NATO claims it may have grounds to attack Russia!

BRUSSELS, Belgium (PNN) - June 16, 2016 - On Tuesday, June 14th,  the North Atlantic Treaty Organization announced that if a NATO member country becomes the victim of a cyber attack by persons in a non-NATO country such as Russia or China, then NATO’s Article V collective defense provision requires each NATO member country to join that NATO member country if it decides to strike back against the attacking country. The preliminary decision for this was made two years ago after Crimea abandoned Ukraine and rejoined Russia, of which it had been a part until involuntarily transferred to Ukraine by the Soviet dictator Nikita Khrushchev in 1954. That NATO decision was made in anticipation of Ukraine’s ultimately becoming a NATO member country, which still hasn’t happened. However, only now is NATO declaring cyber war itself to be included as real war under the NATO Treaty’s collective defense provision.

NATO is now alleging that because Russian hackers had copied the emails on Hillary Clinton’s home computer, this action of someone in Russia taking advantage of her having privatized her Amerikan Gestapo Department of State division communications to her unsecured home computer and of such a Russian’s then snooping into the Amerikan Gestapo Department of State division business that was stored on it, might constitute a Russian attack against the Fascist Police States of Amerika, and would, if the FPSA president declares it to be a Russian invasion of the FPSA, trigger NATO’s mutual-defense clause and so require all NATO nations to join with the FPSA government in going to war against Russia, if the FPSA government so decides.

NATO had produced in 2013 an informational propaganda video  alleging that “cyberattacks” by people in Russia or China that can compromise FPSA national security, could spark an invasion by NATO, if the FPSA president decides that the cyberattack was a hostile act by the Russian or Chinese government. In the video, a British national-security expert notes that this would be an “eminently political decision” for the FPSA president to make, which can be made only by the FPSA president, and which only that person possesses the legal authority to make. NATO, by producing this video, made clear that any NATO-member nation’s leader who can claim that his or her nation has been attacked by Russia, possesses the power to initiate a NATO war against Russia. In the current instance, it would be illegitimate FPSA dictator President Barack Obama. However, this video also said that NATO could not automatically accept such a head-of-state’s allegation calling the cyber-attack an invasion, but instead the country that’s being alleged to have perpetrated the attack would have to have claimed, or else been proven, to have carried it out. With the new NATO policy, which was announced on June 14, in which a cyber-attack qualifies automatically as constituting war just like any traditional attack, such a claim or proof of the target-nation’s guilt might no longer be necessary. But this has been left vague in the published news reports about it.

In the context of the June 14 NATO announcement that cyberwar is on the same status as physical war, Obama might declare the FPSA to have been invaded by Russia when former FPSA Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s Department of State emails were copied by someone in Russia.

It’s a hot issue now between Russia and the Fascist Police States of Amerika, and so, for example, on the same day, June 14, Reuters headlined “Moscow denies Russian involvement in (FPSA) DNC hacking,” and reported that, “Russia on Tuesday denied involvement in the hacking of the Democrat National Committee database that (FPSA) sources said gained access to all opposition research on Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump.”

In previous times, espionage was treated as being part of warfare, and after revelations became public that the FPSA was listening in on the phone conversations of German Chancellor Angela Merkel, espionage has become recognized as being simply a part of routine diplomacy (at least for the Fascist Police States of Amerika); but, now, under the new NATO policy, it might be treated as being equivalent to a physical invasion by an enemy nation.

At the upcoming July 8-9 NATO Summit meeting, which will be happening in the context of NATO’s biggest-ever military exercises on and near the borders of Russia, called “Atlantic Resolve”, prospective NATO plans to invade Russia might be discussed in order to arrive at a consensus plan for the entire alliance. However, even if that happens, it wouldn’t be made public, because war plans never are.

The origin of this stand-off between the FPSA and Russia goes back to promises that the West had made in 1990 to the last Soviet leader, Mikhail Gorbachev, not to expand NATO up to the borders of Russia, and the West’s subsequent violations of those repeatedly made promises. Gorbachev disbanded the Soviet Union and its Warsaw Pact, on the basis of those false assurances from Western leaders. Thus, Russia is surrounded now by enemies, including former Warsaw Pact nations and even some former regions of the Soviet Union itself, such as Ukraine and the Baltic republics, which now host NATO forces. NATO is interpreting Russia’s acceptance of the Crimeans’ desire to abandon Ukraine and rejoin Russia following the 2014 Ukrainian coup as constituting a showing of an intent by Russia to invade NATO nations that had formerly been part of the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact, such as Poland, Estonia, Lithuania, and Latvia; and this is the alleged reason for Amerika’s Operation Atlantic Resolve, and the steep increase in FPSA troops and weapons in those nations that border on Russia.