Gladio B: The Origins of NATO’s Secret Islamic Terrorist Proxies – WideShut.co.uk: Beyond News

 

Gladio B: The Origins of NATO’s Secret Islamic Terrorist Proxies By Tom Secker | Mar 11, 2013 | Featured Articles, War and Terrorism, World News | 0 Comments 

Conspiracy Theories

Parcast

Operation Gladio Pt. 1 

During the Cold War, a secret military operation hid hundreds of weapons caches throughout Europe. They trained resistance fighters and prepared for a Communist invasion, and may have also orchestrated a series of devastating terrorist attacks.

At the end of WW2, as the Allied forces withdrew from continental Europe, the American Office of Strategic Services and the British Special Operations Executive left some paramilitary and intelligence units in place in the host countries. These so-called ‘stay behind’ secret armies had been used successfully against the Axis powers during the war, alongside various other commando-type units. Notably, Ian Fleming (author of James Bond) was loosely in charge of the famed 30 Assault Unit, and his brother was involved in setting up the stay-behinds used during the war. The purpose of these secret armies in the post-war period was to act as a first resort fall back option in case of a Soviet invasion of Western Europe. However they also had an implicit mission of harassing the Soviets pro-actively in time-honoured guerrilla fashion. During the Yalta conference Josef Stalin referred to this, talking about “agents of the London government connected with the so-called resistance” in Poland who had killed 212 Russian soldiers. Franklin Roosevelt suggested that would be a good point to adjourn the meeting, before Winston Churchill, without explicitly denying what Stalin had claimed, said, “I must put on record that both the British and Soviet governments have different sources of information in Poland and get different facts.” Given that it was Churchill who notoriously gave the order that British commando and resistance forces “set Europe ablaze”, the old soak was clearly just covering his back with this remark [1].

So, when the war ended this mission continued, with secret military and intelligence units operating in all the NATO member states, and even in those countries that were not members of NATO such as Sweden and, at least for a time, France. Only select members of the governments of the host countries were let in on the secret – sometimes even the heads of governments were kept in the dark by those within the military and intelligence institutions who were in the know. As such, the stay behind armies operated in the shadows, with almost no public recognition of their influence until 1990, when then Italian Prime Minister Giulio Andreotti admitted that the units in Italy, codenamed Gladio, did exist and had existed for decades.

The Third Mission   

What Andreotti did not admit, but what has become clear through various official and unofficial investigations since then, is that the secret armies developed a third mission, namely, countering the domestic support for Communist and Socialist ideologies, policies and parties. MI5 files now available via the National Archives show that the paranoia in Western intelligence agencies about Communist political subversion took hold even before WW2, let alone the Cold War. Just as they had spied on, infiltrated and manipulated the turn of the century Anarchist movement, they subjected the trade unions, the labour movement, all Communist groups and many suspected Communists in positions of public authority (such as authors) to the same tactics. They even spied on their own former spies, including Arthur Ransome, who had been in Russia during the Bolshevik revolution keeping an eye on Leon Trotsky. Exactly when the pro-active part of the secret armies mission was turned into a means for domestic counter-subversion is not clear. At some point in the 1950s or 1960s there was a change in strategy that used the secret armies not just to gather intelligence on these groups and individuals, but to destroy their support through violence. Numerous terrorist outrages, from Turkey to Ireland, were instigated, provoked or simply carried out by members of the secret armies, including numerous bombings in Italy and the assassination of Aldo Moro, the Oktoberfest bombing in Munich and the Brabant Massacres in Belgium. All forms of urban terrorism were perpetrated, often by neo-Fascists posing as Leftists, in order to terrify the public, polarise public opinion and destroy support for mainstream Leftist political movements. The process was a great success, ultimately contributing to the downfall of the Soviet Union and ensuring that the policies chosen by the leaders of NATO countries were in keeping with the overall trajectory desired by the Anglo-American establishment [2] This story is relatively well-known among students of alternative history and advocates of alternative media, though the operation of the secret army here in the UK has not been subject to the detailed research of, for example, the Italian Gladio.
Perhaps this is a matter of semantics, because at the moment the stay behind units on the continent started their reign of terror, the Irish ‘Troubles’ also began. The same tactics were applied to the political movement for independence in Ireland as to the democratic Communist movement in Italy and elsewhere. Both the Republican and Loyalist radical factions were infiltrated, radicalised, militarised and set down a path of self-destructive and counter-productive violence. This issue of collusion in the Irish conflict has, like the stay behind armies, been outlined in numerous official and unofficial inquiries, most prominently the Cory inquiry [3]. While this knowledge about Gladio and the other secret armies is extremely significant, it is largely historical. There is no threat of domestic subversion from Communism anymore, either real or fabricated, and the world has kept on spinning. While the Irish conflict still simmers, the prolonged campaign of urban terrorism on the British mainland ended over 15 years ago, and so one might well ask why is this still important?

Gladio Part B

The answer to that question has been provided through a series of exceptional interviews with former FBI translator and respected whistleblower Sibel Edmonds, carried out by “one of the world’s few remaining 9/11 conspiracy theorists” James Corbett. Over the last few weeks, Edmonds has outlined how the contemporary spy-game around radical Islam, documented in the works of Nafeez Ahmed among others, is actually a follow-on from Gladio. She refers to it as ‘Gladio B’, identifying a change in policy around 1996, following the Suserluk incident that once again betrayed the forces at work in the Turkish deep state. To paraphrase Edmonds: though the collusion with radical Islam had been going on for decades, it wasn’t until 1996 that a formal decision was made by NATO to abandon their previous secret relationship with neo-Fascists and arch-Nationalists and replace them with Islamists.

                 Sibel Edmonds Documentary - Kill The Messenger

When Did Gladio A Become Gladio B?

Sibel Edmonds on Gladio B - Part 1

Sibel Edmonds and James Corbett on Gladio B Part 2

 This is corroborated by a lot of data, for example the international Islamist organisation Al-Muhajiroun suddenly became very prominent in the UK in 1996-7. Omar Bakri, who later admitted to being an MI5 informant, was a key figure in Al-Muhajiroun and its partner organisations like the International Islamic Front. They were central to the process by which young Muslims were recruited, radicalised, trained and sent to fight NATO’s war of destabilisation in the Balkans. Likewise Al Muqatila, more commonly known as the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group or LIFG, were also prominent in Britain at this time. Following their failed assassination attempt against Colonel Gaddafi in February 1996 several senior members of the group moved to Britain and established their main office there. Among them was Anas Al-Liby, who was probably an MI6 agent recruited as part of their sponsorship of the assassination attempt. He lived in Manchester from 1996 until 2000, having been granted political asylum. A raid on houses connected to Al-Liby in May 2000 resulted in several arrests, but Al-Liby slipped away, probably tipped off by the authorities. [4] According to Edmonds, since that time the Gladio B operation has expanded and includes the radical Islamisation of Central Asia and the Caucasus region specifically and across the Middle East more generally. Again, much of the available information supports her claims, especially regarding the Gulen Movement, but also NATO’s relationship with Islamist organisations such as the Muslim Brotherhood and with terrorist groups like Jundullah who are destabilising Iran and the MEK/MKO. Most of this can be gleaned from reading mainstream media reports with the right kind of eyes and ears, and by being patient enough to tolerate their habit of dropping occasionally truthful stories into their mix, but never teasing out the implications or sticking with the story to see where it leads. We are however still left with a key question.

While much of Edmonds’ analysis of Gladio B is eminently verifiable by those who know where to look, and chimes with much of my own work on terrorist double and triple agents, there is a lot of information that suggests that at least the idea of replacing the Fascist Gladio A with the Islamist Gladio B had occurred to strategists much earlier. The exposing of Gladio A began in Turkey in the 1970s, gaining considerable attention when several Gladio documents were published. These included U.S. Army Field Manual 31-15: Operations Against Irregular Forces, a 1960s US special warfare training manual that had been translated into Turkish [5]. It was perhaps inevitable that following the Turkish revelations that the overall Gladio story would have to be admitted, rendering bit useless.
Meanwhile in Italy a judge named Felice Casson was investigating various acts of terrorism including the 1972 Peteano bombing. This eventually led him to the perpetrator – Vincenzo Vinciguerra, a neo-Fascist and member of Ordine Nuovo and Avanguardia Nazionale who had been spirited out of the country after the bombing and protected by the international Gladio network. Vinciguerra was brought back to Italy and he started to talk, explaining the whole operation. At this point his protection was stopped, and he was subsequently put on trial. If the information coming out of Turkey wasn’t enough to signal to NATO that the veil of secrecy around the secret armies was wearing thin, then Vinciguerra’s testimony certainly was.

Belgian stay-behind network

The Belgian stay-behind network, colloquially called "Gladio" (meaning "sword"), was a secret mixed civilian and military unit, trained to form a resistance movement in the event of a Soviet invasion and part of a network of similar organizations in North Atlantic Treaty Organization states. It functioned from at least 1951 until 1990, when the Belgian branch was promptly and officially dissolved after its existence became publicly known following revelations concerning the Italian branch of the stay-behind network.

History

The history of the Belgian branch of the Gladio network starts in 1948 when Prime Minister Paul-Henri Spaak and Minister of Justice Paul Struye gave the Staatsveiligheid (State Security Service) permission to discuss with allied intelligence services the organization of a clandestine stay-behind network. These negotiations mainly happened with Sir Stewart Menzies of the British SIS and representatives of the then freshly founded CIA. The explicit objectives of this collaboration were outlined in a top-secret letter from Menzies to Spaak:^{[citation needed]}

The present object of [Anglo-Belgian co-operation between the special services] should be directed to two main aims:

1. The improvement of our information on the subject of Cominform and potential enemy activities in so far as they concern our two countries.
2. The preparation of appropriate intelligence and action organizations in the event of war.

— Sir Stewart Menzies, January 27, 1949

The amount of influence at this early stage, accredited to the CIA varies from source to source. CIA did not yet have full authority over the Office of Policy Coordination, which directed U.S. covert action until 1952. During the initial negotiations Menzies proposed to keep the US out of the organization, but Spaak objected to further developments not being in a tripartite (Belgium–Great-Britain–United States) or multilateral setting. In the final report of the parliamentary inquiry there is little mention of CIA involvement, but investigative journalist Walter de Bock points, based on Pentagon documents,^{[clarification needed]} at the CIA's significant early organizational role and de facto control until 1968.^[1] Similarly, Colonel Margot complains in an internal note, dated April 8, 1959, about the influence of the US intelligence services on the Belgian branch of the Gladio-network.^[2]

These initial negotiations led to closer collaboration between the three countries' secret services under the name Tripartite Meeting Belgium. Following this meeting, the Belgian stay-behind network became operational, but it was not until January 4, 1952, that the first formal instructions for stay-behind operations were issued to Ludovicus Caeymaex (Staatsveiligheid) and General Etienne Baele.^[3]

Growing polarization between East and West and awareness of the need for continental collaboration led to the foundation in 1949 of the Comité Clandestin de l'Union Occidentale (C.C.U.O.), which contained Belgium, The Netherlands, Luxembourg, France and Great-Britain.^[4] The C.C.U.O. laid the base for the formation of the NATO and coordinated the various stay-behind networks in the five member countries.^[5] Its functions were transferred to the Clandestine Planning Committee (C.P.C.), another NATO-organization in 1951, which was renamed in to Coordination and Planning Committee in 1959.^[6] The C.P.C. elaborated a plan for installing two taskgroups, one for communications and one for secret networks, a structure reflected in the Allied Coordination Committee (A.C.C.) founded in 1958 to relieve the C.P.C. of some of its tasks.^[6]

The A.C.C. consisted of the members of the C.C.U.O. plus the US and coordinated the stay-behind activities, as was stipulated on its first meeting in April 1959 under French supervision:

The A.C.C. is a six-power regional committee for providing mutual consultation and developing policy guidance on matters of common interest regarding stay behind matters in the Western European countries concerned.^[6] [added emphasis]

— Declaration of principles, April 29–30, 1959

These interlocking coordination organizations, like the C.P.C. and A.C.C, were initially headquartered in Paris, but moved along with SHAPE, NATO's central headquarters, to Mons in Belgium after the French withdrawal from NATO's unified command structure in 1966. After the initial six counties, Germany, Italy, Denmark and Norway became members of the A.C.C.. Though all of the counties were members of NATO, an official link between the A.C.C and NATO was denied. The parliamentary committee noted "... one can not do away with the impression that in practice closer and closer relations did come to exist".^[7]

In the following decades the stay-behind activities were mainly coordinated through A.C.C.-meetings. These activities consisted officially of (multinational) training activities like infiltration, parachute jumping and long range communications, of which numerous were held at least between 1972 and 1989.^[8] Due to the secretive nature of the network, the milieu of various operatives involved and the Cold War setting, allegations were raised that the stay-behind network was during this time also at least indirectly involved with clandestine actions on Belgian soil. The last documented meeting of the A.C.C took place on 23 and 24 October 1990 under supervision of General Van Calster, where the participants discussed a.o. a scaling-back of the stay-behind network in light of changing international relations.^{[citation needed]}

This was the meeting that Italian president Giulio Andreotti^{[clarification needed]} was referring to following the October 24, 1990 revelation of the existence of Gladio in Italy, a revelations several others governments' spokespersons^{[example needed]} reacted to by claiming that any stay-behind in their own country was history. This only exasperated Andreotti, who declared to the press that the last stay-behind meeting had taken place in Belgium a few days ago. After the exposure of the Italian branch and inquiries by Italian officials to their Belgian counterparts, Defense minister Guy Coëme and Prime Minister Wilfried Martens made the existence of the Belgian section of the Gladio-network public in a press meeting on November 7, 1990.^{[citation needed]}

The government decided on November 23, 1990, a few days after the proposition for a parliamentary investigation to officially disband the network.^{[citation needed]}

Organization, activities and resources

The Belgian Gladio-branch consisted of two separate sections:

• S.D.R.A VIII (French: Service de Documentation, de Renseignments et d'Action VIII, "Documentation, Information and Action Service VIII"), residing under the military intelligence service, the Belgian General Information and Security Service (S.G.R) and thus the minister of Defense.
• S.T.C/Mob.^[9] (Dutch: Sectie training, communicatie en documentatie "Training, Communication and Documentation Service"), residing under the Staatsveiligheid and thus the minister of Justice.

S.D.R.A VIII was one of the sections of S.D.R.A (military security service), which in its turn is part of the S.G.R. (general military intelligence and security service). The S.G.R's functions are formally described in a decree from 1989 and are twofold: intelligence gathering and ensuring the security of military personnel and installations, issuing clearances, etc. The S.D.R.A is mandated with the second task, and is dived into functional sections: for instance, S.D.R.A III is contra-infiltration (for S.D.R.A XI, see further).

The members of S.D.R.A VIII were military personnel, trained in unorthodox warfare, combat and sabotage, parachute jumping and maritime operations.^[10] The operatives were trained to accompany the government aboard in case of a Soviet invasion, and then establish liaisons with the Belgian resistance movement and engage in warfare.^{[citation needed]}

Oversight

During the parliamentary investigation, the committee stumbled by chance on the existence of the Coordination and Planning Committee secretariat, which formed S.D.R.A XI, but was funded through secret NATO payments. When Paul Detrembleur, former head of the S.D.R.A and last administrator of S.D.R.A XI/C.P.C.-secretariat, was called to testify before the parliamentary inquiry about the activities of this section about the Gladio-activities, he refused to divulge any information.^[11][12]

The final parliamentary report stressed the resulting incomplete insight into the functioning of the C.P.C. and its relation to S.D.R.A. VIII, which formally organized the military section of the Gladio network. The report noted that the C.P.C. was responsible for the relations between the Belgian secret services and the NATO high command (especially SHAPE), and that the witnesses denied being involved with stay-behind activities. The reason was, the latter claimed, that NATO was "forward defending"-oriented and thus not interested in stay-behind activities in countries like Belgium, which did not border Warsaw Pact-nations. The commission then further noted the discrepancy between these claims and given reason, and the fact that the C.P.C. co-coordinated the S.D.R.A. VIII and participated in the A.C.C.-meetings.^[13]

S.T.C/Mob. function and oversight

The civilian branch of the Belgian stay-behind had the mission to collect intelligence under conditions of enemy occupation which could be useful to the government and to organize secure communication routes to evacuate the members of the government and other people with official functions.

This section needs expansion. You can help by adding to it. (June 2008)

Military trainers/operatives and civilian operatives

• Recruitment (how, criteria)
• Training activities (joint international training/war games, sabotage, intelligence ....)
• Funding (equipment)
• Weapons, weapons-depots.

Both military intelligence and Staatsveiligheid maintained dossiers on Gladio training activities, of which incomplete versions were made available to the parliamentary committee. Events from the list of operations by the military branch was provided by Coëme and is denoted by A, while events from the list from the archives of the Staatsveiligheid (titled "Overzicht oefeningen in het kader ACC – periode 1980-1990") is denoted by B:

• (A) 1972: Training on clandestine techniques.
• (A) 1976: Training on radio-communications, intelligence, maritime operations, aerial operations and escape routes.
• (A) 1977: Training on optimizing techniques to locate downed pilots and the use of escape routes.
• (A) 1978: In-door training on clandestine missions.
• (A) 1980: Training on parachute-jumping, long-distance radio communication and clandestine techniques.
• (B) June 1980: OREGAN II
• (A) 1981: Lessons and training on clandestine activities.
• (A) 1983: Training on escape routes, intelligence, aerial operations and radio communications.
• (A) 1985: Six trainings (at least two outside Belgium, one in Belgium): infiltration a parachute-jumping, extracting material through escape routes.
• (A) 1986, 1987 & 1988: : Trainings outside Belgium on intelligence operations and radio communications.

Minister Melchior Wathelet testified before the parliamentary inquiry that secret weapon depots were created in the 1950s, of which a first one was discovered in 1957 due to a landslide, and a second one in 1959 by playing children. He further stated that after these discoveries it was decided to abandon the depots and transfer the weapons to a military depot.^[8] An inventory report, dated 1991, for the military section of Gladio mentions inflatable boats, video-equipment and around 300 weapons, including M1 carbines, MP40 submachine guns and "armes en cocon", weapons packaged for long-term storage.^[14]

Parliamentary inquiry

Overview

After the existence of the Belgian branch of the Gladio-network became public, speculations and allegations about involvement of the Gladio-operatives in various high-profile and often unsolved crimes and terrorist acts during the 1980s began to appear in the media. To investigate these allegations and clarify the operation of the Belgian branch, a senatorial investigative commission was established on 20 December 1990. It was tasked with clarifying the structure, aims etc. of the network and the amount of oversight; which connections existed with domestic and foreign intelligence and police services; and whether there was a link with events previously examined in parliamentary inquiries^[15] or certain serious crimes and terrorist acts committed the previous decade.^[4]

Chairman senator Roger Lallemand ^{[clarification needed]}

The commission convened from 16 January 1991 until 5 July 1991, during which fifty seven meetings were held and thirty seven witnesses were heard. Amongst those who testified before the commission were ministers Guy Coëme, Melchior Wathelet and Louis Tobback; former administrator-director-general of the Staatsveiligheid (77-90) and head of STC-MOB Albert Raes, Ludo Caeymaex (administrator-general Staatsveiligheid 58–77); then current administrator-general of the Staatsveiligheid Stéphane Schewebach, Jacques Devlieghere (Staatsveiligheid 78–89, nr. 2); S.D.R.A.-operative André Moyen; Gladio-instructors Guibert Nieweling (code name "Addie"), Michel Huys ("Alain"), Etienne Annarts ("Stéphane").

Problems

The two major obstacles facing the commission of inquiry were firstly the secret nature of the case and the related unwillingness of witnesses in disclosing information and secondly time constraints.

Firstly, due to the nature of the case, and the various legal, professional and military requirements of confidentiality, the commission went to great lengths in limiting public access to discussed material. For instance, the parliament did forgo an earlier proposition for a parliamentary in favor for the proposition by Lallemand which included the requirement that the commission operated behind closed doors (in contravention to the regular parliamentary inquiry procedures).^[16] Lallemand placed also additional restriction on the ability to communicate with the press, handling of documents, etc. These restrictions were criticized both for being undemocratic, unnecessary or counter-productive and for not being strict enough.^[17]

The committee initially envisaged a solution whereby the names of the operatives were handed to three selected magistrates, familiar with the relevant unsolved criminal investigations. The relevant agencies and witnesses refused to do so, with the refusal varying from polite claims of forgetfulness or references to oaths of secrecy to outright hostility.^[18] This issue was compounded by the fact that records on former operatives were systematically purged and the magistrates were not up to date with more recent investigations. Gijsels noted that order... ?Names with the CIA/London? The final report then concluded that the cooperation from both the military and the Staatsveiligheid was generally satisfactory, but deplored the stubborn withholding of the names of civilian operatives. Parlementaire Commissie (1991), p. ?^{[clarification needed]}

Secondly, the commission faced time-related problems. The time allotted to the commission was initially five months, a period which the final report deplored as "very little" and short in comparison to other inquiries. The Senate granted on July 12, 1991, a request for extra time, which enabled the committee to work for another three months. Unfortunately most of the allotted time fell during the parliamentary recess, which further frustrated the effort to fully pursue the intended lines of inquiry. For instance, the commission had planned to interview several investigative journalists, people like Richard Brenneke and had requested several "dossiers chauds" (English: "hot cases").^{[clarification needed]}

Handled material and major findings

Handled material: Westmooreland, John Wood/Rudy Daems, ...

This section needs expansion. You can help by adding to it. (June 2008)

Conclusions and impact

Reactions & indirect effect inquiry: Comité-I.^{[clarification needed]} In 1995, the Belgian Chamber of Representatives organized a parliamentary inquiry into the effectiveness of the Belgian police and judiciary with regards to the Nijvel gang investigation. The conclusions of this inquiry, as well as the earlier Senate inquiry on SDRA8 and the Chamber inquiry on banditism, resulted in the preparation of new legislation governing the mission and methods of the Belgian State Security Service and Belgian General Information and Security Service, which was passed in 1998.^{[citation needed]}

                                            Charles E. Wharry (Darkbird18),

Darkbird18 is looking at the Gladio events and I can see darkness at it highest level the Illuminati, NWO and the dark forces of darkness is at work here! This terrorist is all big plain  by the dark side to control the world for same unseen reason but it most be important because they have the whole world looking but what is really happen is some where else but what? This article will help you understand how deep the rabbit holes goes and the key players in this dark game for control and power but for who? I smell a unseen player in this game so deep in darkness not even the bad guys can see it hand and man what a hand! Read this article and watch the YouTube to get the information on Gladio. The rest of the article from WideShut.co.uk can be read by clicking on the link below………….. Gladio B: The Origins of NATO’s Secret Islamic Terrorist Proxies – WideShut.co.uk: Beyond News

LiveJournal Tags: Terrorist,illuminati,NWO,NATO,Shadow Governments,Secret Society

Update :12/16/22 Archbishop Viganò’s Attempt to Justify Putin’s War on Ukraine Runs Counter the Fatima Message and “We Are Facing a Global Coup that Involves Both Civil Society and the Church” – Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano

 

Archbishop Viganò’s Attempt to Justify Putin’s War on Ukraine Runs Counter the Fatima Message

 21 Marzo 2022 ore 17:54

Fonte: tfp.org

by Luiz Sérgio Solimeo 

Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò had a successful ecclesiastical career in Vatican diplomacy. His last assignment was the prestigious post of apostolic nuncio to the United States.

Once retired, he criticized errors in the Second Vatican Council and the Novus Ordo of the Mass. He also denounced the immorality of high-ranking prelates and disagreed with many attitudes of Pope Francis. These and other stands have made him a reference point for many conservative Catholics.

Archbishop Viganò is a cultured and intelligent man. He holds doctorates in Canon and Civil Law1 and is a trained Vatican diplomat. Accordingly, one could expect his continual and lengthy pronouncements to reflect the razor-sharp precision of a canonist and the prudent subtlety of an ambassador. However, for reasons that are difficult to understand, his more recent writings do not reflect a judicious tone. Instead, they increasingly resemble the rhetoric of a populist tribune in which emotional excitement prevails over the serene and well-reasoned analysis of facts and doctrine.2

It Is Not the West’s Fault that Russia Invaded Ukraine

His messages—always addressed urbi et orbi—deal with every topic of the day, from American presidential elections, when he “anointed” one of the candidates, to the pandemic, which he dismisses as “the Covid deception.”3

While His Excellency has the right to present his opinion on current events and problems, including Russia’s war on Ukraine, his thoughts are not always based on facts or supported by good logic. Frequently, fundamental premises required to form a correct opinion are absent from his analyses.

This paragraph from his recent “Declaration on the Russia-Ukraine Crisis” summarizes well what he sees as just motives for the invasion:

If we look at what is happening in Ukraine, without being misled by the gross falsifications of the mainstream media, we realize that respect for each other’s rights has been completely ignored; indeed, we have the impression that the Biden Administration, NATO and the European Union deliberately want to maintain a situation of obvious imbalance, precisely to make impossible any attempt at a peaceful resolution of the Ukrainian crisis, provoking the Russian Federation to trigger a conflict. Herein lies the seriousness of the problem. This is the trap set for both Russia and Ukraine, using both of them to enable the globalist elite to carry out its criminal plan.4

The claim that the West has forced the “Russian Federation to trigger a conflict,” that is, the brutal invasion, is baseless. Neither the U.S., N.A.T.O. nor the E.U. made any threat to invade Putin’s Russia.

America Should Uphold Justice and Help Ukraine Against Putin’s ‘Unjust War’

For His Excellency, Putin was also forced to invade Ukraine by Jewish billionaires who sold their homeland to the corrupt Western world: “These Ukrainian billionaires wearing kippahs are those who are selling out Ukraine to the corrupted and corrupting West, trading their own well-being for the enslavement of their compatriots to the usurers who are taking over the world, using the same ruthless and immoral systems everywhere.”5

Putin, who spent his entire career in the fearsome KGB, does not hide his communist ideology. Speaking to some followers in 2016, he said he still has his Communist Party card and that “I still really like the communist and socialist ideas.” For him, such ideas are “like the Bible.” (“Putin Still Has His Communist Party Card, Likes Socialist Ideals,” AFP, Jan. 25, 2016, https://news.yahoo.com/putin-still-communist-party-card-likes-socialist-ideals-183734163.html?fr=yhssrp_catchall.)

Archbishop Viganò Disregards the Immorality of Russia’s Invasion of Ukraine

Oddly, the learned and experienced archbishop fails to address the moral aspects of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

The basic principles of natural law and Catholic doctrine on just war are ignored, and every attempt is made to justify the Russian invasion. However, the first thing a Catholic would expect from a bishop is guidance on what to think of this conflict from the perspective of Catholic morals. Is Russia morally justified in its war on Ukraine or not?

Unfortunately, the reading of Archbishop Viganò’s “Declaration” leads us to the sad conclusion that he does not offer principled guidelines in this moment of dark confusion. The populist rhetoric of the former apostolic nuncio is confusing and misleading the faithful—especially the conservatives who trust him.

Principles of Natural Law and Catholic Doctrine on Just War

To make up for the archbishop’s omission, let us recall some principles of natural law and Catholic doctrine on just war. Summarizing natural law and Catholic doctrine, Fr. Francisco de Vitoria, O.P. (1492–1546), considered “the founder of international law,” gives the reasons why war is just or unjust:

FIRST, differences of religion cannot be a cause of just war. . . .
SECOND, enlargement of empire cannot be a cause of just war. . . .
THIRD, the personal glory or convenience of the prince is not a cause of just war. . . .
FOURTH, the sole and only just cause for waging war is when harm has been inflicted. . . .
FIFTH, not every or any injury gives sufficient grounds for waging war.6

Saint Thomas Aquinas summarizes the requirements for a just war as follows:

— It must be declared by a legitimate authority.
— The cause must be just.
— It must be waged with good intention.7

Moreover, for a war to be just, there must be no other means of recovering a good unjustly appropriated by another nation, avenging a serious affront, or forestalling an invasion about to begin or one that has already begun. Additionally, all reasonable diplomatic means to resolve the dispute must have been exhausted before starting armed action.8

Natural Law and Catholic Morals Do Not Justify Russia’s Invasion of Ukraine

Theologians also highlight the principle of proportionality. Besides a just cause, a summons by legitimate authority, and an upright intention, there must be a proportion between the good to be recovered or preserved, the unjust situation to be remedied or prevented, and the evils that necessarily come with war, particularly the number of deaths.

As mentioned in a previous article, “The reasons alleged by the Russian autocrat to invade Ukraine do not pass muster. He failed to respect any natural law principles that justify the waging of war.”9

The Real Threat that Archbishop Viganò Does Not Seem to See

The mere possibility of the U.S., N.A.T.O. or the E.U. invading Russia in the future is not a just motive for Putin to invade Ukraine.

However, not only did Putin invade Ukraine for absurd reasons, but he also brutally threatened any country that, following the mandates of Christian justice and charity, wants to help Ukraine defend itself from the unjust attack. Pope Pius XII justifies such help.10 Here is the Russian autocrat’s threat: “Whoever tries to interfere with us, and even more so, to create threats for our country, for our people, should know that Russia’s response will be immediate and will lead you to such consequences that you have never experienced in your history. We are ready for any development of events. All necessary decisions in this regard have been made.”11

Is he suggesting the use of nuclear weapons?

“An Appeal to the Third Rome” Runs Counter to the Fatima Message

There would be many other things to say about the archbishop’s “Declaration,” given the immorality of Russia’s unjust war on Ukraine. However, his most serious flaw is the abandonment of the Catholic Church as the only hope for the world.

Indeed, the former apostolic nuncio seems to place his trust in the schismatic and heretical Russian Church of the Moscow Patriarchate, which he accepts as the “Third Rome.”

Russian schismatics consider Moscow the Third Rome and the Russian Church the true Church of Christ. According to them, the First Rome was the capital of the Roman Empire, the Holy See of Saint Peter, and the center of the Catholic Church. They claim that Catholic Rome fell into heresy and thereby lost its primacy, which passed to Byzantium, the capital of the Roman Empire of the East, and later Constantinople, which, they say, became the Second Rome. When this city fell to the Turks in 1453, the primacy passed to Moscow, the last and Third Rome, the center of the Russian Church, “which should inherit the prerogatives of the first and the second.”12

Devotion to the Heart of Mary Will Save the World

In her Fatima message, Our Lady said that Russia would convert to the Catholic Church. Archbishop Viganò seems to think the opposite, that the West and the Catholic Church herself will convert to the Third Rome, in other words, to schism and heresy.

That is absurd. It is shocking to see it being suggested by a Catholic bishop. Here are Archbishop Viganò’s words in full:

An appeal to the Third Rome

The world crisis with which the dissolution of traditional society is being prepared has also involved the Catholic Church, whose hierarchy is held hostage by apostates who are courtiers of power… Perhaps Providence has ordained that Moscow, the Third Rome, will today in the sight of the world take on the role of κατέχον  [Katechon] (2 Thess 2:6-7), of eschatological obstacle to the Antichrist.13 If the errors of communism were spread by the Soviet Union, even to the point of imposing themselves within the Church, Russia and Ukraine can today have an epochal role in the restoration of Christian Civilization, contributing to bringing the world a period of peace from which the Church too will rise again purified and renewed in her Ministers.14

The Russian Church’s Nationalism

Stefano Caprio, a priest and professor of Russian History and Culture at Rome’s Pontifical Oriental Institute, received this question from journalist Leone Grotti: “Why is the Russian Orthodox Church historically so tied to political power?”

Fr. Caprio answered: “It would take too long to give an exhaustive answer; let’s say they are together from the very origin of Russia. Even during the Soviet Union, when the Orthodox Church was persecuted, Stalin decided to dust it off during Hitler’s invasion to rekindle the patriotic spirit. Thus was born the Church of Stalin, a former seminarian who as a child dreamed of becoming the patriarch of Georgia. And Kirill, as a young monk, was raised by Stalin’s group of metropolitans.”15

Bohdan Oghulchanskij is a Ukrainian with “almost thirty years of experience of the priesthood, including a long tenure in the Moscow Patriarchate.” He shows the role played by the Russian schismatic church in Russian nationalism: “Religious exceptionalism, self-identification as ‘Holy Russia,’ ‘The Third Rome, and the Fourth cannot be,’ resided in the Russian religious consciousness. . . . [N]ationalism, as many researchers note, is very characteristic of Orthodoxy. . . . [I]n Russia, Orthodoxy has always been an instrument of the imperial state.”16

The Russian Church and the KGB

In 1992, Russian investigative journalist Yevgenia Albats published KGB: State Within a State—The Secret Police and Its Hold On Russia’s Past, Present and Future, a book based on documents from KGB archives (made available during the Perestroika years) and interviews with former secret police agents.17

The book shows how the communist regime’s secret police—under various names, but most famously as the KGB—is who held power in the Soviet Union. It infiltrated every sector, had discretionary power over people, was feared by all, and nothing was done without its assent. Dr. Albats writes: “[W]e must understand that the KGB was—and in a way still is—one of the most powerful and important components of the oligarchy that ran the USSR, and still runs Russia.”18

Contrary to popular belief, the KGB was not extinguished. It just changed its name. Dr. Albats continues: “It’s not that I think that these people are about to announce that communism is being restored. No, they’re more likely to install a Russian version, not necessarily extreme, of national socialism. Their ideology will be a mixture of Russian Orthodoxy and Russian nationalism. We’ve seen over the past couple of years how energetically the Orthodox Church has joined the secular political fray, gradually installing itself in the niche grudgingly abandoned by the Party.”19

Learn All About the Prophecies of Our Lady of Good Success About Our Times

Is this not what we are witnessing with Putin and his murky “socialist traditionalism,” being backed as he is by Kirill, the current “patriarch” of the Russian Church?

According to documents from KGB archives, Patriarch Kirill’s codename in the secret police was “Mikhailov,” and that of his predecessor, Alexy II, was “Drozdov.”20

Furthermore, the frightful Cheka, the first Bolshevik political police, already recommended in 1921: “Use the clergy themselves for our own purposes, especially those who occupy an important position in Church life, for example, bishops or metropolitans.”21 Albats states further: “According to Konstantin Kharchev, former chairman of the Council on Religious Affairs of the USSR Council of Ministers, ‘Not a single candidate for the office of bishop or any other high-ranking office, much less a member of the Holy Synod, went through without confirmation by the Central Committee of the CPSU [Communist Party of the Soviet Union] and the KGB.’”22

How can Archbishop Viganò place his hopes in a Third Rome that has served the KGB for so long?

“If They Do Not Stop Offending God”

There is no mention of Fatima in Archbishop Viganò’s “Declaration.” There is no mention of Our Lady either. Nevertheless, in Fatima, the Mother of God was very clear that wars are a chastisement for sin. She said: “The [First World] war will come to an end. But if they [men] do not stop offending God, in the reign of Pius XI a worse war will begin. . . . He [Our Lord] will punish the world for its crimes by means of war, hunger, and persecutions against the Church and the Holy Father.”

And the Blessed Mother continues: “To prevent it I will come to ask the consecration of Russia to my Immaculate Heart and the Communion of Reparation on the First Saturdays. If my requests are fulfilled, Russia will convert and there will be peace; if not, she will spread her errors throughout the world, promoting wars and persecution of the Church. The good will be martyred, the Holy Father will have much to suffer and many nations will be annihilated.”

Our Lady ends her message with a promise of hope: “Finally, my Immaculate Heart will triumph. The Holy Father will consecrate Russia to me and she will be converted and the world will be given a certain period of peace.”23

Fatima: An Overview to Understand the Message

We must place our confidence in the words of the Most Holy Virgin, fidelity to the Catholic Church, and conversion to a virtuous life, never in a heretical, schismatic, and KGB-controlled Third Rome.

Let us pray for Ukraine. Let us pray for Russia. Let us pray for the world to convert. There is no hope outside of conversion and filial obedience to Mary Most Holy.

This article was already written when the Matt Fradd show interviewed Ukrainian Catholic priest Fr. Jason Charron. The pastor of Holy Trinity Ukrainian Catholic Church, in Carnegie, Pennsylvania, denounces and demolishes the fallacies in Archbishop Viganò’s “Declaration on the Russia-Ukraine Crisis.” The video interview is available on the site From Rome.24

The archbishop said in his letter that Putin has been cornered by an aggressive NATO, backed by the United States, which is seeking to escalate the conflict for its own gains. “This is the trap for Russia just as much as Ukraine, using both to allow a globalist elite to bring its criminal plot to fruition,” Viganò wrote.

So-called democratic states, according to Viganò, have imposed “censure and intolerance” over dissenting opinions. The pandemic has exacerbated this dynamic, the archbishop said, adding that global media outlets “shamelessly lied” with the cooperation of governments and the Catholic hierarchy.

The archbishop said in his letter that Putin has been cornered by an aggressive NATO, backed by the United States, which is seeking to escalate the conflict for its own gains.

Viganò said the “ostracism” of those who have opposed the administration of COVID-19 vaccines was similar to the treatment reserved for those who refuse to call Putin an “invader” or “tyrant.”

The Vatican has repeatedly dismissed objections to the vaccines based on their development or testing with stem cell lines originally drawn from aborted fetal cells. Pope Francis has joined global pro-vaccine campaigns, calling getting the shot “an act of love.” The Pontifical Academy for Life, a Vatican think tank charged with promoting life from conception to natural death, has come forward numerous times encouraging Catholics to get the vaccine.

Viganò adopted Russian President Vladimir Putin’s justifications for attacking Ukraine, lamenting the lack of media coverage of supposed neo-Nazi groups in Ukraine that have allegedly attacked Russian-speaking Ukrainians in the autonomous eastern Ukrainian regions of Donetsk and Luhansk. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has ridiculed the idea that Nazism is behind the eight-year-old conflict in his country’s east, which Russia invaded in 2014.

The letter was the second defense of Russia’s invasion to be floated by a prominent churchman in recent days. In a sermon on Sunday, Patriarch Kirill of Moscow, the head of the Russian Orthodox Church and an ally of Putin, repeated a long-held contention that the West wants to enforce the practice of holding gay pride parades as a test of loyalty to its values, which include the acceptance of homosexuality. The Ukraine war, he said Sunday, resulted from the eastern regions’ refusal to acquiesce.

Viganò said the “ostracism” of those who have opposed the administration of COVID-19 vaccines was similar to the treatment reserved for those who refuse to call Putin an “invader” or “tyrant.”

Tweet this

“If humanity accepts that sin is not a violation of God’s law, if humanity accepts that sin is a variation of human behavior, then human civilization will end there,” Kirill said on the pre-Lenten celebration known as Forgiveness Sunday.

But Viganò sees a deeper plot to institute a new world order. Naming the United Nations, NATO, and the International Monetary Fund as well as the European Union and billionaire philanthropists like George Soros and Bill Gates, the archbishop identified a global conspiracy, initiated by an American deep state, to introduce a world government based on economic interests and progressivism.

Viganò portrayed Zelenskyy as an E.U. puppet, an affable outsider introduced to foment Ukrainians’ feelings against Russia.

“We Are Facing a Global Coup that Involves Both Civil Society and the Church” – Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano

By Joe Hoft
Published April 13, 2022, at 4:30pm
469 Comments

Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano was on Canale Italia TV and he shared his observations on what is going on in this world. 

Below are some of the Archbishop’s key observations.

Why did Viganò call out George Soros, Klaus Schwab, and Bill Gates?

About the church and political leadership today:

We are facing a global coup that involves both civil society and the Church. Both are infiltrated and controlled by characters who use their power and the authority that derives from it, not for the purposes of the institutions they govern, but in order to destroy them. This crisis of authority must be denounced, because the action of those who have reached the highest levels of leadership both of nations and of the Church is a subversive and criminal act.

 When asked about the efforts to create a global religion and whether it is homicide or suicide for the Holy Church, Vigano shared:

Both. On the one hand, the corrupt part of the Hierarchy – which for the sake of brevity I call the deep church – since it is subservient to Satan, hates the Church as the Mystical Body of Christ and intends to kill Her, just as happened to the Church’s Head. But we know that just as Christ is risen, so His Mystical Body will also be resurrected after Her Passion. So yes: those who serve the Devil carry out a murderous operation, however crazy and doomed to failure.

When asked about the consequences he has incurred in standing up to the New World Order, Vigano shared:

Already after my revelations about the scandals of then Cardinal McCarrick, I had to take care of my safety. My statements about the pandemic farce, which I remember began in May 2020, at the time earned me insults and verbal lynchings, accusations of undue interference or that I was promoting conspiracy theories. There have also been those who have said that it was not I who wrote my statements; it was even insinuated that I was suffering from psychosis and “delirium of interpretation,” or even possessed by the devil. Not to mention the the accusations following my pronouncement on the Russian-Ukrainian crisis, a few days ago…

I have been amazed that these often over-the-top attacks also come in part from circles of Catholic conservatism and the so-called political right. In many cases, those whom I would have considered as allies – in opposing first the pandemic farce and then the war provocation – have shown that they side with the adversary, to the point of recognizing the effectiveness and moral lawfulness of the so-called vaccines or presenting Zelensky as an innocent victim of Putin’s expansionist aims. The reality is quite different, and denying it or concealing it to support one’s own theses or to obey one’s masters will serve no purpose other than to make the condemnation of the guilty and their accomplices even more just and motivated.

In any case, I thank God and Our Lady that I am in good health, and for the protection they have granted me so far.

Here is the TV interview for those of you who would like to watch it in  Italian.

Here is the full transcript of the interview with Archbishop Vigano on Canale TV in English.

Charles Wharry (Darkbird18);

These two very interesting articles from Archbishop Viganò’s about the Ukraine and Russia war is showing that not all people are behind Ukraine because they see the whole picture of what's really going on and that the secret world powers are behind this war; just like all major wars, WWI and WWII. His statement bring out the other side of how NATO pushed Russia by army Ukraine and other nations in that region and using Ukraine as a chess piece in a world control game to bring about the NWO Agenda and start WWIII. The world has been always under the control of the dark brotherhood of darkness to help bring in a satanic agenda and take away all major nations who get in their way of this goal. The Archbishop is a power player and has inside information about the true happening in our world and people should take notice of what he is saying.