NATO Appoints a Vicious Liar as Secretary General 6


One of the nastiest men in Europe, Anders Rasmussen, has been appointed as NATO Secretary General. To achieve this Angela Merkel, Rasmussen’s most vociferous supporter, blackmailed Turkey into agreement by saying that otherwise Turkey’s prospect of entry into the EU would be affected. (The subtext is actually that Merkel has in fact no intention of ever permitting Turkish entry into the EU, as the prospect of all Turks having the right of settlement in Germany is anathema to her party.)

Insofar as Rasmussen’s appointment has been mentioned at all in the UK media, the only background given has been his support for the publication of the “Danish Cartoons” of the Prophet Mohammed. That is a surefire way to cheap popularity, as most in Europe – myself included – will maintain the right to freedom of speech. You only have to look at the scary fundamentalist Christians in the US to understand that it is essential that we maintain the right to poke fun at religion and the religous.

But the truth is Rasmussen has a very limited concept of freedom of speech. An enthusiastic follower of George Bush, like his friend Tony Blair he told outright lies to the Danish people about the existence of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction. He also lied about the content of secret intelligence reports the Danes had on Iraqi WMD.

Unlike Tony Blair, Rasmussen faced a secret intelligence service of some integrity. A very brave and honourable man, Major Frank Grevil, stepped forward to tell the Danish people that Rasmussen had lied about the content of intelligence reports.

Rasmussen did not show his famed support for freedom of speech in the case of Major Frank Grevil, who was jailed for telling the Danish people the truth and has only just been released. Rasmussen survived the scandal by winning the support of his parliamentary majority for the argument that he did not have to resign as he had not lied in parliament, only in a broadcast to his people.

There was dismay throughout Scandinavia at the prospect of Rasmussen’s appointment. The leading and generally conservative, pro-NATO Norwegian daily, Aftenposten, on 26 March published an editorial calling Rasmussen a “liar” and a “simplistic militarist”, and asking why Obama would support the appointment of one of Bush’s closest allies in the attack on Iraq – which is rather a good question.

In fact Rasmussen’s appointment is the apothesosis of the new vision of NATO as an alliance to enforce Western control over energy sources and supply routes in the Islamic world. And I challenge you to find any of the information I have just given you in the UK or US mainstream media.

Major Frank Grevil was this year, on his release from prison, presented with the Sam Adams Award for Integrity in Intelligence, voted by a jury of former senior US intelligence officials and former winners, of whom I am very proud to be one.


6 thoughts on “NATO Appoints a Vicious Liar as Secretary General

  • Vronsky

    There seems to be a growing tradition of filling the NATO position of Secretary-General with a very nasty person. George Robertson, for example.

  • Tom Welsh

    “Aftenposten, on 26 March published an editorial calling Rasmussen a “liar” and a “simplistic militarist”, and asking why Obama would support the appointment of one of Bush’s closest allies in the attack on Iraq – which is rather a good question”.

    Only if you take the view – itself simplistic – that Obama is materially different from Bush in his views and plans. I don’t, as both are chosen representatives of the US political machine so aptly described by Gore Vidal as “one party with two right wings”.

    Obama has refused to have Bush and his fellow lawbreakers prosecuted, thereby breaking his oath of office to uphold the constitution. Although he is moving to shut down Guantanamo, that is purely a PR exercise, as he has announced no plans to compensate or try the inmates. Nor has he even mentioned Bagram. Moreover, he has made it clear he intends to maintain US military bases in Iraq indefinitely, to expand the war in Afghanistan, and to extend it into Pakistan. And his overtures to Iran require that nation to admit that it is in the wrong (which it isn’t) as a condition of earning US tolerance. Thus, while dressed up for PR purposes to look friendly, in fact they are as hostile as anything Bush ever did.

    What goes around, comes around. Same old same old. You can’t fight City Hall. God is on the side of the big battalions.

  • Tom Welsh

    “There seems to be a growing tradition of filling the NATO position of Secretary-General with a very nasty person. George Robertson, for example”.

    I think there’s a simple explanation, Vronsky. It’s a very nasty post, which involves thinking up excuses for heavily-armed nations to enrich their arms manufacturers by attacking weaker nations that can’t defend themselves.

    You will never see NATO knowingly tangle with Russia or China because, despite all its tough talk, its members know very well that they would be putting their hands into a shredder. Last time the world’s most powerful armed forces attacked Russia, it took 3.5 years to annihilate them and reduce their homeland to a smoking ruin. And the Americans still ruefully remember their nasty experience in Korea, when they discovered that the Chinese could not only stand up to them, but knock them flying given a chance.

  • Ruth

    Tom Welsh:

    What goes around, comes around. Same old same old. You can’t fight City Hall. God is on the side of the big battalions.

    This thinking is rubbish. You can fight and win but of course it’ll be a long haul and you’ll have to put up with hardship. With Tom Welsh’s mindset why don’t we all roll over and say to the government do what you will.

  • JimmyGiro

    I think we need to resolve a fundamental question regarding power:

    What is better (or least worse), an honest bastard, or a ‘nice’ liar?

    My answer would be that in a true democracy you will be safer with the bastard, because you can vote them out if need be; but if you are not in a true democracy, could the nice liar be the better option?

  • Ron

    @Tom Welsh

    Excuse my pedantry, but Vidal’s quote was, “America has one party, the property party, with two right wings.” The meaning is not changed at all by dropping the property party bit, but we should play nicely and show that your version is an elliptical construction.

Comments are closed.