• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

What was operation gladio

NWO Sentryman

Proud NWO Gatekeeper
N
Joined
Jun 16, 2009
Messages
6,994
I often read about it on 9/11 truth websites.

I know some details, but what's the full story?
 
NWO Sentryman said:
I often read about it on 9/11 truth websites.

I know some details, but what's the full story?
Click to expand...

In concise terms: right wing nutbags were wrongly thought to be potentially useful in a war with the Warsaw Pact and were given training and arms. This was later regretted.
 
Travis said:
In concise terms: right wing nutbags were wrongly thought to be potentially useful in a war with the Warsaw Pact and were given training and arms. This was later regretted.
Click to expand...

"Right wing" is generous even for them. They were fascists.

OP, do you know anything about the Years of Lead in Italy? The Red Brigades, Guilio Andreotti, Propaganda Due, all of that? Lots of really bizarre, horrible stuff went down. Honest to goodness false flag operations, murder, mafia corruption, conspiracies with the Vatican Bank, illegal Masonic Lodges. Heard of Roberto Calvi?

Authentic history is weirder than any conspiracy theory sometimes.
 
parky76 said:
Wikipedia. Try it.
Click to expand...

The thing about asking here instead of just reading Wikipedia is that a discussion might ensue. Not everyone will want to be involved, and they're free to say things like "Wikipedia. Try it." Thanks for at least taking the time say you're not interested in saying anything else. That's at least saying something. :)

Travis said:
In concise terms: right wing nutbags were wrongly thought to be potentially useful in a war with the Warsaw Pact and were given training and arms. This was later regretted.
Click to expand...

I was wondering if you have an idea when this was decided a bad idea, by whom, and what was done about it at that time? I'm a novice on this point, probably less-read than you, but I'm regretting that now. The Wikipedia page and the Amazon description for Ganser's book I can piece together
1) Gladio and the general stay-behind network in Europe was established in 1948 or 49, in 1951 put under NATO's Clandestine Planning Committee (CPC).
2) Wiki: "Next to the CPC, a second secret army command center, labeled Allied Clandestine Committee (ACC), was set up in 1957 on the orders of NATO's Supreme Allied Commander in Europe (SACEUR). This military structure provided for significant US leverage over the secret stay-behind networks in Western Europe..."
...
483) 1990: USSR is losing its grip all year, Berlin wall's already down, in general Commie threat in Europe melting like thin snow.
484) Italian Judge and the Itialian PM expose Gladio network in Italy, and the story unravels from there. NATO's Secret Armies are no longer secret.
485) Amazon: Stay-Behinds "were internationally coordinated by the Pentagon and NATO and had their last known meeting in the NATO-linked Allied Clandestine Committee (ACC) in Brussels in October 1990."
486) Nov 22 1990 - European Parliament acknowledges whole network's existence , denounces it and orders dissolution and investigations continent-wide.

Looks like it took them... mmmm, bout four decades, the end of the threat they were based on, and irreversible exposure before they decided it was a bad idea to keep this operation running.

Correct me if I'm wrong.
 
Last edited:
JoeyDonuts said:
[ULTIMA1]Olny a blieeevur wuold uze smothnig so childish.

I haf sekret webistes wur I get faxcts an edivence.[/ULTIMA1]
Click to expand...

only a lyyign shl wold resrt to childih name -calling. I prsens fact and vvidenc, nd forget to respond to commnts at m blog from NSA shells about ol' OptimusUno. ;)
 
Caustic Logic said:
The thing about asking here instead of just reading Wikipedia is that a discussion might ensue.
Click to expand...

Not to mention the fact that being what is euphemistically referred to as an "open source" reference site, Wikipedia is open to being "edited" at will, 24/7, by (literally) any eleven-year-old with functioning internet access; rendering it, therefore, roughly as useful as an old X-Men comic for definitive answers on any topic(s) much weightier than, say, the full names of the various Brady Bunch moppets, or similarly fluffy esoterica. It's the written equivalent of YouTube. ("IMHO," he added, courteously.;) )
 
Last edited:
J. Wellington Wimpy said:
Not to mention the fact that being what is euphemistically referred to as an "open source" reference site, Wikipedia is open to being "edited" at will, 24/7, by (literally) any eleven-year-old with functioning internet access; rendering it, therefore, roughly as useful as an old X-Men comic for definitive answers on any topic(s) much weightier than, say, the full names of the various Brady Bunch moppets, or similarly fluffy esoterica. It's the written equivalent of YouTube. ("IMHO," he added, courteously.;) )
Click to expand...

You exagerrate, dear sir! Obviously no one should take Wikipedia as the final word without accepting the very real risk. It's editable by a ten year old, and re-editable by smarter 20-year-olds and so on and usually it ends up correct on points, if slanted and disorganized, etc... it's a good way of seeing what some people want you to know anyway...

Also a bump for my amazing discovery that Operation Gladio and the S/B networks seemed like a good idea to NATO leaders, false flag attacks and assassinations and coup attempts and all, for four decades straight until they were publicly revealed and had no choice but to disband and/or reform (??). Does anyone else find that troubling?
 
Caustic Logic said:
You exagerrate, dear sir! Obviously no one should take Wikipedia as the final word without accepting the very real risk. It's editable by a ten year old, and re-editable by smarter 20-year-olds and so on and usually it ends up correct on points, if slanted and disorganized, etc... it's a good way of seeing what some people want you to know anyway...

Also a bump for my amazing discovery that Operation Gladio and the S/B networks seemed like a good idea to NATO leaders, false flag attacks and assassinations and coup attempts and all, for four decades straight until they were publicly revealed and had no choice but to disband and/or reform (??). Does anyone else find that troubling?
Click to expand...

Very troubling. But the terrorism and such were limited to Italy AFAICT.
The other stay behind organisations just kept a low profile.

I don't think NATO ordered them to blow up trains, I think some of these guys went out of control on their own.

Or does anyone have a different view?

Arguably, Italy was the most left-leaning of the NATO countries, with a successful Communist party. It also bordered on the Eastern Block.
So there is some logic to creating instability and pinning violent acts on the Red Brigades.

Was Gladio acting on orders? Does anyone know?
 
Eddie Dane said:
Very troubling. But the terrorism and such were limited to Italy AFAICT.
The other stay behind organisations just kept a low profile.

I don't think NATO ordered them to blow up trains, I think some of these guys went out of control on their own.
Click to expand...

That is the current consensus view. They went nuts and when they did NATO cut them off.
 
Eddie Dane said:
Very troubling. But the terrorism and such were limited to Italy AFAICT.
The other stay behind organisations just kept a low profile.

I don't think NATO ordered them to blow up trains, I think some of these guys went out of control on their own.

Or does anyone have a different view?

Arguably, Italy was the most left-leaning of the NATO countries, with a successful Communist party. It also bordered on the Eastern Block.
So there is some logic to creating instability and pinning violent acts on the Red Brigades.

Was Gladio acting on orders? Does anyone know?
Click to expand...

Thanks for the comment. From what I've seen so far (I'm buying Ganser's book soon) Italy was the most violent anyway. Belgium had the assassination of Julien Lahaut in 1950, and the "Nijvel gang" violence of the 1980s, come dead people there. The German branch had at least one group uncovered and outlawed in the early 50s, had weapons caches and a list of left politicians to liquidate in the future. No violence I've heard of yet, but they employed many Nazis under the Gehlen Group.

I've only looked at germany and Belgium aside from Italy so far, so by these trends there had to me more in other countries. Turkey... yeah, their branch did stuff against the Kurds, had a link somewhere...

Found this:
On trial on 17 November 1974, a furious Miceli had shouted: “A Super SID on my orders? Of course! But I did not organise the coup d'état myself. It was the United States and NATO who asked me to do it!”11 Due to his excellent contacts, Miceli got off lightly,was released on bail and spent six months in a military hospital.
Click to expand...
http://www.psa.ac.uk/journals/pdf/5/2005/Ganser.pdf

Travis said:
That is the current consensus view. They went nuts and when they did NATO cut them off.
Click to expand...

A long time after, of course. I'll concede it's possible the insane branches might have been closed as needed while the program rolled ahead. I need to study it more.
 
Last edited:
Caustic Logic said:
Thanks for the comment. From what I've seen so far (I'm buying Ganser's book soon)
Click to expand...

Caveat emptor. See my comments here: "He completely screwed up the story of the bombing of the...".

His chapter on Greece was so screwy, it raises all kinds of questions about the rest of the book.

Barrie Zwicker is writing a book on false flag operations, and he has been informed about Ganser's errors. Hopefully, he will fact check any claims of Ganser's before he repeats them.
 
metamars said:
Caveat emptor. See my comments here: "He completely screwed up the story of the bombing of the...".

His chapter on Greece was so screwy, it raises all kinds of questions about the rest of the book.

Barrie Zwicker is writing a book on false flag operations, and he has been informed about Ganser's errors. Hopefully, he will fact check any claims of Ganser's before he repeats them.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the tip. From what I know of Zwicker, I'd believe Ganser over him if there were any disagreement I couldn't call myself. And besides, whatever... I don't believe anyone 100% and just trying to get the basics, some leads for further research, etc... Expensive book, but ordered now.
 
metamars said:
Caveat emptor. See my comments here: "He completely screwed up the story of the bombing of the...".

His chapter on Greece was so screwy, it raises all kinds of questions about the rest of the book.

Barrie Zwicker is writing a book on false flag operations, and he has been informed about Ganser's errors. Hopefully, he will fact check any claims of Ganser's before he repeats them.
Click to expand...

Actually looking at the book now I wouldn’t be surprised if there were serious errors. The guy’s English is not the best, but I can’t complain given my own grasp of Swiss. You can always tell what he means, even when he calls World War II “the darkest however in mankind’s history.” Some pointless asides reveal an anti-American left bias, but it seems fairly balanced out by reasonableness. He uses the word “secret” way too often, calling CIA and FBI “secret services.”

The facts are what’s important and he has them, but not as many as I’d hoped – a fair amount of repetition chapter to chapter. A lot is still secret, especially from Eglish-speaking sources. It’s done country-by-country, and each chapter has at least a few worthwhile facts. A lot of quoted opinions. Much emphasis is given to the role of Washington and London, the CIA and MI6 in maintenance of this nework. The evidence seems to support this – NATO has always been dominated by the Anglo-American alliance.

The foreword is by Dr. John Prados, senior fella at Nat. Sec. Archive (GWU), which is a plus. Regarding the “unintended” side effect of ppolitical manipulation (including the violence) that this was standard and apparently then part of the plan. “[N]etworks created to be quiescent became activists in political causes as a rule and not an exception.” That is, they were chartered to resist a commie invasion – that was the reason cired whenever they were forced to acknowledge a branch. When not so forced, and with no invasion ever, the network kept on doing stuff that undermined democracy at all the right places to keep Europe to the “right” path.

One of the more fascinating aspects of all this is the stay-Behind network in France, NATO’s original home and a channel of great resistance (irony duly noted). The network was initially strong in France, given the overwhelming popularity of the Communist party there; even before NATO was formed an Anglo-American-French Right collaborative effort called “Plan Bleu” was exposed and shut down in 1947. New systems under NATO were erected in the 1950s and later, plotting against communists, helping bring DeGaulle to power, and later targeting de Gaulle over the Algeria issue, and plotting a full-on coup and such. One group was called “Rose de Vents,” or compass rose, meaning NATO’s logo, and their actions were among those contributing to de Gaulle’s decision to get France out of NATO and vice-versa and to disempower the secret services.

There will hopefully be a better book someday on this important story, but this one is good for now, and offers a pretty decent introduction.
 
Above got goofed - to clarify Prados wrote
“[N]etworks created to be quiescent became activists in political causes as a rule and not an exception [...] At a minimum Dr Ganser's record shows that capabilities created for straightforward purposes as part of the Cold War ultimately turned to more sinister ends. [...] Can it be that the United States itself, Britain, France, Italy, and others who should be on the list of state sponsors [of terror]?"
He shows reservations in the endorsement, but it's a good endorsement and I also recommend this book. It is a great book. Back to you Lavar.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom