🇬🇧 SITREP - Independent OSINT Channel 🇬🇧

From Fallout to Reality: Imperial Psyops and the Erosion of Sovereignty

In the Fallout universe, Canada’s annexation by the US is a footnote in the imperial march toward global catastrophe. A resource-strapped America absorbs its northern neighbor to secure the Alaskan pipeline and prepare for war with China, ultimately leading to a nuclear apocalypse. At first glance, it’s dystopian fiction, but peel back, and it becomes something far more sinister. The game’s narrative operates like a psyop, conditioning audiences to see the erasure of borders and the subjugation of sovereignty as inevitable when resources are at stake. It’s imperial hubris wrapped in pixels, teaching players that empire-building, even at the cost of "allies", is just the way of the world.

Now step out of the game and into reality. Trump’s musings about Canada becoming the 51st state, purchasing Greenland, or retaking the Panama Canal are dismissed as “jokes.” But are they? These offhand remarks are the kind of subtle ideological work a psyop thrives on; normalizing the idea that sovereignty is expendable in the pursuit of power. In Fallout, the annexation of Canada was framed as a patriotic necessity, a way to secure North American stability. Today, Trump frames it as a win-win for Canadians who could enjoy “lower taxes” and “better military protection.” Same logic, different delivery. The underlying message remains: sovereignty is optional when America decides it is.

Greenland is the more chilling example. To the untrained ear, Trump’s talk of “buying” Greenland sounds like the ramblings of a man who doesn’t understand sovereignty. But dig deeper, and it becomes clear that Greenland, rich in untapped natural resources and strategically placed in the Arctic, is the crown jewel of the polar frontier. Trump’s quiet implication of using military means to secure it echoes the logic of Fallout: if you can’t buy it, take it. Greenland isn’t for sale, as Denmark firmly stated, but the mere suggestion softens resistance to the idea that territory can still be acquired in the 21st century, if not through negotiations, then by extortion (tarrifs) and lastly by force.

And then we have the Panama Canal, a vital artery of global trade and a symbol of U.S. imperialism in Latin America. Trump’s remarks about “reclaiming” the canal underscore a nostalgia for the days when DC's word was law in the Global South. For the U.S., the canal isn’t just infrastructure, it’s power. The treaties transferring control to Panama were supposed to mark a shift toward respecting Latin American sovereignty. But to the empire, agreements are tools of convenience, not principles. The Monroe Doctrine isn’t dead, it’s just been rebranded.

This is the brilliance of a psyop. By embedding these imperial ambitions in entertainment, the empire conditions the public mind to see them as natural, even inevitable. The annexation of Canada in Fallout and Trump’s flippant remarks about sovereignty share a common purpose: to normalize imperial overreach. Laugh it off, and the idea slips past the defenses of outrage. By the time the rhetoric turns into policy, the groundwork has already been laid. This is how empires have always worked, not with a frontal assault, but with a steady erosion of resistance until compliance feels like relief.

The irony is thick, Trump self proclaime champion of anti-globalism, couldn't be more aligned with globalism when it comes to his expansionist wet dream.

But the world is no longer buying it. The multipolar world, led by Russia, China, and an awakening Global South, is rewriting the script. They see the empire’s play for what it is: desperation. Sovereignty isn’t for sale, and the empire’s psyops, whether in video games or in Trump’s soundbites, are losing their grip. If Fallout was a story of inevitability, the rising multipolar world is one of resistance, a declaration that sovereignty is sacred and empire’s time is up.

Now the question isn’t whether the empire will fall, it’s when and how loudly the world will cheer when it does.

- Gerry Nolan

Musk’s Wildfire Critique: The Climate Racket, California’s Bureaucratic Inferno, and the Globalist Playbook

Elon Musk’s comments on California wildfires strike at a deeper, uncomfortable truth: while the flames rage across the West Coast, the smokescreen of bureaucratic ineptitude and globalist climate opportunism chokes any meaningful solutions. Musk, as always, delivers his critique with the subtlety of a blowtorch. But, let’s not dismiss the core of his argument, there’s something to be said about the absurdities of California’s approach to wildfire prevention and the globalist racket disguised as “climate policy.”

Controlled Burns vs. Globalist Distraction
Musk rightly calls out California’s nonsensical regulations that have hamstrung forest management for decades. The science is clear: controlled burns and proactive land clearing drastically reduce wildfire risks. Indigenous peoples knew this long before California regulators decided to reinvent the wheel with their eco-bureaucratic maze. But instead of addressing the fuel - overgrown forests, drought-ridden underbrush; California’s policymakers throw billions at “green initiatives” that do 'net-zero' to solve the problem.

It’s a classic case of virtue signaling masquerading as policy. Why engage in unglamorous, practical forest management when you can virtue-signal about “net zero” and carbon credits at international climate summits?

The Climate Grift and Globalist Leverage
Climate change, happening since the existence of our planet isn’t a debate, it’s a fact. But it’s also a tool, co-opted by global elites to consolidate power. Carbon taxes masquerade as moral imperatives while siphoning wealth from the working class. International climate agreements? Mechanisms for weakening national sovereignty under unelected bureaucrats. The hypocrisy is stunning: private jets ferry elites to conferences where they lecture and demand sacrifices from everyone but themselves.

Wildfires as a Globalist Case Study
Musk sees the dysfunction, but the problem is bigger than bad policy, it’s bad actors. The same globalist networks that profit from chaos are those championing California’s failed regulations. The carbon credit market grows fat, politicians secure power through fear, and multinational firms cash in on “solutions” that perpetuate the problem. Wildfires become the perfect storm: a natural disaster spun into a propaganda machine.

The Playbook of Crisis Capitalism
This is how the game is played. First, manufacture fear. Then, offer control as the solution. California’s wildfires fit neatly into this model: regulatory failures are ignored, while globalist forces weaponize the crisis to push their agenda. Musk’s frustration is valid, but the real enemy isn’t just Sacramento, it’s the system of global profiteering and control that thrives on perpetual crisis.

❗️Musk’s critique only scratches the surface. Wildfires, climate change, and the policies supposedly meant to combat them are part of a global system that prioritizes power over solutions. California burns not just because of bad policy, but because of a bad system, one that thrives on chaos and fear.

As California burns, the larger blaze is the one torching sovereignty and empowering elites. Clearing the brush isn’t enough, the institutions that enable the flames must also be razed.

- Gerry Nolan

🎙 Subscribe @TheIslanderNews

⚡️A Cultural Masterclass in Syria

The unparalleled finesse of modern diplomacy! Annalena Baerbock, the Green Party wunderkind, has once again graced the international stage, this time with a jaunt to Syria.

This is post-Assad Syria where a new political movement is being formed, diversity friendly, Armani wearing Jihadists that every westerner can love. No democracy on the horizon, still carrying out ethnic cleansing of Alawites, Christians and Sunnis, but they've trimmed their beards and wear suits! And sharia law and elimination of rights for women, but let's not quibble. If Azov represents the political ideal in Europe, why not Jihadist head choppers in the Middle East?

Baerbock strolled into Damascus, in a masterpiece of studied nonchalance, in a wardrobe that can best be described as "Gap clearance rack". We must assume this was some sort of post-feminist statement, right? Discretely standing up for local women, right? No hijab for our dear brave Annalena!

This is what Green Party “pro-diversity” looks like. True diversity means imposing your casual German aesthetic on the rest.

Baerbock isn’t just a Green Party politician; she’s a warrior for women’s rights and her choice of outfit wasn’t a careless oversight but a calculated act of feminist rebellion. What better way to inspire the women of Syria than by breezing into their homeland, flouting their cultural norms, and showing them how modern liberation looks? Surely, the sight of her boldly informal garb was enough to make every woman in Syria instantly discard her hijab and demand a revolution.

Imagine for a moment if this were a male foreign minister. Picture him striding into the heart of jihadist-controlled Syria clad in, say, cargo shorts and flip-flops, or perhaps a faded Metallica T-shirt. But when Baerbock does it, she thinks it is a bold rejection of outdated norms. How utterly "refreshing".

As for her hosts, one assumes they were torn between mild amusement and utter disdain. The irony is almost poetic: here is the representative of a nation that prides itself on inclusivity and understanding, traipsing into a deeply conservative milieu with all the cultural awareness of a YouTube travel vlogger. Oh, and let’s not forget that these hosts—stalwart champions of post-Assad democracy (read: jihadists)—aren’t exactly known for their patience with blasphemy, sartorial or otherwise. But sure, Ms. Baerbock, show them how progressive Europeans roll. What could possibly go wrong?

⚡️ Two Majors

Hidden Threads of Syria’s Collapse: Unanswered Questions

Syria’s collapse: a tale of intrigue, betrayal, and squandered sovereignty didn’t happen overnight. Bashar al-Assad’s retreat to Russia and the meteoric rise of HTS were just the final acts in a long-running theater, masterfully engineered to shatter the Levant’s last bastion of resistance against Zionist hegemony. But was this collapse inevitable? Or was it orchestrated, piece by piece, by external powers, internal corruption, and strategic miscalculations? To truly unravel the story, we must follow four critical threads:

Asma Assad: The Trojan Horse in Chanel?
Syria’s First Lady, Asma Assad, was long presented as a symbol of modernity and resilience, a woman with Western poise and a vision for Syria’s future. But was this cultivated image a smokescreen? Born and educated in the UK, with a background in banking, Asma’s ties to the Western financial elite are impossible to ignore. Her apparent role in rejecting Russian and Chinese economic solutions, a lifeline that could have circumvented the crushing Caesar sanctions raises profound questions. Was she an unwitting agent of influence, subtly steering Syria away from a multipolar future? Or did her financial strategies, crafted in the corridors of London’s banking elite, betray Syria’s sovereignty for a Western-engineered collapse? Asma’s role isn’t just enigmatic; it’s central to understanding why Syria collapsed.

2. Basil al-Assad: The Heir They Couldn’t Let Live
The death of Basil al-Assad in a 1994 car crash reshaped Syria’s destiny. Basil was groomed by Hafiz al-Assad as a strongman heir, a military leader who would ensure Syria’s survival against Western interference. His younger brother Bashar, a London-trained doctor, was the polar opposite: soft-spoken, untested, and seemingly pliable. Was Basil’s death truly accidental, or was it a surgical strike by foreign intelligence to clear the way for Bashar, a leader more susceptible to manipulation? The contrast between the brothers is stark, Basil represented continuity and resistance, while Bashar became a reformist figure who, in early days, cozied up to Western intelligence.

3. Russia and China: The Lifelines Syria Refused
As Syria’s economy buckled under the Caesar Act sanctions, Russia and China extended their hands, not as charity, but as part of a broader strategy to pull Syria into the multipolar order. Russia offered oil exploration deals, infrastructure investment, and a modernized Tartus port. China invited Syria to join its Belt and Road Initiative, a chance to rebuild and reorient its economy. Yet Assad’s regime hesitated, ultimately stalling these opportunities. Why? Was it fear of becoming overly dependent on Moscow and Beijing? Pressure from Western intelligence to avoid deepening ties with Syria’s Eastern allies? Or simply the regime’s own corruption and mismanagement? By turning away from these lifelines, Assad sealed Syria’s economic isolation.

4. Internal Corruption: The State That Devoured Itself
While foreign powers pulled their strings, Syria’s collapse was also an inside job. The Assad regime, hollowed out by decades of corruption, was already teetering long before the civil war. State funds meant for reconstruction vanished into the pockets of regime loyalists, while basic governance broke down under the weight of kleptocracy. Even Russian and Chinese investments struggled to take root in such a toxic environment. The Caesar Act may have tightened the noose, but the regime itself built the gallows.

Syria Delivered on a Silver Platter
Syria’s collapse wasn’t just the result of bombs and bullets, it was the culmination of decades of betrayal, mismanagement, and gamesmanship. Asma Assad’s enigmatic role, Basil’s untimely death, the rejection of multipolar lifelines, and the rot of internal corruption all point to a narrative far more complex than simple military defeat. These threads, when woven together, reveal a nation deliberately hollowed out from within and strategically dismantled.

- Gerry Nolan

🎙 Subscribe @TheIslanderNews

⚡️The notorious absent-mindedness of terrorists

We've all heard how so many terrorists have downloaded how-to manuals on how to be a good terrorist. You would seriously think that these manuals, designed for global jihadists, would have an itsy bitsy mention somewhere: "DO NOT BRING ID ON ATTACKS!"

But no. From the Kouachi brothers in the Charlie Hebdo massacre (oops, left ID in the getaway car), to the Berlin Christmas market attack, (a rejected asylum claim which obviously the perpetrator couldn't not take on his mission) to the famous "indestructible passport" miraculously fluttering down from the fiery infernos of 9/11.

Imagine being a terrorist in the middle of planning a major attack. You're loading your ammo, double-checking explosives, saying a quick farewell to loved ones or comrades. Then, as you're about to head out, you think: "Whoops, can't go without my ID! What if I need to rent a car or open a library account midway through the rampage?" Because clearly, nothing screams "death to the West" like a laminated government-issued card.

And most recently, the Cybertruck incident in Las Vegas. Of course, "another" ID conveniently found in the aftermath. A massive explosion, a roaring inferno, but the ID somehow is only lightly scorched.

What are the odds? It's as if terrorists have a fetish for paperwork. Maybe they're huge fans of bureaucracy? They detest Western civilization but can't resist keeping up with their driver's licenses and passports. Sure, they're fine with wielding Kalashnikovs, but going undocumented? Too radical.

They can smuggle weapons and explosives across borders but can’t remember to leave their IDs at home. Well done gentlemen. Your martyrdom may be messy, but at least you’re keeping the government's paperwork straight.

It is almost as if the terrorists weren't the only ones with how-to manuals.

⚡️Two Majors

The Trojan X Horse: Ministry of Happy Truth

Trump’s sharpest barbs wouldn’t survive X’s algorithmic guillotine, and now we’re staring at the full circle of fascism: privatized censorship. Elon Musk, self-proclaimed free speech crusader, has created a dystopian echo chamber where critique, dissent, and irony are algorithmically exiled. They don’t just want obedience, they want you drooling approved happy thoughts. Asking questions? Dangerous. Sarcasm? Forbidden. Welcome to the Ministry of Happy Truth.

This isn’t sensitivity; it’s intellectual cowardice wrapped in the facade of “engagement.” No lectures on North Korea, please, this is next level Orwellian. Elon and his algorithmic lackeys lack the intellectual capacity for debate. They’ve outsourced censorship to the machines, turning satire, wit, and rebellion into thought crimes. Irony, the sharpest tool to expose absurdity, is now blunted, because dissent isn’t just inconvenient, it’s dangerous.

What’s left? A Truman Show dystopia where the empire doesn’t even need to silence you, tech overlords like Elon do it for them. Is this DOGE in action, privitizing censorship and surveillance? The Trojan X horse has arrived, gift-wrapped for state power, to smother rebellion in algorithm-approved drivel. Thanks, Elon, you sensitive snowflake.

The grand promise of free speech has morphed into a caricature where irony dies and mediocrity reigns. Fascism outsourced, censorship automated. The empire couldn’t have designed it better.

-Gerry

🎙 Subscribe @TheIslanderNews

The Euro’s Collapse and the Greenback’s Last Illusion

The euro’s descent to a two year low of 1.032 USD is the sound of a currency cracking under the weight of its own contradictions. Germany’s industrial stagnation, Europe’s energy crisis, and complete surrender of monetary sovereignty to DC have turned the euro into a sacrificial lamb on the altar of empire. But let’s not mistake the dollar’s temporary resilience for permanence. It’s a currency underwritten by $36.2 trillion in debt and more than $200 trillion in unfunded liabilities, a bankrupt Ponzi scheme of historic proportions, posing as stability. Both currencies are hurtling toward collapse, but Europe will go first, because vassals are always sacrificed to keep the empire’s illusions alive.

Germany, heart of the Eurozone, has been gutted. Once Europe’s industrial engine, it limps along, strangled by soaring energy costs and a U.S.-driven embargo on cheap Russian oil and gas. Growth this year will barely scrape 0.2%. Volkswagen and Bosch, industrial giants that once symbolized German power, are scaling back as LNG bills pile up. This was no accident. Europe didn’t lose sovereignty, it gave it away. Its decision to sanction its own energy lifelines was both economic folly and geo-servitude. We cannot forget the Nord Stream sabotage; Germany, fully aware of who committed the act of economic terror, chose silence over sovereignty, humiliation over defiance.

But while the euro collapses, the dollar isn’t sitting on quick sand. It clings to its final illusions of credibility, even as it’s underwritten by mountains of debt and liabilities that no amount of Fed magic can erase. And then came the theft, the empire’s $300 billion seizure of Russian sovereign wealth. Beyond theft; it was the opening of Pandora’s box. The empire told the world that no reserves are safe, no currency is immune if you dare step out of line. This was much more than a moment of recklessness, it was a precedent that will haunt. What was meant to cripple Russia will be used against the empire itself, as nations accelerate their flight from dollar hegemony.

The euro’s plight is intertwined with this arrogance. Europe’s decision to bow to DC didn’t just destroy its economy, it ceded the very monetary sovereignty that once made the euro a contender for global relevance. The ECB has slashed rates four times, and predictably its currency keeps falling. It’s a vassal of the greenback, enslaved by policies designed not for Europe’s prosperity but for to buy the empire time.

Meanwhile, the dollar revels in its short-term resilience, propped up by faux military dominance and the inertia of global finance. But the theft of Russian reserves has shattered the illusion of dollar stability for the rest of the world. Nations across the Global South now see the empire for what it is: a bankrupt enforcer clinging to its racket. The dollar’s credibility isn’t real but enforced. And once enforcement becomes the only tool, the system collapses from within.

Europe will fall first, sacrificed to buy the empire a few more hours. DC, fully willing to watch Europe burn, has already shown its hand. The mafia-style LNG extortion racket, the indifference to Europe’s collapsing industry, and the Nord Stream humiliation are proof enough. The empire doesn’t have allies, it has dependents. But don’t think the dollar will escape its own reckoning. When the world finally moves to alternatives untethered from the empire’s whims, both the euro and the dollar will be relics of a failed order.

And here’s the final note: the theft of Russian assets was was a declaration of war on the global financial system itself. It shattered the last vestiges of trust in the empire’s currency regime.

The euro may be the first to collapse, but make no mistake: the dollar will be next. When the dust settles, Washington will look back on the theft of $300 billion as the moment it signed its own death warrant.

This isn’t just the decline of currencies, it’s the funeral dirge of an empire that mistook coercion for strength.

- Gerry Nolan

Shadows of 9/11: From Guantanamo to Idlib, The Empire’s Double Standards

In a military court ruling as surreal as it is revealing, a U.S. appeals court has decided that Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin lacked the authority to nullify plea deals for the 9/11 defendants, including Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the alleged mastermind behind the attacks. If upheld, these agreements would spare the men the death penalty in exchange for guilty pleas, ending decades of legal theater at Guantanamo Bay. But as this legal drama unfolds, the farce grows larger: in the same breath that the West debates “justice” for 9/11, it openly empowers al-Qaeda’s heirs in Syria.

Enter Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), a rebranded al-Qaeda affiliate running Syria like a de facto state, with the blessing of Washington, Ankara, and Tel Aviv. The group’s leader, Abu Mohammad al-Julani, once pledged allegiance to Osama bin Laden. Now, he’s touted as a stabilizing force in U.S. diplomatic backchannels. His rebranding from terrorist warlord to “moderate, inclusive opposition” isn’t just absurd, it’s a masterstroke of imperial cynicism. Meanwhile, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed sits in Guantanamo, a relic of a “war on terror” that now funds and arms the very ideology it once vowed to eradicate. Almost as if terror is an operative arm for some Intel agencies.

HTS’s ascension wasn’t accidental. Turkey played kingmaker, allowing HTS to flourish as a counterweight to Kurdish forces, while the U.S. engaged al-Julani in quiet negotiations, seeking to legitimize his rule over Idlib and then Damascus. Even Israel, long the self-styled bulwark against terrorism, more than turned a blind eye as HTS expanded, as long as its focus remained on keeping Iranian forces and Hezbollah in check, Israeli Air force and special forces would outright support. These alliances reveal the darker truth: terrorism isn’t an enemy, it’s a tool, wielded by states to destabilize adversaries and maintain regional dominance.

The hypocrisy is breathtaking. Al-Julani, with his al-Qaeda pedigree, is hailed as a partner in stability, while the 9/11 defendants rot in Guantanamo, denied the twisted logic that turned their ideological kin into the West’s favorite proxies. If al-Julani’s allegiance to bin Laden can be wiped clean with a PR campaign, why not extend the same logic to those languishing in legal purgatory? Of course, the answer is utility: Khalid Sheikh Mohammed has no use to the empire, while HTS serves as a ready-made proxy in Syria’s endless war.

The parallels to past imperial projects are impossible to ignore. Just as the CIA once armed the mujahideen in Afghanistan to bleed the Soviets dry, HTS is being repurposed as a buffer against Iranian and Syrian influence. Terror groups are reshaped, renamed, and redeployed as convenient tools of chaos, providing plausible deniability for policies too sordid to execute directly. The playbook doesn’t change, only the players do.

What’s left is a grotesque spectacle. HTS controls Syria with U.S. and Turkish backing, enforces what has been until now, brutal Islamist rule, and remains a thorn in Syria’s. Israel’s approval of HTS’s presence speaks volumes: for Tel Aviv, as long as al-Qaeda’s heirs keep Tehran and Hezbollah occupied, they’re useful. The war on terror? It’s long dead, replaced by a war for proxies, where ideology takes a backseat to geopolitics.

And so, as the 9/11 defendants await their fate, one has to marvel at the double standards of empire. The very forces that brought down the Twin Towers are now reshaped into tools of statecraft. Al-Julani, once a servant of bin Laden, now walks free in Damascus, an American asset by any other name. Meanwhile, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed faces life imprisonment. The message is clear: terrorism isn’t the crime for the Empire, it’s the branding that matters.

- Gerry Nolan

🎙 Subscribe @TheIslanderNews

⚡️The German Green Party - A Study in (Deliberate?) Contradictions

The contradictions within the Green Party are stark. They project themselves as champions of environmental sustainability, peace, diversity, and progressive values. Yet, their actions usually undermine these very ideals.

The Greens are supposedly the party of environmentalism and climate action, yet their immediate nuclear shutdown and the rejection of Russian gas have made coal—the dirtiest fuel— unavoidable for Germany’s energy needs. Instead of a greener future, their decisions increased carbon emissions while driving up energy costs for everyone. The environmental and economic cost of their choices is staggering, yet they frame it as a necessary sacrifice, dismissing the short-term damage in favor of their ideological purity. They may eventually achieve their "environmental" goals for Germany, but through deindustrialization and pauperization of the population. All so that in the end, they will have simply outsourced the German carbon footprint (and prosperity) to other countries.

On militarism, the Greens have undergone an astonishing transformation. Once a bastion of pacifism, the party now stands as the most hawkish in German politics - unlimited support for Ukraine, NATO expansion, and increased defense spending. All of which stand in stark opposition to the party’s origins. Their supporters, meanwhile, remain statistically the least likely to support military service or national defense, creating a jarring dissonance between the party’s leadership and its base.

Where militarism and fake environmentalism come together is Nord Stream. To this day, the Greens lead the efforts to avoid serious investigation, looking the other way as to the causes, culprits and effects of the sabotage of the pipelines.

Their contradictions extend to their supposed advocacy for diversity and multiculturalism. The Greens pride themselves on being champions of inclusion and respect for all cultures. Yet Annalena Baerbock, their co-leader and Germany’s Foreign Minister, has repeatedly displayed a shocking lack of cultural sensitivity. Her rhetoric often shows her unshakable belief that Western liberal values are universal, with little regard for the complexity or legitimacy of other worldviews. Her handling of foreign policy has often alienated nations whose histories and cultural perspectives differ from her own. This hypocrisy undermines the Greens’ claims to be true advocates of multiculturalism, as it reduces diversity to a tokenistic principle rather than a genuine respect for differing values.

What ties these contradictions together is the unsettling pattern of outcomes. The Greens’ policies often appear to harm Germany—whether through higher energy costs, deindustrialization, a reliance on coal, or alienation on the global stage—while benefiting the United States and the globalist elite. Their stance on Russian gas has increased dependency on American liquefied natural gas; their push for NATO expansion strengthens U.S. geopolitical influence. Their actions raise the uncomfortable question: are these results the product of confusion and ideological rigidity (or simple mindedness), or do they reflect undeclared loyalties? Is it merely a coincidence that their policies so often align with American interests, even when they run counter to Germany’s?

All of which leaves us with the doubt - what is the German Green Party really? Is it a group of (not very smart) ideological zealots unduly influenced by the globalists, whether for money, power, prestige or simple ideology? Or is there something more nefarious? Are Die Grünen part of an elaborate plan to ensure the dreaded (in Washington and Davos) Berlin-Moscow-Beijing axis can never be formed?

Either way, future generations may well look upon the Green Party as the traitors whose selling out of their country to America and the WEF led to the permanent decline of Germany as a prosperous nation and global industrial power.

@ashesofpompeii
⚡️Two Majors