Mentioning Anders Fogh Rasmussen

by morton_h, the blogger 

The historian Webster Griffin Tarpley mentioned in his radio blog the former Danish prime minister, Anders Fogh Rasmussen (calling him 'Fuck' Rasmussen ;-)

Finally this murky character is mentionend in international alternative media. But since I am Danish, I have a few comments on his radioblog from the 19th of april, 2014.

It is absolutely true, that Anders Fogh Rasmussen has earned his position as General Secretary of NATO by licking the behind of Bush and Blair. Moreover he, like they did, lied to his teeth towards the Danish population on the motives for joining the aggressive wars in Afghanistan, Irak and later in Libya, Sudan, Mali, Syria and undercover in Ukraine.

And we should also add, that he - while still being the prime minister (statsminister) of Denmark, where as we know 'something is wrong', he served as an instrument of bashing the Irish, the Polacks and other nations to accept the expansion of the EU towards Eastern Europe.

He is an extremely manipulative person, at the members of the Danish press and media were utterly terrified by his style. No-one had the guts to ask certain questions when he was in front of a camera.

But all tyrannies has an end, and he then felt his feet burning i DK and left a country with af far worse economy than under his social democratic predesessor: Poul Nyrop, a brilliant economist who wrote af book about 'Casino Capitalism' after the financial crisis and who was a main spokesperson for the social democratic parties i the EU, trying to oppose the rising corruption of this monstrous organisation.

Anders Fogh has a history of abuse. As the youngest taxation-minister in the history Danish administration he was grabbed with his fingers down the cookie box doing 'creative bookkeeping' aka fraud in his departement. There has been numerous accounts of his sexual tendencies, and he has been seen in parks in Copenhagen contacting young boys. This would fit perfectly into the scheme of control by compromize performed by the elite.

Where I think the brilliant historian Webster Tarpley may be a bit wrong, is his direct connections to the so called collaboration policies with the nazis during WW2. Danish 'collaboration policy' was a concept performed internally with the parties of the Danish parliament during WW2. Externally it was 'negociation policy'. Post WW2 historians have confused these concepts thus slipping it into history books.

You have to go further back in history and see it in a broader context. Denmark had two wars with Germany in the 18th hundreds: the first and the second Schlesvig War. The first one was around 1850 and was basically a civil war in northern Germany supported by the Danish crown. This war boosted the Danish ego and was seen as a victory.

The second Schlesvig War the king and the administration deliberately offending the Preussians and Bismarch under the motto: 'Denmark to the Ejder', the river in Schleswig. This was very offensive, since most of the population there was German.

One must also know, that the Danish nobilities were what we call 'low-nobilities' with German roots. They all bear German names, and even the Queen of Denmark till recently had long subtitles referring to this North German noble bloodlines.

Anyway, Bismarck was annoyed by the Danish arrogance and send his troops into Denmark in 1864, and they went as far as the northern part of the main peninsula Jutland - just for pissing off the territory and punishing the Danes. Then they retreated to a stream called 'Kongeaaen' - the Kings River. This was a major blow to the Danish national ego. You may argue, that the Danish national ego never overcame this blow provoked by the very same ego.

Then came the 1st and the 2nd world war. Denmark kept out of the 1st by the effort of one of the most brilliant diplomats of any time called Erik Scavenius. He later was called back in the 2nd world war to do his tricks. He was a most scilled diplomate part time stationed in Berlin. He knew the Germans in-and-out. And he knew, that a tiny country - once a Nordic empire for sure untill the rennaissance but lost with Christian II but in the 19th century only a tiny appendix to the North of Germany - should never offend the Germans, and that they would always rise again no matter what onslaughts they might suffer.

Scavenius' cunning diplomacy prevented Denmark from being destroyed in WW2. It was diplomatic 'aikido'. Imagine a tiny population opposing the giant war mashine of Germany! Cmon! Can we please not indulge in speaches of destructive heroicism?!

Back to our time. Anders Fogh made in his days in office some weird statements: That Denmark was acting cowardly in 1940, that we should have fought back sacrificing 1000's of young men in a mortal uprise against the Germans at the southern border for absolutely no other reason than symbolic sacrifice! Propaganda and historic falsification de-luxe and his statement had all had to do with internal policies in Denmark, promoting his own career, neo-liberalism and what he later called 'activist foreign policy'. What he forgot to mention was, that his party, the liberals, in Denmark called 'Venstre' meaning 'the left' (ironically) were the biggest collaborators with the nazis during WW2.

Another national ego-defeat of Denmark was the bombing of Copenhagen in the late days of the Napolean Wars. Denmark had the guts to support Napoleon. He lost as we know. The British ambassadors wanted a meeting i Cph, but the king refused to meet with them. After the defeat the British fleet arrived and bombed Copenhagen in 1807, destroyed the City and the fleet.

This is the start of 'the English Decease', and that decease has been part of the Danish national plague ever since.

Anders Fogh performed a historical parallel to the diplomatic stupidity of the end of the Napolan War when he orchestrated the socalled 'Muhammed Crisis' with some talentless drawings ordered by a Danish newspaper, Jyllandsposten, and its culture correspondent, the zionist Flemming Rose, who spent decades in Russia as a correspondent and who hated the Russians with all his guts. Anders Fogh refused to even meet with the diplomats from several arab/muslim countries to explain them in a polite manner, that we don't censor newspapers in this country (in fact we do now, but that's another story) and that satire is not a matter for the state. He could most easily have avoided it but chose deliberately not to.

I guess you call it 'The Clash Of The Civilisations' and part of the scheme for starting a third world war.

I do think like Webster Tarpley, that this mean guy needs to be nailed down and - if justice was to emerge - put to a criminal court with Bush, Blair, Blankfein and the whole bunch. But in order to do so, one needs to aim in the right manner and not ascribe him attributes and opinions that he did not have. If defeatism and cowardice is him, that would be his defeat to the british-american powers.

The next prime minister is apparently different: Helle Thorning Schmidt. And then again not. She follows up on the English decease by being married into the corrupt British political Labour-gang. Her husband is the relative of one of the most corrupt Labour politicians ever: Nigel Kinnock. She herself is a 100% breed of the EU-tocracy. She was educated and careered from here, and is now planning her retreat here having severe problems as a prime minister. The Danes are beginning to see how politicians are cheating and lying on them constantly. Goldman Sachs has now targetted Denmark and its economy as a venture field, and the corrupt Danish politicians just sold the largest energy company DONG Energy to these financial gangsters so they can suck its resources and the hidden oil in the Danish colony, Greenland - totally disregarding violent protests from the Danes.

And be of no doubt: the Danes never approved the German invasion in the 40ties, ever! Only a very few were clapping their hand then. It is very wrong to claim, that they were opportunistic and only started sabotaging and fighting back when they realized, that the Germans might not win the war. This is the weakness of history books. They are infected with politics, and they are written with that in retrospect. The brilliant diplomate, Scavenius, was smeared and character murdered after the war although he had saved Denmark from being brutally destroyed. He sat hours and hours and stubbornly negotiated with the German staff in Berlin refusing to let Danes participate at the German eastern front as 'payment' for not destroying Denmark.

Compare with Norwegians and Swedes. The Norwegians had one big blow against the Germans when they sank the big German cruiser Blücher in the Oslo Fjord in 1940. They have been boasting of that ever since, but that was about it. They forget to mention, that they afterwards were begging and begging for the same conditions with the Wehrmacht as the Danes but they did'nt get it because of this incident. The Swedes were even worse. They made huge profits with the Germans providing them with steal from their mines. The Swedish weapon industry started here, and Bofors is now one of the biggest players in the global industrial complex. Moreover the socalled Swedish neutrality is a giant piece of hipocracy, and there was a lot of nazism going on in Sweden. The nazi cells of the swedish police were never cleaned out after the war as opposed to the Danish. The second generation of these vermits participated in the murder of their prime minister Olof Palme. Should there be any doubt of that, read the author and researcher Ole Dammegaards book 'Coup d'Etat In Slow Motion' with a thousand pages filled with well consolidated info.