Society
Declan Hayes
October 2, 2022
© Photo: REUTERS/Leonhard Foeger

Germany and the European Union have the backs of anyone wishing to undermine the credibility of any elections that didn’t secure NATO’s imprimatur.

As Germany’s Foreign Office and the European Union both directly fund The European Platform for Democratic Elections (EPDE) and indirectly through the “13 independent European citizen election observation organizations” that are members of this shadowy group, Germany and the European Union have the backs of anyone wishing to undermine the credibility not only of the recent referenda held in Eastern Ukraine but those in Crimea and other elections that didn’t secure NATO’s imprimatur.

Because the EPDE is concerned that non NATO approved elections lack “integrity”, it preaches that problematic elections, including those internal to Russia, can only gain that stamp of approval by having EU approved monitors drawn from the EPDE and similar NATO front bodies. Thus, because it notes that “no international politically-biased observers [were] identified during the 2022 Russian regional elections”, it argues to its EU paymasters that those elections failed its litmus test that internal elections in Russia and allied states can only be kosher if held under the watchful eye of the EPDE and similar EU and NATO funded Big Brother groups.

Crucially, regarding its claims of independence, the EPDE posits “Russia’s unprovoked and unjustified military aggression against Ukraine” as being a primary factor in causing EPDE and other “experts” not to observe those Russian elections on behalf of NATO and other interested groups. The EPDE citing “Russia’s unprovoked and unjustified military aggression against Ukraine” is simply further proof the EPDE, whilst parading its independence, is, in fact just a blunt tool of EU and NATO soft power, whose mantra the EPDA parrots to the letter. The EPDA, in other words, very much has a dog in the fight, and that dog is NATO, which is its eyes as well as its ears.

Whereas the EPDE insists all of its members and partners are kosher “non-governmental citizen election observation organizations standing up for transparent and equal suffrage”, it has a massive data base on fake observers, of politically biased election observers who don’t meet their pristine standards and who, one must presume, their democratically challenged chums in Kiev would like to add to their own extensive Mirotvorets death lists.

EPDE’s data base is an eye opener for anyone who wants to see where German and EU totalitarianism is bringing us. Please peruse these “fake observers” who observed where the EU did not want them to observe and so now have their mug shots paraded on Fake Observers as a simple but effective smear tactic and as a prelude to Alina Lipp type sanctions or, in more contentious places, a simple bullet in the head.

Archibold Jomo Nyambi, a South African MP, is there. As is Armenian Vardan Khachatryan, Italian Federico Arena, French politician Thierry Mariani and a host of other “NATO’s Most Wanted” politicians and academics from Israel, Brazil, Britain, and a large number of other countries too numerous to adumbrate. These 500 characters on the EPDE’s rogues’ gallery do not meet the standards of NATO’s European Platform for Democratic Elections because, much like Russia’s national football team, they do not meet NATO’s self-serving rules.

NATO’s Global Network of Domestic Election Monitors (GNDEM) tells us that being monitored by NATO approved groups like theirs “is inseparable from defending the ability of citizens to exercise a broad array of civil and political rights and is affected by the actions of a range of governmental authorities, as well as political contestants”. What all of that tripe breaks down to is only elections which NATO controls are kosher and others, be they in Gaza, Syria, Venezuela or Crimea are not.

I was cited as an international observer at Syria’s 2014 Presidential election where lines formed in Damascus to vote in President Assad at 5 am in the morning and where, in Homs at least where I was, the Ba’ath Party was integrated into every level of civil society and thus was able to get the vote out in huge numbers, something the Irish have been famous for in Boston, Chicago, England and Ireland itself. Although the result was a foregone conclusion, it was not the blood election NATO warned it would be and NATO’s media had been crowing in advance that the Donbas and related referenda would be. Rather, it was the ordinary Syrian people telling NATO to fuck off and to take their proxies with them.

Much the same applies in those areas of Ukraine, which have now voted to reunite with Russia. Although, as prominent Scottish nationalist and Julian Assange campaigner Craig Murray argues, though the process might not have been perfect and though some fools and grifters were obviously along for the ride, NATO must now deal with the consequences that the overwhelming majority in Donbas and Luhansk chose life under Russia rather than death under Zelensky. That is the crux.

And, though Murray is correct not to “be spending all day arguing with idiots”, who inveigle their way into such proceedings, the EDME’s rogues’ gallery and my own Syrian and Irish experiences show that the most important of these dissident observers are not clowns.

As the EDMEs most wanted include a lot of eminent politicians, journalists and academics, NATO’s objective is to ensure they remain just a group of ants, rather than a colony of ants, working towards a common objective. In the Syrian Presidential election, the foreign observers were anchored by the Iranian Foreign Minister, a first class diplomat, who did a sterling job of herding all the various serious and not so serious representatives from the four corners of the earth into delivering that one message that Hezbollah’s Hassan Nasrallah gave us and NATO in Beirut a day or two later: Assad is President of Syria for the next seven years; deal with it.

It was the same when I campaigned and voted for Bobby Sands in the pivotal 1981 Westminster election, which was monitored by some self important South African Mennonites and some similar nonentities of no consequence. The voters of Fermanagh South Tyrone defied Thatcher by electing Bobby Sands and they thereby changed the course of Irish electoral history.

The same applies in Lugansk, Donetsk and the other areas of Eastern Ukraine that recently hit the ballot box. As they have voted to defy NATO, Zelensky, von der Leyen and their EDME and other puppets, NATO must now deal with it by blowing the Kerch Bridge or some other terrorist act that shows these thugs are powerless against a babushka with a ballot box in one hand and a desire for peace and freedom in the other.

Undermining Eastern Ukraine’s Electorate

Germany and the European Union have the backs of anyone wishing to undermine the credibility of any elections that didn’t secure NATO’s imprimatur.

As Germany’s Foreign Office and the European Union both directly fund The European Platform for Democratic Elections (EPDE) and indirectly through the “13 independent European citizen election observation organizations” that are members of this shadowy group, Germany and the European Union have the backs of anyone wishing to undermine the credibility not only of the recent referenda held in Eastern Ukraine but those in Crimea and other elections that didn’t secure NATO’s imprimatur.

Because the EPDE is concerned that non NATO approved elections lack “integrity”, it preaches that problematic elections, including those internal to Russia, can only gain that stamp of approval by having EU approved monitors drawn from the EPDE and similar NATO front bodies. Thus, because it notes that “no international politically-biased observers [were] identified during the 2022 Russian regional elections”, it argues to its EU paymasters that those elections failed its litmus test that internal elections in Russia and allied states can only be kosher if held under the watchful eye of the EPDE and similar EU and NATO funded Big Brother groups.

Crucially, regarding its claims of independence, the EPDE posits “Russia’s unprovoked and unjustified military aggression against Ukraine” as being a primary factor in causing EPDE and other “experts” not to observe those Russian elections on behalf of NATO and other interested groups. The EPDE citing “Russia’s unprovoked and unjustified military aggression against Ukraine” is simply further proof the EPDE, whilst parading its independence, is, in fact just a blunt tool of EU and NATO soft power, whose mantra the EPDA parrots to the letter. The EPDA, in other words, very much has a dog in the fight, and that dog is NATO, which is its eyes as well as its ears.

Whereas the EPDE insists all of its members and partners are kosher “non-governmental citizen election observation organizations standing up for transparent and equal suffrage”, it has a massive data base on fake observers, of politically biased election observers who don’t meet their pristine standards and who, one must presume, their democratically challenged chums in Kiev would like to add to their own extensive Mirotvorets death lists.

EPDE’s data base is an eye opener for anyone who wants to see where German and EU totalitarianism is bringing us. Please peruse these “fake observers” who observed where the EU did not want them to observe and so now have their mug shots paraded on Fake Observers as a simple but effective smear tactic and as a prelude to Alina Lipp type sanctions or, in more contentious places, a simple bullet in the head.

Archibold Jomo Nyambi, a South African MP, is there. As is Armenian Vardan Khachatryan, Italian Federico Arena, French politician Thierry Mariani and a host of other “NATO’s Most Wanted” politicians and academics from Israel, Brazil, Britain, and a large number of other countries too numerous to adumbrate. These 500 characters on the EPDE’s rogues’ gallery do not meet the standards of NATO’s European Platform for Democratic Elections because, much like Russia’s national football team, they do not meet NATO’s self-serving rules.

NATO’s Global Network of Domestic Election Monitors (GNDEM) tells us that being monitored by NATO approved groups like theirs “is inseparable from defending the ability of citizens to exercise a broad array of civil and political rights and is affected by the actions of a range of governmental authorities, as well as political contestants”. What all of that tripe breaks down to is only elections which NATO controls are kosher and others, be they in Gaza, Syria, Venezuela or Crimea are not.

I was cited as an international observer at Syria’s 2014 Presidential election where lines formed in Damascus to vote in President Assad at 5 am in the morning and where, in Homs at least where I was, the Ba’ath Party was integrated into every level of civil society and thus was able to get the vote out in huge numbers, something the Irish have been famous for in Boston, Chicago, England and Ireland itself. Although the result was a foregone conclusion, it was not the blood election NATO warned it would be and NATO’s media had been crowing in advance that the Donbas and related referenda would be. Rather, it was the ordinary Syrian people telling NATO to fuck off and to take their proxies with them.

Much the same applies in those areas of Ukraine, which have now voted to reunite with Russia. Although, as prominent Scottish nationalist and Julian Assange campaigner Craig Murray argues, though the process might not have been perfect and though some fools and grifters were obviously along for the ride, NATO must now deal with the consequences that the overwhelming majority in Donbas and Luhansk chose life under Russia rather than death under Zelensky. That is the crux.

And, though Murray is correct not to “be spending all day arguing with idiots”, who inveigle their way into such proceedings, the EDME’s rogues’ gallery and my own Syrian and Irish experiences show that the most important of these dissident observers are not clowns.

As the EDMEs most wanted include a lot of eminent politicians, journalists and academics, NATO’s objective is to ensure they remain just a group of ants, rather than a colony of ants, working towards a common objective. In the Syrian Presidential election, the foreign observers were anchored by the Iranian Foreign Minister, a first class diplomat, who did a sterling job of herding all the various serious and not so serious representatives from the four corners of the earth into delivering that one message that Hezbollah’s Hassan Nasrallah gave us and NATO in Beirut a day or two later: Assad is President of Syria for the next seven years; deal with it.

It was the same when I campaigned and voted for Bobby Sands in the pivotal 1981 Westminster election, which was monitored by some self important South African Mennonites and some similar nonentities of no consequence. The voters of Fermanagh South Tyrone defied Thatcher by electing Bobby Sands and they thereby changed the course of Irish electoral history.

The same applies in Lugansk, Donetsk and the other areas of Eastern Ukraine that recently hit the ballot box. As they have voted to defy NATO, Zelensky, von der Leyen and their EDME and other puppets, NATO must now deal with it by blowing the Kerch Bridge or some other terrorist act that shows these thugs are powerless against a babushka with a ballot box in one hand and a desire for peace and freedom in the other.

Germany and the European Union have the backs of anyone wishing to undermine the credibility of any elections that didn’t secure NATO’s imprimatur.

As Germany’s Foreign Office and the European Union both directly fund The European Platform for Democratic Elections (EPDE) and indirectly through the “13 independent European citizen election observation organizations” that are members of this shadowy group, Germany and the European Union have the backs of anyone wishing to undermine the credibility not only of the recent referenda held in Eastern Ukraine but those in Crimea and other elections that didn’t secure NATO’s imprimatur.

Because the EPDE is concerned that non NATO approved elections lack “integrity”, it preaches that problematic elections, including those internal to Russia, can only gain that stamp of approval by having EU approved monitors drawn from the EPDE and similar NATO front bodies. Thus, because it notes that “no international politically-biased observers [were] identified during the 2022 Russian regional elections”, it argues to its EU paymasters that those elections failed its litmus test that internal elections in Russia and allied states can only be kosher if held under the watchful eye of the EPDE and similar EU and NATO funded Big Brother groups.

Crucially, regarding its claims of independence, the EPDE posits “Russia’s unprovoked and unjustified military aggression against Ukraine” as being a primary factor in causing EPDE and other “experts” not to observe those Russian elections on behalf of NATO and other interested groups. The EPDE citing “Russia’s unprovoked and unjustified military aggression against Ukraine” is simply further proof the EPDE, whilst parading its independence, is, in fact just a blunt tool of EU and NATO soft power, whose mantra the EPDA parrots to the letter. The EPDA, in other words, very much has a dog in the fight, and that dog is NATO, which is its eyes as well as its ears.

Whereas the EPDE insists all of its members and partners are kosher “non-governmental citizen election observation organizations standing up for transparent and equal suffrage”, it has a massive data base on fake observers, of politically biased election observers who don’t meet their pristine standards and who, one must presume, their democratically challenged chums in Kiev would like to add to their own extensive Mirotvorets death lists.

EPDE’s data base is an eye opener for anyone who wants to see where German and EU totalitarianism is bringing us. Please peruse these “fake observers” who observed where the EU did not want them to observe and so now have their mug shots paraded on Fake Observers as a simple but effective smear tactic and as a prelude to Alina Lipp type sanctions or, in more contentious places, a simple bullet in the head.

Archibold Jomo Nyambi, a South African MP, is there. As is Armenian Vardan Khachatryan, Italian Federico Arena, French politician Thierry Mariani and a host of other “NATO’s Most Wanted” politicians and academics from Israel, Brazil, Britain, and a large number of other countries too numerous to adumbrate. These 500 characters on the EPDE’s rogues’ gallery do not meet the standards of NATO’s European Platform for Democratic Elections because, much like Russia’s national football team, they do not meet NATO’s self-serving rules.

NATO’s Global Network of Domestic Election Monitors (GNDEM) tells us that being monitored by NATO approved groups like theirs “is inseparable from defending the ability of citizens to exercise a broad array of civil and political rights and is affected by the actions of a range of governmental authorities, as well as political contestants”. What all of that tripe breaks down to is only elections which NATO controls are kosher and others, be they in Gaza, Syria, Venezuela or Crimea are not.

I was cited as an international observer at Syria’s 2014 Presidential election where lines formed in Damascus to vote in President Assad at 5 am in the morning and where, in Homs at least where I was, the Ba’ath Party was integrated into every level of civil society and thus was able to get the vote out in huge numbers, something the Irish have been famous for in Boston, Chicago, England and Ireland itself. Although the result was a foregone conclusion, it was not the blood election NATO warned it would be and NATO’s media had been crowing in advance that the Donbas and related referenda would be. Rather, it was the ordinary Syrian people telling NATO to fuck off and to take their proxies with them.

Much the same applies in those areas of Ukraine, which have now voted to reunite with Russia. Although, as prominent Scottish nationalist and Julian Assange campaigner Craig Murray argues, though the process might not have been perfect and though some fools and grifters were obviously along for the ride, NATO must now deal with the consequences that the overwhelming majority in Donbas and Luhansk chose life under Russia rather than death under Zelensky. That is the crux.

And, though Murray is correct not to “be spending all day arguing with idiots”, who inveigle their way into such proceedings, the EDME’s rogues’ gallery and my own Syrian and Irish experiences show that the most important of these dissident observers are not clowns.

As the EDMEs most wanted include a lot of eminent politicians, journalists and academics, NATO’s objective is to ensure they remain just a group of ants, rather than a colony of ants, working towards a common objective. In the Syrian Presidential election, the foreign observers were anchored by the Iranian Foreign Minister, a first class diplomat, who did a sterling job of herding all the various serious and not so serious representatives from the four corners of the earth into delivering that one message that Hezbollah’s Hassan Nasrallah gave us and NATO in Beirut a day or two later: Assad is President of Syria for the next seven years; deal with it.

It was the same when I campaigned and voted for Bobby Sands in the pivotal 1981 Westminster election, which was monitored by some self important South African Mennonites and some similar nonentities of no consequence. The voters of Fermanagh South Tyrone defied Thatcher by electing Bobby Sands and they thereby changed the course of Irish electoral history.

The same applies in Lugansk, Donetsk and the other areas of Eastern Ukraine that recently hit the ballot box. As they have voted to defy NATO, Zelensky, von der Leyen and their EDME and other puppets, NATO must now deal with it by blowing the Kerch Bridge or some other terrorist act that shows these thugs are powerless against a babushka with a ballot box in one hand and a desire for peace and freedom in the other.

The views of individual contributors do not necessarily represent those of the Strategic Culture Foundation.

See also

September 27, 2022
November 23, 2022

See also

September 27, 2022
November 23, 2022
The views of individual contributors do not necessarily represent those of the Strategic Culture Foundation.