available Russian natural gas. Turkey purchased an S-400 antimissile system in addition to its US made Patriot battery.

There would seem to be very little in the way of concrete and reliable reasoning for the alliance to continue.

But the American Deep State and liberal establishment have come together to resist the US President in a truly furious manner, and it is revelatory of the hypocrisy of anti-Trump politics that American liberals, typically the “sing Kum-ba-yah peacenik” crowd, displays paroxysms of outrage and horror that NATO might be disbanded.

As the result of that, the American media is determined to choke off any possibility of one thinking, “well, what if we were to disband NATO?”

Why is this?

Simple. A lot of people make their living by preparing for the Russian “threat”, and it would mean the end of their work, the end of their money, and a great disruption in life. It does not matter that while this is true, these same people could conceivably apply their considerable skill sets to deal with real problems that face a world that no longer has a dipolar alignment, or to help prevent a real problem from arising from real situations, such as the recent and current Islamization of many European cities.

One of the great afflictions of American politics and policy has been that so much of it appears to be focused on “short term” or “no term” matters. We see this with the problems related to border security, the coming advent of AI-based automated processes that may furlough low-skilled workers in tremendous amounts in a short period of time. Rather than solve real problems, the elected representatives and media seem more content to oppose Donald Trump when he, as a businessman ought to do, makes a federal case out of what he sees on the horizon.

The Border Wall, for example, is a highly logical part of a properly handled set of immigration policies. But the very direct behavior of President Trump helped amplify the resentment the Democrats still hold against him for defeating Hillary Clinton in 2016, and so, the Democrats have effectively said “nuts!” to the needs of the nation and they take out their resentment on the nation by refusing to negotiate with the President about how to close the border.

NATO is another example. The alliance served its purpose. It is time for the alliance to end, or to be radically restructured in terms of new goals based in real, and not just flimsy rhetorical, needs.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Latest

A dispassionate case for the American border wall

All the arguing on both sides is a rhetorical war that prevents action from happening. Here are simple reasons the border wall should go up.

Seraphim Hanisch

Published

on

One of the hottest news stories in the American press has been that over the border wall, proposed by President Trump during his campaign, and now resting at the center of a debate that has about one-quarter of the US governmental services in a state of shutdown. We have observed fiery, passionate, and even disgusting levels of rancor and bitterness in the political rhetoric concerning the wall. This debate goes on in the news media, and many of the Americans who watch and listen to this take on the fire of these arguments to even more passionate levels.

However, the passion has largely obscured the actual issue of border security, perhaps by design. As long as people keep fighting over it, it still is not getting done. And while thankfully the American government is designed to work very slowly in determining important matters, here, that trait is being exploited, mostly by Democrats, but also by Republicans and even possibly, President Trump himself.

The motives each side has vary.

President Trump wants Congress to pass wall funding because then it is a legislative act that the Legislative and Executive branches of government agree on. It is unlikely that the Supreme Court will be called upon to test such a resolution for its legality. This is one very significant reason why the President is trying every way possible to get this through Congress.

If he goes the route of declaring a “National Emergency” then, according to a number of sources, the first thing that is likely to happen after the build order is a lawsuit that stops the process in its tracks – probably a land-use lawsuit regarding eminent domain and damage to the properties of private citizens, who for various reasons do not want a barrier built through their lands. This is a problem that the American government has sadly created for itself with a very poor reputation of proper reparations for the invocation of Eminent Domain land claims.

This is the simplest way to explain the raison d’être behind the President’s hesitation to invoke executive emergency powers.

For the Democrats, the motive is interesting. The rhetoric from conservatives, including the President, is that the Dems do not want the wall simply because the “imposter” President wants one. 

For anyone who thinks that this is an utterly insane, and indeed, childish, argument, well, you would be exactly right. It is.

It also appears to be true. Evidence for this is shown by the fact that almost every critic quoted by the mainstream press is a Democrat. How is it possible that Democrats have a unique hold on facts that other people just don’t? Even when a Republican expresses a concern about the wall, there is still actual logistical information backing the claim:

Republican and Democratic lawmakers raised immediate concerns over shifting funds that have already been approved by Congress for projects in states across the nation.

Rep. Mike Simpson of Idaho, a top Republican on the Appropriations Committee, said he has been hearing from lawmakers in recent days concerned that Army Corps projects in their states could be canceled or postponed.

(This is a concrete situation that is based on normal concerns about money and not about ideological political views.)

“If they drag the money out of here,” Simpson said in an interview late Thursday, “a lot of members will have problem with it.”

(But now in come the Democrats, and observe as logic leaves and is replaced by fiery language.)

Rep. Peter DeFazio, D-Ore., the incoming chairman of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, said in an interview that rebuilding the disaster areas is “a way higher priority benefiting the American people than a wasteful wall.”

He said the Army Corps works on dams, levees and other projects across the nation and has an enormous backlog of unfunded needs. “It would be an incredible disservice to the American people and the economy” to divert the money to the border wall, he said.

And Rep. Nydia Velazquez, D-N.Y., said in a statement that it would be “beyond appalling for the president to take money from places like Puerto Rico that have suffered enormous catastrophes, costing thousands of American citizens’ lives, in order to pay for Donald Trump’s foolish, offensive and hateful wall.

“Siphoning funding from real disasters to pay for a crisis manufactured by the president is wholly unacceptable and the American people won’t fall for it,” she said.

The Republican here spoke without passion, simply saying there is concern about shifting funds for the wall. But the Democrats used incendiary language like “wasteful” and “foolish, offensive and hateful” as adjectives to describe the border wall. Very passionate expressions, which are being repeated ad nauseam by the mainstream press and all of the Democrat party.

The bias most notably and publicly showed in the accusatory language of the Democrat kingpins themselves, Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi.

There is little true “debate” about the border wall. Most discussion on the news media or social media is verbal rock-throwing rather than respectful, honest and fair discussion. As noted before, this may be part of the design to prevent action on the wall.

However there are dispassionate and reasonable arguments that support the construction of this project. Here are some of those reasons:

  •  A 30-35 foot tall wall running the entire length of the border is probably the cheapest and most cost effective single deterrent to illegal border crossings. Whoever wants to cross the border has to make some provision for dealing with the wall. If that provision is rather difficult, it will dissuade most people from trying it.
  • A wall reduces the need for manpower along the border. While it is absurd to assume that the wall alone would keep every illegal immigrant out, it also facilitates efficient deployment of manpower and other means for active border control.
  • Even if the wall is not continuous along the entire length of the border (which is likely to wind up as the case), where it isn’t is easier to monitor. This is another aspect of the manpower issue. There are likely to be gaps and open spaces for a variety of reasons. But right now, there are about over 1,200 miles of the 1,954 mile long border that have no barrier present. That is a lot of space to monitor actively.

These three reasons are really so close as to be almost the same exact reason. But the arguments for and against the border wall are being conducted in an apparent context that in order to secure a border, this is all anyone needs to do. This is an absurd idea and is being used to try to deflect action.

  • The best border security systems in the world are systems of walls, fences and monitoring facilities. Even the Great Wall of China did not stop all invaders. It deterred a lot of probable attempts though. The wall was also manned so that active attempts to get through it could be stopped in active manners.
  • The North – South Korean DMZ and the Berlin Wall are also particularly effective as parts of an overall border crossing deterrent system. The fences, trenches and watchtowers along the length of these two borders create an extremely effective measure to deter illegal crossings. For example, the Berlin Wall stood from 1961 to 1989, a total of 28 years. During that period, only five thousand people crossed that border. The US Border Patrol conducted over 300,000 apprehensions of illegal immigrants crossing the border in 2018 alone.

The imagery of walls like North Korea’s and East Berlin’s are part of the reason why the border wall comes across as an unsavory idea. There is probably no American that does not know this image, and no one in the country like the idea of such a barrier being associated with the United States.

However, that is simply not the issue. The US is not a police state trying to keep people inside. It is dealing with a decades-long stretch of bad policy regarding immigration which will not be stopped except by radical means.

Many families made a very long journey this year in the migrant caravans to try to game the American system. It is understandable that many of these people are trying to get away from bad conditions in the countries they left. But taking advantage of the United States is wrong, and the wrong is shared equally by the actions of the illegals and by the weak posture of the United States herself.

The simplest fact is that only strength assures freedom. A strong border reinforces safe immigration. A strong and effective immigration policy relies on having a tightly controlled border AND an asylum and entry facilitation process that is thorough, lawful and dispassionate. The USA has had this in place in other points of entry, such as Ellis Island. Leaving the Mexican frontier open now is just stupid policy. An integrated, careful process to process would be immigrants as quickly and carefully as possible needs to become part of the new American way of doing things. There is no swifter way to guarantee overall immigration policy change than the construction of the physical barrier along the US-Mexican border.

It does not matter how anyone feels or thinks. Walls work when used rightly. President Trump’s plan satisfies all the required needs for a good US immigration policy as regards the Mexican border.

 

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Latest

US Women’s March implodes upon itself [Video]

This year’s Women’s March collapses due to not being politically woke enough, in a truly astounding fashion.

Seraphim Hanisch

Published

on

If this doesn’t make your head spin, perhaps you are either dead, or sufficiently “woke.” The Humboldt County Annual Women’s March, set for January 19th of this year got canceled because it was “too white.”

Yes. Too white. This is a county in Northern California, 270 miles north of San Francisco. According to the Wikipedia entry, on this locale, the 2016 census gave this demographic result.

In other words, the county’s own demographics are very white.

So, does this make sense? No? Well, maybe the interview will clear it up.

Still no?

It seems that Jesse Watters was just as stunned as anyone else. The expression on his face is priceless. Should I laugh now, or later? How does this woman actually believe her own rhetoric?

But the woman, Kelsey Reedy, seems to have the logic worked out in her mind.

Maybe that is because she is a woman. A liberal woman. Fantasy turned inside out. But wait! She also even included expletive language on a televised interview, which is indecent in of itself.

It would appear that being “woke” can truly turn in on itself.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

JOIN OUR YOUTUBE CHANNEL

Your donations make all the difference. Together we can expose fake news lies and deliver truth.

Amount to donate in USD$:

5 100

Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Advertisement

Advertisement

Quick Donate

The Duran
EURO
DONATE
Donate a quick 10 spot!
Advertisement
Advertisement

Advertisement

The Duran Newsletter

Trending