Selected Articles: Celebrity COVID Vaxx Injuries

Selected Articles: Celebrity COVID Vaxx Injuries

Celebrity COVID Vaxx Injuries

By Ben Bartee, December 01, 2022

There is no shortage of examples of the celebrity COVID vaxx injury phenomenon, particularly among those who virtue-signaled their vaccinations. Actor Bob Odenkirk, an otherwise seemingly healthy 58-year-old Hollywood star, promoted the shot in March 2021 in a choreographed publicity stunt, probably at the behest of the show’s producers, while shooting the last season of Better Call Saul.

Video: Trudeau Did Not Have Authority to Invoke the Emergencies Act. Canadian Constitution Foundation’s Closing Argument

By Canadian Constitution Foundation, December 01, 2022

The video below is the Canadian Constitution Foundation’s closing argument made in the Public Order Emergency Commission (POEC) on November 25, 2022.

Pentagon Cannot Account for $20 Billion Worth of Weapons in Ukraine While Another $19 Billion for Taiwan Is Missing

By Drago Bosnic, December 01, 2022

As if ongoing corruption scandals, including the FTX-Kiev regime-DNC connection, weren’t enough, the troubled Biden administration is now faced with another one. According to the latest reports, the US government is unable to account for the approximately $20 billion worth of weapons it sent to the Kiev regime.

We Will be Sacrificed for Global Standardization of Systems

By Dr. Joseph Mercola, December 01, 2022

Agenda 21 (Agenda for the 21st Century) is the inventory and control plan for all land, water, minerals, plants, animals, construction, means of production, food, energy, information, education and all human beings in the world.

High Fuel Prices Likely to Kill More Europeans Than Fighting in Ukraine. The Economist

By Marc Vandepitte, November 30, 2022

That the economic sanctions resulting from the invasion of Ukraine affect Europe more than Russia is an annoying fact. But now a recent study by The Economist suggests that because of high fuel prices, the additional death toll in Europe in the coming winter could exceed the number of soldiers killed in combat in Ukraine so far. Food for thought.

The West Seeks War, Not Peace

By Mark Taliano, November 30, 2022

“The collective West” does not want peace for Ukraine.  Instead it wants war in an unsuccessful bid to “bleed Russia”. The West was not seeking Peace when it orchestrated the bloody, unconstitutional Maidan coup, ousting elected President Yanukovych, who was forced to flee the country.

Thanksgiving in a Victim World. Resuming Our National Holidays After a Mass Violation

By Dr. Naomi Wolf, November 30, 2022

I recently traveled to Florida, to do research for a new book. I stayed in a hotel for almost a week, in a modest, touristy town, a few miles from the beach. Every day, from the moment I opened my eyes til the moment I settled into my cool hotel sheets, my heart exulted with an indescribable happiness.

British Medical Journal: “COVID-19 Vaccines and Drugs Were Developed at “Warp Speed””

By Maryanne Demasi, November 30, 2022

On 25 September 2020, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) received a complaint by Brook Jackson who had been working for Ventavia Research Group, a Texas based company hired to run clinical trials for Pfizer’s covid-19 mRNA vaccine.

Dutch Government to Close Down 3000 Farms

By Free West Media, November 30, 2022

Many farms are to be closed down in the Netherlands because of EU requirements and Brussels’ “Green Deal”. In the Netherlands there have been several protests by farmers in the summer, as reported by FWM.

Israelis Are Not Welcome in Qatar During the 2022 World Cup

By Steven Sahiounie, November 30, 2022

sraeli citizens and journalists are allowed in Qatar in a FIFA agreement during the 2022 World Cup now underway in Doha. Being allowed to enter a country to watch football, or to cover an event as a journalist or media crew, is far different than being welcome.

Source

“Medical Assistance in Dying” (MAID): Canadian Government Literally Proposes State Execution of Living Babies

“Medical Assistance in Dying” (MAID): Canadian Government Literally Proposes State Execution of Living Babies

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

The corporate media has an established track record of promoting suicide as a solution to climate change, among other trendy political problems.

Social engineers euphemistically rebrand state-facilitated suicide as “medical assistance in dying” (MAID). The Canadian government even produces educational “activity books” to indoctrinate children into the new paradigm early, like this one by Canadian Virtual Hospice:

Canadian Virtual Hospice

Proponents of the practice frame state-facilitated suicide as a peculiar form of self-empowerment, taking back the right to end your life on your own terms rather than “someone else”:

“From early-adopting Switzerland to latest-to-the-table Australia, more and more countries are legalising the practice. It is now available to over 280 million people in 11 countries around the world. It was on offer to my mother, who recently (and gratefully) used Canada’s legislation to orchestrate her own wise demise…  If we don’t claim the design of our own deaths, it’s likely someone else will…

All social engineering programs are slippery slopes, moving predictably from the most reasonable and appealing arguments based on rationality to the most extreme, ideologically driven ones.

In this case, the more reasonable government suicide argument starts with older adults nearing the end of their life, in unbearable physical anguish due to one illness or another. That’s how it’s initially sold.

Then, in 2021, Bill C-7 amended the Canadian Criminal Code to “repeal the provision that a person’s natural death be reasonably foreseeable in order for them to be eligible for MAID.” Accordingly, the parameters under which a patient can legally request that the state kill them expanded to include mental illness.

The “kill yourself because you’re depressed” narrative is a tacit acknowledgment of the failure of the psychiatric profession.

Since the 80s, the medical industry pumped “antidepressant” selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors into tens of millions of Americans’ bloodstreams. The entire pharmacological premise of these drugs, that depression is caused by neurochemical imbalance, has been recently debunked. They made billions while depression worsened.

Then we have “anti-anxiety” benzodiazepines like Valium and Xanax that actually just take a neurochemical shotgun to your brain and render you an emotional zombie for 10 hours. Those didn’t work to improve long-term mental health outcomes either.

So they now throw their hands up: “Fuck it, just kill yourself.”

This is not theoretical. The Belgian government already killed an otherwise physically healthy 23-year-old on mental health grounds this year:

“A 23-year woman who had survived a terror attack when she was a teenager has died after she chose to be euthanised… Though Shanti escaped the explosion physically unscathed, mentally she suffered every day since… Shanti sought help from a psychiatric facility in her home town of Antwerp and was even put on anti-depressant medications. However, the psychological trauma was too heavy and she attempted suicide twice; once in 2018 and once in 2020. Finally, in May of this year, she opted to be euthanised.”

Now, having crossed the mental health frontier, as it was destined to from the start, the agenda moves to the Holy Grail: killing children. So we arrive at the Canadian Paediatric Society’s (fittingly acronymized as CPS) treatise on the topic, “Medical Assistance in Dying: A Paediatric Perspective“:

Ensuring that newborns, children and youth receive the highest possible standard of care as they are dying is a privilege and a responsibility for physicians and allied professionals. Bringing a thoughtful, respectful and personal approach to every end-of-life situation is an essential and evolving duty of care, and the process should meet each patient’s (and family’s) unique social, cultural and spiritual needs.”

So the medical system gets official permission from the Public Health© authorities (the CPS being the foremost authority on children’s medicine) to kill children… as long their decision-making is “respectful” towards “social, cultural, and spiritual needs.”

The Canadian Paediatric Society refers to the children it aims to mercy-kill as “mature minors,” an Orwellian term apparently intended to convey that they are intellectually developed enough to decide to kill themselves:

But already, the CPS is opening the door to kill children of all ages, citing “the need to examine requests for and attitudes around MAID for minors of all ages.”

This includes, amazingly, infants:

“Canadian health care professionals are increasingly being approached by the parents of ‘never-competent’ infants and children, including those too young to make a reasoned decision, and by youth themselves, to discuss MAID-related issues. Results from a Canadian Paediatric Surveillance Program (CPSP) survey, discussed below, indicate that parents raise such questions with paediatricians more often than do minors

In the foreseeable future, parents may challenge health care decisions in court on the grounds that continued life, as experienced by their dying or profoundly disabled child, is not in that child’s best interests.”

(To her credit, at least one high-ranking Canadian official, the minister of disability, has pushed back on the baby-killing proposal – for now.)

*

The state doesn’t have the functional power, and maybe shouldn’t, to prevent suicide, even though it’s technically illegal. What the state should not be involved in is actively facilitating suicide.

As we’ve seen, inertia will push the state to claim more and more killing power for itself.

Barring effective popular pushback, here’s what’s coming down the pike next: as the designed implosion of Western civilization by a cabal of multinational technocrats (headed by the WEF) picks up speed, resources will dwindle.

There will not be enough water or food to go around, and conflict over access to these precious materials will explode.

Posturing as responsible public administrators, governments will set up advisory boards to decide which people must be spared the traumas of deprivation – for their own good, mind you.

Having determined that death is the most humane outcome, the state will release them of their celestial burden with euthanasia – a mercy killing.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Ben Bartee is an independent Bangkok-based American journalist with opposable thumbs. Follow his stuff via Armageddon Prose and/or Substack, Patreon, Gab, and Twitter.

Featured image is from The Daily Bell

Source

Selected Articles: Accused of “Corona Insanity”: Swiss Doctor Locked Away in Mental Asylum for Speaking Against COVID Laws, April 2020

Selected Articles: Accused of “Corona Insanity”: Swiss Doctor Locked Away in Mental Asylum for Speaking Against COVID Laws, April 2020

Accused of “Corona Insanity”: Swiss Doctor Locked Away in Mental Asylum for Speaking Against COVID Laws, April 2020

By Martin Armstrong, Dr. Thomas Binder, and Taylor Hudak, November 24, 2022

Dr. Thomas Binder is a Swiss cardiologist with over 34 years of experience in treating respiratory infections. He received a doctorate in immunology and virology, specializing in internal medicine and cardiology, from the University of Zurich. Binder is an intelligent man who was deemed insane by the Swiss government for speaking out against COVID regulations.

US Defenseless to Protect Kurds Against Turkish Invasion in Syria

By Steven Sahiounie, November 25, 2022

Ilham Ahmed, a co-chair of the Syrian Democratic Council, confirmed on November 20 that Turkish airstrikes had struck near Derik, a town within the US military’s area of occupation.

Medical Ethics and the Covid Pandemic. Give People “Morality Pills”

By Igor Chudov, November 24, 2022

Be aware that “bioethics” has moved on to proposals that might seem crazy to you but are considered seriously and published in Bill Gates-funded publications and scientific journals. Important studies on this subject are conducted under the auspices of the World Economic Forum.

Silicon Valley Fake: Elizabeth Holmes and the Fraudster’s Motivation

By Dr. Binoy Kampmark, November 24, 2022

It has been one noisy time for the paladins of big tech.  Jobs have been shed by the thousands at Meta, Amazon and Twitter; FTX, the second largest cryptocurrency company, has collapsed.  Then came the conviction of Elizabeth Holmes, founder of the healthcare company Theranos, for fraud.

Swimming in Superbugs: MRSA and E coli Found in British Rivers

By Andrew Wasley, November 24, 2022

Testing commissioned with World Animal Protection and the Alliance to Save Our Antibiotics has found evidence of drug resistance in waterways near poultry and pig farms and in cattle farm waste, highlighting the risks of slurry leaks contaminating rivers.

Video: Biden COVID Minion Tells Americans “God Gave Us Two Arms” for Multiple Vaccines

By Steve Watson, November 24, 2022

Joe Biden’s COVID ‘czar’ declared Tuesday during a White House press briefing that “God gave you two arms” so we can all be injected with different vaccines. Dr. Ashish Jha made the statement while simultaneously pushing COVID booster shots and flu shots as if they are the same thing.

NY Times Takes Rare Look at Apparent Ukrainian War Crimes

By Zero Hedge, November 24, 2022

The New York Times has in an extremely rare moment (or perhaps more like unprecedented) conducted an in-depth visual investigation of a likely war crime against surrendered Russian troops conducted by Ukrainian forces. Multiple videos from different angles, including drone footage, emerged last week showing the incredibly disturbing scenes as Ukrainian forces were recapturing the village of Makiivka in the Luhansk region.

French Ambassador: US ‘Rules-based Order’ Means Western Domination, Violating International Law

By Ben Norton, November 24, 2022

France’s ex US Ambassador Gérard Araud criticized Washington for frequently violating international law and said its so-called “rules-based order” is an unfair “Western order” based on “hegemony.” He condemned the new cold war on China, instead calling for mutual compromises.

White House Announces ‘New Enforcement Guidance’ on COVID-19 Vaccine Mandates

By Jack Phillips, November 24, 2022

It announced “new enforcement guidance to ensure nursing homes are offering updated COVID-19 vaccines and timely treatment to their residents and staff,” according to a White House fact sheet released on Nov. 22. It stated that the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) still requires “nursing homes to educate their residents” on COVID-19 vaccines and offer vaccines to residents.

Pfizer CEO Claims 400% Price Hike on COVID Vaccines Will be “Free”

By Beth Mole, November 24, 2022

Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla claimed at a news event last week that the company’s COVID-19 vaccines will continue to be “free to all Americans,” despite the company’s plan to raise the price of the vaccine roughly 400 percent—a price difference that will be picked up by health insurers.

Source

Putin’s Sledgehammer

Putin’s Sledgehammer

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

“The Ukrainians are in bad shape… It won’t be long before the Ukrainians run out of food. It won’t be long before they freeze… They have done all that we can reasonably expect them to do. It’s time to negotiate…. before the offensive begins, because once it begins, there will be no further discussion between Moscow and Kiev until it is over to the satisfaction of the Russians.” —Colonel Douglas MacGregor, “War in Ukraine; Quiet Before the Storm”, 15 minute-mark

“Strictly speaking, we haven’t started anything yet.”  —Russian President Vladimir Putin

The relentless attacks on Ukraine’s electrical grid, fuel-storage units, railway hubs, and Command-and-Control centers mark the beginning of a second and more lethal phase of the war.

The increased tempo of the high-precision, long-range missile attacks suggests that Moscow is laying the groundwork for a major winter offensive that will be launched as soon as Russia’s 300,000 reservists join their formations in east Ukraine. Kiev’s refusal to negotiate a settlement that addresses Russia’s core security concerns, has left Russian president Vladimir Putin with no other option but to defeat Ukrainian forces on the battlefield and impose a settlement through force-of-arms. The impending winter offensive is designed to deliver the knock-out punch Russia needs to achieve its strategic objectives and bring the war to swift end. This is from Reuters:

Russian missile strikes have crippled almost half of Ukraine’s energy system, the government said on Friday, and authorities in the capital Kyiv warned that the city could face a “complete shutdown” of the power grid as winter sets in.

With temperatures falling and Kyiv seeing its first snow, officials were working to restore power nationwide after some of the heaviest bombardment of Ukrainian civilian infrastructure in nine months of war.

The United Nations says Ukraine’s electricity and water shortages threaten a humanitarian disaster this winter.

“Unfortunately Russia continues to carry out missile strikes on Ukraine’s civilian and critical infrastructure. Almost half of our energy system is disabled,” Prime Minister Denys Shmyhal said….

“We are preparing for different scenarios, including a complete shutdown,” Mykola Povoroznyk, deputy head of the Kyiv city administration, said in televised comments.” (“Ukraine says half its energy system crippled by Russian attacks, Kyiv could ‘shutdown’”, Reuters)

Until recently, Russia had avoided targets that would dramatically impact civilian activities, but now military leaders have returned to a more conventional approach. Presently, the military is destroying whatever facilities, transformers, storage units, substations, rail yards and energy depots that allow Ukraine to continue to wage war. Clearly –as the bigger and more powerful state — it was always within Russia’s ability to take a sledgehammer to Ukraine and break it into a million pieces, but Putin chose to hold back hoping that Kiev would come to its senses and see the hopelessness of its cause.

And –despite the deluge of western propaganda to the contrary– the outcome of this war has never been in doubt. Russia is going to impose a settlement on Kiev and that settlement will require the government to cut all ties with NATO and to sign a treaty declaring its neutrality into perpetuity. Russia is not going to allow a hostile military alliance to place its missile sites and combat troops on its western flank. That won’t happen.

Unfortunately, Russia’s military operation is going to greatly increase the suffering of the Ukrainian people who find themselves locked in a cage-match between the Washington and Moscow. This is from the World Socialist Web Site:

Poverty in Ukraine has increased more than tenfold since the outbreak of the US/NATO-Russia war, according to the latest data from the World Bank (WB). Officially, 25 percent of the country’s population is now poor, up from supposedly just 2 percent before February 2022… With officials predicting that the poverty rate could rise to as much as 60 percent or more next year, levels of deprivation are emerging in Ukraine that have not been witnessed on the European continent since the end of World War II.

Unemployment is now running at 35 percent, and salaries have fallen by as much as 50 percent over the spring and summer for some categories of workers. … according to the International Monetary Fund, Ukraine’s public debt has now soared to 85 percent of GDP…. A recently released joint study by the World Health Organization and Ukraine’s Ministry of Health found that 22 percent of people in Ukraine cannot access essential medicines. For the country’s 6.9 million internally displaced, that number rises to 33 percent.

The medications that are hardest to get—those that treat blood pressure, heart problems and pain, as well as sedatives and antibiotics—reveal a population struggling to cope with decades of poverty-induced ill health and the physical and psychological trauma of war.

While US and NATO officials are able to dispatch massive amounts of firepower to Ukraine’s front lines within a matter of weeks, the delivery of life-saving humanitarian goods is seemingly an impossible logistical challenge.”(“Poverty skyrockets in Ukraine”, World Socialist Web Site)

Washington’s proxy-war on Moscow has inflicted incalculable suffering on the people of Ukraine who now face plunging temperatures, dwindling food supplies, a crashing economy and a growing shortage of essential medications. And despite the chest-thumping bravado over the recapturing of Kherson, the Ukrainian people will now be forced to flee their battered homeland by the millions seeking refuge in Europe which has already slipped into a post-industrial slump brought on by Uncle Sam’s reckless provocations.

How many of these working-class Ukrainians would have preferred that their leaders reach an accommodation with Putin (regarding his legitimate security concerns) rather than engaging the Russian army in a pointless war which has cost them their homes, their jobs, their cities, and (for many) their lives? And do the people outside the country who claim to “Stand With Ukraine” realize that they are actually supporting the impoverishment and immiseration of millions of civilians that are caught in a geopolitical crossfire between Washington and Russia? Anyone who genuinely cares about Ukraine should support Ukrainian neutrality and an end to NATO expansion. That is the only way this war is going to end. Russian security will be achieved by-way of a treaty or an iron-fist. The choice is Ukraine’s. This is from an article titled ‘Russia Is Right: The U.S. Is Waging a Proxy War in Ukraine‘:

“The war in Ukraine isn’t just a conflict between Moscow and Kyiv, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov recently declared. It is a “proxy war” in which the world’s most powerful military alliance … is using Ukraine as a battering ram against the Russian state … Lavrov is … not wrong. Russia is the target of one of the most ruthlessly effectively proxy wars in modern history.”

The US foreign policy establishment does not care about Ukraine or the Ukrainian people. The country is merely a launching pad for Washington’s war on Russia. That is why the CIA toppled the democratically-elected government in Kiev in 2014 and that is why the CIA armed and trained Ukrainian paramilitaries to fight the Russian military in 2015 (7 years before the invasion!) Here’s some background from a 2015 article at Yahoo News:

“The CIA is overseeing a secret intensive training program in the U.S. for elite Ukrainian special operations forces and other intelligence personnel, according to five former intelligence and national security officials familiar with the initiative. The program, which started in 2015, is based at an undisclosed facility in the Southern U.S., according to some of those officials….

“The United States is training an insurgency,” said a former CIA official, adding that the program has taught the Ukrainians how “to kill Russians.”

…the CIA and other U.S. agencies could support a Ukrainian insurgency, should Russia launch a large-scale incursion.

…“We’ve been training these guys now for eight years. They’re really good fighters. …representatives from both countries also believe that Russia won’t be able to hold on to new territory indefinitely because of stiff resistance from Ukrainian insurgents, according to former officials.

If the Russians launch a new invasion, “there’s going to be people who make their life miserable,” said the former senior intelligence official…

“All that stuff that happened to us in Afghanistan,” said the former senior intelligence official, “they can expect to see that in spades with these guys.” (“CIA-trained Ukrainian paramilitaries may take central role if Russia invades”, Yahoo News)

There it is in black and white. The plan to use Ukraine as a staging-ground for conducting a proxy-war on Russia preceded the invasion by at least 7 years.

The Obama administration and their neocon allies set a trap for Russia in order to drag them into an Afghanistan-like quagmire that would deplete their resources and kill as many Russian servicemen as possible. As Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin recently admitted, the US wants to “weaken” Russia so it is unable to project power beyond its borders. Washington seeks unhindered access to Central Asia so it can encircle China with military bases and nuclear missiles. The US intends to control China’s growth while dominating the world’s most populous and prosperous region of the next century, Asia. But first, Washington must crush Russia, collapse its economy, isolate it from the global community, demonize it in its media, and topple its leaders. Ukraine is seen as the first phase in a much broader strategy aimed at regime change (in Moscow) followed by the forced fragmentation of the Russian state. The ultimate objective is the preservation of Washington’s preeminent role in the global order.

Putin’s winter offensive threatens to derail Washington’s plan to drag the conflict out for as long as possible. In the weeks and months ahead, Russia is going to intensify its assault on Ukraine’s critical infrastructure. Most of the country will be plunged into darkness, fuel supplies will dry up, food and water will become scarcer, communications will be cut off, and all rail-traffic will cease. Millions of civilians will flee to Europe while the entire country slowly grinds to a standstill. At the same time that Russian battalions overtake cities and towns east of the Dnieper, the Russian army will block vital supply-lines from Poland cutting off the flow of lethal weaponry and combat troops headed to the front. This, in turn, will lead to widespread capitulation among Ukrainian fighting units operating in the field which will force Zelensky to the negotiating table. Eventually, Russia will prevail and its legitimate security demands will be met. Here’s how Colonel Douglas MacGregor summed it up in a recent interview:

“What’s coming in the future is a very massive offensive... the kind of offensive that I and many other military analysts expected at the beginning; Very decisive operations, multiple operational axes designed to effectively annihilate the enemy on the ground. And that’s what’s coming now, that’s what lies in the future.” (Colonel Douglas MacGregor, “War in Ukraine; Quiet Before the Storm”, you tube)

When the ground freezes, Russia’s offensive will begin.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

This article was originally published on The Unz Review.

Michael Whitney is a renowned geopolitical and social analyst based in Washington State. He initiated his career as an independent citizen-journalist in 2002 with a commitment to honest journalism, social justice and World peace.

He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG).

Featured image: Russian president Vladimir Putin (Illustration by TPYXA_ILLUSTRATION/Shutterstock)

Source

What Will the World Look Like in 2032? Reversing the Covid Narrative, Confronting “The Great Reset”, Restoring Democracy

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

First published on February 3, 2022

***

Millions of lives affected within the next ten years – according to Mike Adams. See this video.

The video talks about UN Agenda 2030, without ever mentioning it. It covers a ten-year period, starting in 2022, when it is expected that most of the vaxx-drive around the world, especially in the Global North, will be completed or is expected to be completed soon.

The report – an extrapolation of data – expanded mostly linearly, explains in essence what a large proportion – not all – of mRNA vaxxes are, and what they are intended to do to humanity. 

.

The mRNA injections, many are graphene oxide concoctions (see “The Fifth Column”) responding to electromagnetic waves, i.e. to 5G, making from humans “transhumans”, as per Klaus Schwab, WEF. (see first section of video below)

Video: Towards Digital Tyranny with Peter Koenig

Click here to link to bitchute version

The mRNA injections result  in mortality through a number of ways:

  • lowered immune system; according to Mike Yeadon, former VP and Chief Science Officer of Pfizer, every shot lowers the immune system by about 30% and the booster by another 20%. Thus, a person who had all three jabs, will have a drastically reduced immune system and is vulnerable to all kinds of diseases that otherwise would have been brushed off by natural immunity;
  • overproduction of spike proteins; they then literally penetrate every cell in the human body and destroy it;
  • the creation of tiny blood clots that are hardly visible by microscope. They settle primarily in the lungs, but can move to the heart and brain and cause heart attacks and brain strokes. They may also stay in the lungs and impair breathing;
  • in the longer run, mRNA jabs may cause often very aggressive cancers, that do not react to any therapy. They are predominantly cancers affecting humans’ reproductive system;
  • and more….

Even if vaccines were stopped immediately, which they are not, hundreds of thousands of people or more might be killed in the next 10 years – and if the vaxx drive continues and eventually 70% to 80% of the world population is vaxxed, the impacts on world population of about 7.9 billion would be potentially devastating. See this.

It is unlikely that such depopulation goals would be reached. But the fact that they are put up as targets means that the effort to reach the plan is relentless, unless we the People through an international legal movement such as that put forth by Dr. Reiner Fuellmich brings the worst perpetrators and their puppets to justice – in a case that may be called Nuremberg 2.0.

Nuremberg  Trial 1946

Covid Exit: The Freedom Convoy 2022

We, the People, also have the possibility to wake up to the truth, and to collectively in unison in solidarity fight this crime of humanity by massive civil disobedience. One such effort, perhaps the largest ever worldwide, is currently taking place in Canada. The Freedom Convoy 2022 – tens of thousands of truck drivers from all over Canada and even cross-border from the US — have driven to Ottawa, to ask Justin Trudeau to resign, go into permanent political quarantine, and/or lift ALL Covid restrictions for Canadians.

This movement alone is already extraordinary. It is an element of dynamics that was not foreseen in Mike Adams futuristic documentary “Ghost World – 2022 – 2032”. See this.

Economic Chaos, Poverty and Famine

Economic and financial implications are going to be simply put – gigantic. The economic and financial implication are simply going to be unimaginable for world citizens from 2022 through 2032.

Already today, after the first two years of “Covid” and an intense vaxx drive, bankruptcies in the Global North, as well as the resulting economic collapse in the Global South, the so-called developing world, has increased poverty and famine six-fold between mid-2019 and mid-2021 – see Oxfam. Oxfam enhances this statement by predicting that this “hunger plandemic” threatens to push millions into starvation; see this. according to Oxfam, millions of people are expected to die from poverty, famine, despair and disease – let alone from the poisonous vaxx “side effects”.

Double Digit Inflation

In addition, we are faced with an extraordinary (intentional) drive toward double-digit inflation – a real price bubble, not heard of in the last 30 years. What when it bursts, and burst it will? More transfer of resources from the bottom and the center to the top. A planned shift of wealth – an enormous shift. It’s sheer theft.  That alone will cause more poverty, despair and death.

Lawlessness knows no limits. To the contrary, the rich countries make their laws so that what otherwise would have been called “corruption” are now white-collar “regulations”.

The Great Reset

And make no mistake, this is the plan.

The Great Reset describes it quite well, except that the authors of the Great Reset paint the new era as a period of Great Happiness, “you will own nothing, but you will be happy”. Literally. People’s minds will be robotized or transhumanized to feel good.

The jabs, falsely called vaccines, contain a highly toxic and electromagnetic substance called Graphene Oxide which will receive the deadly ultra-shortwaves 5G with which the human brain will be manipulated, according to the masters’ wishes. See findings of the Spanish researchers the “Fifth Column”, see reference above.  It is suspected that mind manipulation trials are ongoing today through DARPA.

The lives of many of the world’s producers, factory workers, administrators, planners, will be affected by the mRNA vaccines, as they were asked to be vaxxed to maintain their jobs – to sustain their families. Little do they know that the so-called vaccine is a carefully planned poison concoction.

In many countries you are not allowed to shop even for food, unless you can demonstrate a vaxx certificate. This enormous blackmail, applied all over the western world is an unspeakable crime against humanity. It speaks for total lawlessness. In this ambiance, we must expect anything and everything – but we definitely must stop trusting our governments.

The results of these planned disasters may be euphemistically called supply chain disruptions – empty shelves – and famine even in so-called developed or First World countries. In the Global South, misery will be catastrophic beyond words – see above what Oxfam has to say. And if not stopped by massive people’s protests, people’s disobedience events like the Canadian Freedom Convoy 2022, the world may indeed face unfathomable misery.

Are we going to end up in a Ghost World? With a reduced population, a huge unmanned production apparatus that doesn’t produce anything, but slowly rots away – as labor and raw materials are missing, and artificial intelligence (AI) is unable to fill all the gaps?

Restoring Democracy

We the People, in a massive movement of solidarity, will have to bring those responsible to justice. We will not accept the Great Reset nor the Green Agenda nor the Global Warming agenda nor digitization of body, mind and money, nor a QR-coded life – we will thrive towards a new model society, one that may have to start from scratch, from a level of consuming (and wasting) less than Mother Earth produces.

When people depend on electronics, on digital money, on digital anything – with their most intimate data registered, digitally on QR-codes, we are enslaved. We must avoid it today because once we are there, in the digitized QR-world, it’s too late. We are enslaved.

Not too long ago, some 60-70 years ago, post-WWII, we lived a relatively peaceful life – none or hardly any electronics and life was possible.

The Covid narrative, with all its fears, coercion, blackmails and threats, has caused major damage in society, in most of the people who have faithfully trusted their governments which in turn have betrayed them into death.

It will not be easy to pull everybody out of this indoctrinated lie, from this cognitive dissonance, which is a well-planned psychological phenomenon, that has – according to Dr. Reiner Fuellmich, German Corona Investigative Committee — worked for about a third of the western population, meaning they are literally hypnotized. Awaking them will be extremely difficult.

A medical doctor told me the other day, if tomorrow the government would lift all Covid restrictions – people would still walk around with masks for quite a while. He talked about a Global South country, but it would not be much different in the Global North. That’s the hypnosis effect. They are still living under the fear syndrome.

Dr. Fuellmich goes on – one-third is awake, and the remaining third – there may be a willingness to see the truth.

A lot of damage has been done already, and a lot more will follow. But we are living in a dynamic world, and, we the People, have the power to turn the ship around. In fact, the tide is already turning, maybe slower than what we wish for but turning it is.

Quoting Bob Dylan, “The times are a Changing”.

Definitely.

“Venceremos!”

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @globalresearch_crg. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Peter Koenig is an economist and geopolitical analyst. He is also a water resources and environmental specialist. He worked for over 30 years with the World Bank and the World Health Organization around the world in the fields of environment and water. He lectures at universities in the US, Europe and South America. He writes regularly for online journals such as Global Research; ICH; New Eastern Outlook (NEO) and more. He is the author of Implosion – An Economic Thriller about War, Environmental Destruction and Corporate Greed – fiction based on facts and on 30 years of World Bank experience around the globe. Peter is also co-author of Cynthia McKinney’s book “When China Sneezes: From the Coronavirus Lockdown to the Global Politico-Economic Crisis” (Clarity Press – November 1, 2020)

He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG).

Featured image is a screenshot from the video

Source

NATO-Exit under Art. 13: Dismantle NATO, Close Down 800 US Military Bases, Prosecute the War Criminals

NATO-Exit under Art. 13: Dismantle NATO, Close Down 800 US Military Bases, Prosecute the War Criminals

This text was first published on April 4 2019 in the context of the Florence International Conference: No War, No NATO which centred on the key relationship between US-NATO military operations directed against targeted countries and the imposition of  far-reaching neoliberal economic reforms both before and in the wake of US-NATO military interventions.

At the height of the Ukraine Crisis, a World War III Scenario Looms. Nuclear War is Contemplated. The Future of Humanity is Threatened.

What are the Solutions:

  • NATO Exit under Art. 13. Notice of Denunciation
  • A Worldwide Antiwar Movement
  • The Disabling of  War Propaganda
  • Sanity in US Foreign Policy
  • Diplomacy and Peace Negotiations,
  • The Closing Down of the War Economy

Michel Chossudovsky, November 20, 2022

***

This article addresses the dangers and consequences of a Third World War as well the nature of advanced weapons systems deployed by the broader US-NATO coalition.

Extensive war crimes have been committed by NATO member states.

The object of the 2019 Florence Venue is  NATO-EXIT. The Dismantling of NATO and the closure of US military bases. 

There is a (somewhat contradictory) clause within the Treaty of the Atlantic Alliance (Article 13) which enables withdrawal from NATO. This clause has to be examined and a strategy must be envisaged.

The request of a NATO Member State to withdraw from the Treaty rests with the Government of the United States of America. What are the legal implications of this clause?

In our conclusion we will address what types of actions are required by mass movements to reach this objective, bearing in mind that since the war on Iraq (2003), protest movements have been coopted and manipulated. While global warming makes the headlines, the dangers of nuclear war are barely mentioned. Why?

Introduction and Overview

Washington’s unspoken hegemonic objective is Worldwide militarization and economic conquest. This imperial design  is carried out through acts of war, military intervention, coups d’Etat, regime change, US sponsored insurgencies, cyber-warfare, economic sabotage and destabilization. “All options are on the table”.

We are at an important threshold in our history

In relation to all previous wars, today’s advanced military arsenal includes nuclear, biological, chemical and electromagnetic weapons which have the ability to destroy human life on a Worldwide scale.

War Propanganda

This military agenda is supported by an extensive propaganda apparatus.

The dangers of a World War are casually dismissed. War is portrayed as a humanitarian endeavor. The Mainstream media contends that war is a peace-making undertaking and that NATO should be granted the Nobel Peace prize.

Propaganda sustains the war agenda.

It provides a human face to war criminals in high office. Without media disinformation which upholds war as a peacemaking endeavor, America’s military agenda would collapse like a house of cards.

The imminent dangers of modern warfare are not front page news.

War is portrayed as a Peace-making endeavour.  War Becomes Peace, Realities are turned upside down.

When the Lie becomes the Truth, there is no turning backwards. War criminals are portrayed as peace-makers.

War and Globalization. The Neoliberal Agenda

War and globalization go hand in hand. Militarization supports  the imposition of macro-economic restructuring on targeted countries. It imposes military spending in support of the war economy at the expense of the civilian economy. It leads to economic destabilization and the demise of national institutions.

Military interventions are coupled with concurrent acts of economic sabotage and financial manipulation. The ultimate objective is conquest of both human and natural resources as well as political institutions.

Acts of war support a process of outright economic conquest.  America’s hegemonic project is to transform sovereign countries into open territories. Debt conditionalities are imposed by foreign creditors. In turn, large sectors of the World population are impoverished through the concurrent imposition of deadly macro-economic reforms. 

9/11 and the Invasion of Afghanistan. NATO and the “Global War on Terrorism”

The September 11, 2001 attacks (9/11) constitute an important and historical threshold. On the 12th of September 2001, the North Atlantic Council in Brussels invoking for the first time the doctrine of collective security (art. 5 of the Washington Treaty) adopted the following resolution:

“if it is determined that the [September 11, 2001] attack against the United States was directed from abroad [Afghanistan] against “The North Atlantic area“, it shall be regarded as an action covered by Article 5 of the Washington Treaty”. (emphasis added)

This historic decision was supported by media propaganda. There was no attack against the US by a foreign power. There were no Afghan jet fighters in the skies of New York. There was a terror event. But it was not an act of war by a foreign power against the United States of America.

Without a shred of evidence, Afghanistan was tagged as the state sponsor of the 9/11 high-jackers, all of whom were Saudi nationals. Allegedly Afghanistan was “protecting” 9/11 terror mastermind Osama bin Laden  (who was an “intelligence asset”, recruited in the early 1980s by the CIA ). Osama bin Laden’s whereabouts were known. On the 10th of September (as documented by Dan Rather CBS News) Osama had been admitted to the urology department of a military hospital in Rawalpindi, by America’s staunchest ally Pakistan.

Moreover, in the course of September and early October 2001, the Afghan Taliban government on two occasions contacted the US State Department through diplomatic channels and offered to extradite bin Laden to the U.S. This issue was not covered by the media.

Bush responded:” We do not negotiate with terrorists”.

Barely 4 weeks following the 9/11 attack on October 7, 2001, US-NATO invaded Afghanistan, invoking the doctrine of collective security. There was no evidence that “Afghanistan had attacked America” on September 11, 2001.

It is worth noting, confirmed by military analysts that you do not prepare a large scale theatre war in Central Asia, thousands of miles away in a matter of 28 days. This issue was casually dismissed by the mainstream media. The war on Afghanistan had been prepared PRIOR to 9/11.

US-NATO’s Role in Recruiting and Financing Al Qaeda Affiliated Terrorists

NATO has self-proclaimed mandate to go after the terrorists.

Yet there is ample evidence that NATO was involved in supporting as well as recruiting Al Qaeda affiliated mercenaries in Kosovo, Libya and Syria.(among other countries)

Video: NATO is Helping to Fight Terrorism Every Day  (Source NATO)

In Syria, from Day One (March 17, 2011), the Islamist “freedom fighters” were supported, trained and equipped by NATO and Turkey’s High Command. According to Israeli intelligence sources (Debka, August 14, 2011):

NATO headquarters in Brussels and the Turkish high command are meanwhile drawing up plans for their first military step in Syria, which is to arm the rebels with weapons for combating the tanks and helicopters spearheading the Assad regime’s crackdown on dissent. … NATO strategists are thinking more in terms of pouring large quantities of anti-tank and anti-air rockets, mortars and heavy machine guns into the protest centers for beating back the government armored forces. (DEBKAfile, NATO to give rebels anti-tank weapons, August 14, 2011)

This initiative, which was also supported by Israel, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States involved a process of organized recruitment of thousands of jihadist “freedom fighters”, reminiscent of  the enlistment of  the Mujahideen to wage the CIA’s jihad (holy war) in the heyday of the Soviet-Afghan war (1979-89).

In NATO’s war on Libya in 2011, support was channelled to the Al Qaeda affiliated jihadist opposition to the Gadaffi government.

The Legitimacy of  “Humanitarian Warfare”

The twisted justifications for US-NATO led wars are:

  • “The Just War” (Jus ad Bellum). NATO contends that all its wars are morally justifiable. This is tantamount to legitimizing extensive war crimes.
  • “The Global War on Terrorism”. The counter-terrorism campaign is fake. Amply documented, NATO is involved in supporting and recruiting jihadist mercenaries (Syria 2011).
  • “Responsibility to Protect” (R2P) with a view to instilling (Trump style) Western “democracy” Worldwide.
  • Pre-emptive war as a means of “self-defense”, Attack them before they attack us. This doctrine also pertains to nuclear weapons, i.e. blow up the planet as a means of ‘self-defense”
  • RussiaGate, “Self-defense” against Russia under the doctrine of collective security
  • Pivot to Asia, Targeting China.

Financing US-NATO led Wars

In recent developments, President Trump has proposed major spending cuts in health, education, social infrastructure “while seeking a large increase for the Pentagon”. At the outset of his administration, president Trump confirmed that he was increasing the budget for the nuclear weapons program launched by Obama from 1.0 trillion to 1.2 trillion dollars. The stated objective was to make the world safer.

Throughout the EU, extended military spending coupled with austerity measures is leading to the demise of what was called the “Welfare State”.

NATO is committed to increasing military spending. It is the right thing to do to “keep our people secure, according to NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg

Source NATO

This favors the weapons producers at the expense of social programs. Mass movements against neoliberal economic policy and social inequality (Yellow Vests) cannot, therefore, be divorced from the anti-war movement.

Globalization and the Corporate Power Structures

Global warfare sustains the Neoliberal Agenda and vice versa.

Neoliberalism broadly defined is not limited to a set of economic paradigms and structural reforms. What we are dealing with is an imperial project broadly serving powerful global overlapping interests:

  • Wall Street and the Global Banking Apparatus
  • The Military Industrial Complex,
  • Big Oil,
  • the Biotech conglomerates, Bayer-Monsanto et al
  • Big Pharma,
  • The Global Narcotics Economy and Organized Crime,
  • the Media Conglomerates and the Information and Communication Technology Giants.

The military agenda is geared towards supporting and endorsing these powerful interests groups. There is of course within  these sectors, mounting conflict between global conglomerates, each of which have their lobby groups.

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO)

NATO and the De Facto US Military Occupation of Western Europe

70 years ago NATO was born. In April 1949, The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) established what was designated as the doctrine of “Collective Security” under Art. 5 of the Washington Treaty.

NATO has a sordid history of aggression and war crimes:

Ever since its founding in April 1949, NATO has served as the vehicle to spur the arms race in the name of ‘peace through strength’. In that very same year, the Truman Administration in the United States secretly developed “Operation Dropshot’ to launch a devastating ‘first-strike’ against the former Soviet Union to completely obliterate that country. Throughout the ‘cold war’ years, the U.S. and its NATO allies always maintained an overwhelming military superiority over the USSR and the Warsaw Pact – a fact that they cynically concealed from public view at the time, but now readily admit. (Canadian Peace Congress)

The unspoken objective of  NATO –which is of significance to our debate in Florence–, was to sustain under a different label, the de facto “military occupation” of Western Europe.  The US not only continues to “occupy” World War II “axis countries” (Italy, Germany), it has used the NATO emblem to install US military bases throughout Western Europe, as well as in Eastern Europe in the wake of the Cold War, extending into the Balkans in the wake of NATO’s war on Yugoslavia.

Today, NATO consists of  29 member states, most of which have US military facilities on their territory, with the largest deployments of US forces in Germany and Italy. Bear in mind these are not NATO bases. The latter are limited to command and logistics: e.g. SHAPE Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe, Casteau, Belgium, NATO Allied Command Transformation, Norfolk, Virginia

  • 12 founding member states in 1949 Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Iceland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal,
  • Greece and Turkey (1952),
  • Germany (1955),
  • Spain (1982)
  • Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland (1999),
  • Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia (2004),
  • Albania and Croatia (2009),
  • Montenegro (2017)

A number of other countries have established partnership agreements with NATO. Israel is a de facto member of NATO, based on an agreement reached in 2003. In turn, the US has established a host of military alliances on a regional basis.

Source: NATO

Under the semblance of a multi-national military alliance, the Pentagon dominates NATO decision-making. The US controls NATO command structures, which are embedded into those of the US. The Supreme Allied Commander Europe (SACEUR) as well as the  Supreme Allied Commander Atlantic (SACLANT) are Americans appointed by Washington. NATO current Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg is essentially a bureaucrat. He does not call the shots.

Two other key command structures Allied Command Transformation (ACT) and Allied Command Operations (ACO), “responsible for the planning and execution of all NATO military operations” were added in 2002.

Under the terms of the military alliance, NATO member states are harnessed into endorsing Washington’s imperial design of World conquest under the doctrine of collective security. 

In 1949, NATO became a Cold War instrument which prevented and undermined the development of trade,  political, social and cultural relations between Western Europe and the Soviet block including Eastern Europe.

For Washington, with the Pentagon pulling the strings, NATO has become a convenient military “multi-state proxy”.

The strategic objectives of the US with regard to NATO are:

  1. The de facto US Military Occupation of Western, Eastern Europe and Canada through the establishment of US military bases in most NATO member states
  2. The imposition of US Foreign Policy, requiring the acceptance (under the doctrine of collective security) of all US war plans by NATO member states (including military deployments on Russia’s doorstep)
  3. A mechanism whereby the Pentagon finances its wars and military operations through contributions by each NATO member state, at tax-payers expense;
  4. The conduct of US-led wars under the emblem of the NATO military alliance, thereby obliging NATO member states to deploy their military capabilities as well as “do the dirty work for us”, i.e. killing and destruction on behalf of Washington.
  5. The extension of US influence in the post war period into the former colonies of  Western European countries (France, Belgium, Italy, Britain)

Military Occupation is tagged as “Protection” and the governments of NATO member states are actually “Paying the U.S. to Occupy their countries”. It is all for a good cause. “Make the World Safer”:

“The biggest indignity yet was the ludicrous demand that NATO allies pay to host the American troops permanently garrisoned there – to essentially bankroll their own occupations. Last week, it was reported the US would begin asking some of its most hospitable allies – those nations home to hundreds of thousands of soldiers – to foot the bill for the cost of keeping them “safe.”(H. Busyinzki),

I should mention that in addition to recommending NATO for the Nobel Peace Prize, the media relentlessly presents NATO as an instrument of  peace-making.

US Military Bases and Global Military Alliances

The Pentagon’s grip extends well beyond the 29 NATO member states. It also includes partner countries as well as a broad system of military alliances in all major regions of the World including Latin America, North Africa and the Middle East, sub-Saharan Africa, South Asia, South East Asia, East Asia (Japan, South Korea) and Oceania. Israel is a de facto NATO member state.

Military alliances and military occupation go hand in hand.

More generally the creation of military alliances has become a means to install US military bases in a large number of countries, including countries which were the victims of US led wars and military interventions. (eg Vietnam, Cambodia, Indonesia, Afghanistan, Iraq)

With the exception of NATO Strategic Command and its Logistics bases, there are no NATO military bases.

There are US bases located in host countries (including NATO member states) as well as national military bases under the jurisdiction of the NATO member states, often in a joint arrangement with the US.

Today there are approximately 39 US military bases in Germany (based on official sources), many of which are under a system of joint command with Germany and NATO.

In Italy, the major military bases are:

  • Aviano Air Base, Pordenone
  • Caserma Ederle, Vicenza
  • San Vito Dei Normanni Air Station, near Brindisi
  • Naval Air Station Sigonella, near Catania, Sicily
  • Camp Darby, near Pisa and Livorno

According to an unconfirmed source, In Italy, there are about 100 US military bases and facilities

Cross-Cutting Coalitions: Sleeping with the Enemy

Of significance, beyond the scope of this article, are the broad structures of military alliances of Russia and China under the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO).

Turkey (a member of NATO) is now collaborating with Russia as well as Iran. America’s staunchest ally Pakistan is now a full member of the SCO and is actively collaborating with China.

Geographic Combat Commands. US Military Bases Worldwide

America’s System of Geographic Combat Commands was established in the wake of World War II. It constitutes the foundations of global warfare, leading to the deployment of US Air, Navy and Land forces Worldwide, including the militarization of outer space  and the deployment of nuclear weapons. In turn, all major theater wars are coordinated by US Strategic Command (USSTRATCOM) at Offutt Air Force Base, Nebraska,

The United States currently has more than 800 formal military bases in 80 countries. In turn, US-led military and economic alliances have played a key role in extending America’s sphere of influence.Once these military bases are established in countries, they remain. The host country becomes a de facto ally of the US.

From a strategic point of view with modern day warfare, the geographic combat commands are in some regards obsolete. They are largely geared towards controlling countries which host US military bases. They do not constitute an effective structure for waging strategic military operations against Russia or China.

 800+ US Military Bases. Where are they Located

Joint Forces command agreements are signed between the US and its allies. The host countries must not only endorse US military doctrine, they also contribute sizeable financial resources which are used to fund US military operations. In this regard, NATO member states contribute financially to sustaining the US-led military apparatus.

The map below is incomplete. It does not include US bases under Joint Command

America’s allies are also caught in the nexus of sustaining the US weapons industry (“defense contractors”) through multibillion dollar purchase.

Nuclear War and Nuclear Weapons

“The Privatization of Nuclear War” 

US Military Contractors Set the Stage

US-NATO interventions are presented as peacemaking endeavors. A new generation of “more usable” “low yield” nuclear weapons are categorized as “harmless to civilians”. This initiative was first formulated during the George W. Bush administration. The concepts are contained in the 2001 Nuclear Posture Review, adopted by the Senate in 2002.

Hiroshima Day 2003: Secret Meeting at Strategic Command Headquarters

On August 6, 2003, on Hiroshima Day, commemorating when the first atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima (August 6 1945), a secret meeting was held behind closed doors at Strategic Command Headquarters at the Offutt Air Force Base in Nebraska.

Senior executives from the nuclear industry and the military industrial complex were in attendance. This mingling of defense contractors, scientists and policy-makers was not intended to commemorate Hiroshima. The meeting was intended to set the stage for the development of a new generation of “smaller”, “safer” and “more usable” nuclear weapons, to be used in the “in-theater nuclear wars” of the 21st Century.

In a cruel irony, the participants to this secret meeting, which excluded members of Congress, arrived on the anniversary of the Hiroshima bombing and departed on the anniversary of the attack on Nagasaki. More than 150 military contractors, scientists from the weapons labs, and other government officials gathered at the headquarters of the US Strategic Command in Omaha, Nebraska to plot and plan for the possibility of “full-scale nuclear war”, calling for the production of a new generation of nuclear weapons – more “usable” so-called “mini-nukes” and earth penetrating “bunker busters” armed with atomic warheads.

According to a leaked draft of the agenda, the secret meeting included discussions on “mini-nukes” and “bunker-buster” bombs with nuclear war heads “for possible use against rogue states”:

Participants intimated:

“We need to change our nuclear strategy from the Cold War to one that can deal with emerging threats… The meeting will give some thought to how we guarantee the efficacy of the (nuclear) stockpile.”

The post 9/11 nuclear weapons doctrine was in the making, with America’s major defense contractors directly involved in the decision-making process.

The Hiroshima Day 2003 meetings had set the stage for the “privatization of nuclear war”. Corporations not only reap multibillion-dollar profits from the production of nuclear bombs, they also have a direct voice in setting the agenda regarding the use and deployment of nuclear weapons.

The nuclear weapons industry, which includes the production of nuclear devices as well as the missile delivery systems, etc., is controlled by a handful of defense contractors with Lockheed Martin, General Dynamics, Northrop Grunman, Raytheon and Boeing in the lead. It is worth noting that barely a week prior to the historic August 6, 2003 meeting, the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) disbanded its advisory committee which provided an “independent oversight” on the US nuclear arsenal, including the testing and/or use of new nuclear devices. (The above text is an excerpt from Michel Chossudovsky’s Towards a World War Three Scenario, The Dangers of Nuclear War. Global Research, Montreal, 2011)

Dangerous Crossroads: The Future of Humanity is Threatened

Needless to say, the World is at a dangerous crossroads. The future of humanity is threatened.  Lies and fabrications permeate US-NATO military doctrine. Those who decide believe in their own propaganda. Not only do they believe that tactical nuclear weapons are peace-making bombs, they are now putting forth the concept of a “Winnable Third World War”. Taking out China and Russia is on the drawing board of the Pentagon.

We are at the juncture of the most serious crisis in World history. A Third World War using nuclear weapons is terminal. This is not an understatement. 

Military interventions are not limited to conventional warfare. What is at stake is a process of global warfare using advanced weapons systems. The safeguards of the Cold War era have been scrapped. The concept of “Mutually Assured Destruction” pertaining to the use of nuclear weapons has been replaced by the doctrine of preemptive nuclear war.

The INF Treaty is defunct. Nuclear weapons are portrayed by the media as peace-making bombs. They are no longer tagged as Weapons of Mass Destruction. They are to be used in what the Pentagon calls “bloody nose” operations.

In the 2001 Nuclear Posture Review (NPR) under the Bush administration, the Pentagon introduced the notion of pre-emptive nuclear war, namely the use of nuclear weapons on a first strike basis as a means of “self defense”.

The new generation of so-called tactical nuclear weapons (mininukes) has been been categorized as “low yield” and “more usable. The US Senate in 2002 approved their use in the conventional war theater. They are contemplated for use against North Korea and Iran.

They are tagged as “safe to the surrounding civilian population because the explosion is underground.”  These “low yield” tactical nuclear bombs have an explosive capacity between one third and twelve times a Hiroshima bomb.

“More Usable” “Low Yield Nuclear Weapons Deployed in Five Non-Nuclear Weapons States: Germany, Italy, Belgium,The Netherlands, Turkey

The “Official” Nuclear Weapons States

Five countries, the US, UK, France, China and Russia are considered to be “nuclear weapons states” (NWS), “an internationally recognized status conferred by the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT)”. Three other “Non NPT countries” (i.e. non-signatory states of the NPT) including India, Pakistan and North Korea, have recognized possessing nuclear weapons.

It is worth noting that North Korea was the only declared nuclear weapons state which voted YES at the UN General Assembly, in favor of the prohibition of nuclear weapons under Resolution L.41.

Nobody knows about this. WHY: Because the mainstream media has not mentioned it (“Fake News” through Omission) or as in the case of The Guardian and Bloomberg, the DPRK was casually lumped together with the other nuclear weapons states which voted NO (against the resolution).

“Oops News”. “We made a mistake”. We did not really check the UN General Assembly documents.

Israel: “Undeclared Nuclear State”

Israel is identified as an “undeclared nuclear state”. It produces and deploys nuclear warheads directed against military and civilian targets in the Middle East including Tehran.

Belgium, Germany, The Netherlands, Italy and Turkey: erroneously categorised as Non-Nuclear Weapons States”

The nuclear weapons capabilities of these five countries including delivery procedures are formally acknowledged. The US has supplied some 480 B61. thermonuclear bombs to five so-called “non-nuclear states”, including Belgium, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and Turkey. In recent developments the B61.11 mini-nukes are to replaced by the recently developed B61.12. Based on 2014 data Italy possesses 50 B61 tactical nuclear weapons at its Aviano base. It is unclear whether these bombs are under US or National Command.

Casually disregarded by the Vienna based UN Nuclear Watchdog (IAEA), the US has actively contributed to the proliferation of nuclear weapons in Western Europe. As part of this European stockpiling, Turkey, which is a partner of the US-led coalition against Iran along with Israel, possesses some 90 thermonuclear B61 bunker buster bombs at the Incirlik nuclear air base. (National Resources Defense Council, Nuclear Weapons in Europe , February 2005) By the recognised definition, these five countries are “undeclared nuclear weapons states”.

The stockpiling and deployment of tactical B61 in these five “non-nuclear states” are intended for targets in the Middle East. Moreover, in accordance with  “NATO strike plans”, these thermonuclear B61 bunker buster bombs (stockpiled by the “non-nuclear States”) could be launched  “against targets in Russia or countries in the Middle East such as Syria and Iran” ( quoted in National Resources Defense Council, Nuclear Weapons in Europe, February 2005)

Click to See Details and Map of Nuclear Facilities located in 5 European “Non-Nuclear States”

The stockpiled weapons are B61 thermonuclear bombs.  All the weapons are gravity bombs of the B61-3, -4, and -10 types.2 . Those estimates were based on private and public statements by a number of government sources and assumptions about the weapon storage capacity at each base .(National Resources Defense Council, Nuclear Weapons in Europe , February 2005)

Germany: Nuclear Weapons Producer

Among the five “undeclared nuclear states”, “Germany remains the most heavily nuclearized country with three nuclear bases (two of which are fully operational) and may store as many as 150 [B61 bunker buster ] bombs” (Ibid). In accordance with “NATO strike plans” (mentioned above) these tactical nuclear weapons are also targeted at the Middle East. While Germany is not categorized officially as a nuclear power, it produces nuclear warheads for the French Navy. It stockpiles nuclear warheads (made in America) and it has the capabilities of delivering nuclear weapons.

Moreover,  The European Aeronautic Defense and Space Company – EADS , a Franco-German-Spanish  joint venture, controlled by Deutsche Aerospace and the powerful Daimler Group is Europe’s second largest military producer, supplying .France’s M51 nuclear missile. Germany imports and deploys nuclear weapons from the US. It also produces nuclear warheads which are exported to France. Yet it is classified as a non-nuclear state.

Fidel’s Message on the Dangers of Nuclear War

In 2010, October 12 to 15, 2010, I had extensive and detailed discussions with Fidel Castro in Havana, pertaining to the dangers of nuclear war, the global economic crisis and the nature of the New World Order.

Fidel Castro and Michel Chossudovsky, Havana, October 2010

These meetings resulted in a wide-ranging and fruitful interview which was subsequently published by Global Research.

Recorded on the last day of the Conversations, October 15, 2010, Fidel Castro made the following statement:

In a nuclear war the “collateral damage” would be the life of all humanity.

Let us have the courage to proclaim that all nuclear or conventional weapons, everything that is used to make war, must disappear!

“The use of nuclear weapons in a new war would mean the end of humanity. This was candidly foreseen by scientist Albert Einstein who was able to measure their destructive capability to generate millions of degrees of heat, which would vaporize everything within a wide radius of action. This brilliant researcher had promoted the development of this weapon so that it would not become available to the genocidal Nazi regime.

Each and every government in the world has the obligation to respect the right to life of each and every nation and of the totality of all the peoples on the planet.

Today there is an imminent risk of war with the use of that kind of weapon and I don’t harbour the least doubt that an attack by the United States and Israel against the Islamic Republic of Iran would inevitably evolve towards a global nuclear conflict.

The World’s peoples have an obligation to demand of their political leaders their Right to Live. When the life of humankind, of your people and your most beloved human beings run such a risk, nobody can afford to be indifferent; not one minute can be lost in demanding respect for that right; tomorrow will be too late.

Albert Einstein himself stated unmistakably: “I do not know with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones”. We fully comprehend what he wanted to convey, and he was absolutely right, yet in the wake of a global nuclear war, there wouldn’t be anybody around to make use of those sticks and stones.

There would be “collateral damage”, as the American political and military leaders always affirm, to justify the deaths of innocent people.

In a nuclear war the “collateral damage” would be the life of all humanity.

Let us have the courage to proclaim that all nuclear or conventional weapons, everything that is used to make war, must disappear!”

Fidel Castro Ruz,  October 15, 2010

Flashback: The Unspoken History of Nuclear War 

The Manhattan Project established in 1939 together with Britain and Canada developed the first atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. What was the purpose of the Manhattan Project?  The official explanation is that it was America’s  response to Nazi Germany’s intent to develop the atomic bomb. Bear in mind, the Manhattan project was launched in 1939, two years prior to America’s participation in World War II.

What is never mentioned in the history of nuclear weapons is that the Manhattan Project had formulated a plan to use nuclear weapons against the Soviet Union as early as 1942. In other words, the Nuclear Arms Race was not the product of the Cold War. It took it roots during World War II when the US and the Soviet Union were allies. And present US military doctrine is largely a continuation of the nuclear weapons program initiated under the Manhattan Project:

According to a secret document dated September 15, 1945, “the Pentagon had envisaged blowing up the Soviet Union  with a coordinated nuclear attack directed against major urban areas.

All major cities of the Soviet Union were included in the list of 66 “strategic” targets. The tables below categorize each city in terms of area in square miles and the corresponding number of atomic bombs required to annihilate and kill the inhabitants of selected urban areas.

Six atomic bombs were to be used to destroy each of the larger cities including Moscow, Leningrad, Tashkent, Kiev, Kharkov, Odessa.

The Pentagon estimated that a total of 204 atomic bombs would be required to “Wipe the Soviet Union off the Map”. The targets for a nuclear attack consisted of sixty-six major cities.

To undertake this operation the “optimum” number of bombs required was of the order of 466 (see document below)

One single atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima resulted in the immediate death of 100,000 people in the first seven seconds. Imagine what would have happened if 204 atomic bombs had been dropped on major cities of the Soviet Union as outlined in a secret U.S. plan formulated during the Second World War. (Michel Chossudovsky, “Wipe the Soviet Union Off the Map”, 204 Atomic Bombs against 66 Major Cities, US Nuclear Attack against USSR Planned During World War II, Global Research, October 27,

The document outlining this diabolical military agenda had been released in September 1945, barely one month after the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki (6 and 9 August, 1945) and two years before the onset of the Cold War (1947).


Video produced by South Front

The secret plan dated September 15, 1945 (two weeks after the surrender of Japan on September 2, 1945 aboard the USS Missouri, see image below) , however, had been formulated at an earlier period, namely at the height of World War II,  at a time when America and the Soviet Union were close allies.

 War with Russia and China

Nuclear Weapons were contemplated to be used against Russia since 1942, and against China since October 1949

Currently, there are detailed plans by the US military (which are in the public domaine) to wage war against both Russia and China.

Four non-compliant countries including China, Russia, Iran and North Korea have been singled out.

World War III scenarios have been contemplated by the Pentagon for more than ten years. They are the object of military simulations (which are classified). Leaked to the Washington Post in 2006, see Vigilant Shield global war scenario using nuclear weapons against China, Russia, Iran, North Korea

At the outset of 2019, War against China and Russia is on the drawing board of the Pentagon. The use of nuclear weapons is contemplated on a preemptive first strike basis.

  • Recent reports (2015-2018) commissioned by the Pentagon confirm the details of  Washington’s military agenda against China and Russia (see reports by the Rand Corporation’s  War against China project  and the 2018 National Defense Strategy Commission, War against China and Russia.
  • On March 1st, 2018 president Vladimir Putin unveiled an array of advanced military technologies in response to renewed US threats to wipe the Russian Federation off the Map, as contained in Trump’s 2018 Nuclear Posture Review

Below is a review of detailed war plans  against Russia and China. These plans are in the public domaine. They are based on the premise that the US can win a nuclear war.

In May 2014, the  Russian Aggression Prevention Act (RAPA) was  introduced in the US Senate (S 2277), calling for the militarization of Eastern Europe and the Baltic States and the stationing of US and NATO troops on Russia’s doorstep:

S.2277 – Russian Aggression Prevention Act of 2014

Directs the President to: (1) implement a plan for increasing U.S. and NATO support for the armed forces of Poland, Estonia, Lithuania, and Latvia, and other NATO member-states; and (2) direct the U.S. Permanent Representative to NATO to seek consideration for permanently basing NATO forces in such countries.

In 2018:  the US National Defense Strategy Commission report entitled “Providing for the Common Defense” outlines the contours of a war with Russia

The thrust of the report is that “global peace and stability” and “America’s own security, prosperity, and global leadership” are threatened by Russia and China.

Across Eurasia, grayzone aggression is steadily undermining the security of U.S. allies and partners and eroding American influence. Regional military balances in Eastern Europe, the Middle East, and the Western Pacific have shifted in decidedly adverse ways.

What the report recommends is the conduct of  “preemptive” action against both China and Russia, with a view to sustaining US military superiority.

The United States needs more than just new capabilities; it urgently requires new operational concepts that expand U.S. options and constrain those of China, Russia, and other actors.

While the report does describe a possible war scenario with Russia or China, it recommends a sizeable increase in the US military budget. A  recommendation which is currently carried out by president Trump.

War with China Scenario

In 2015, a detailed report by the Rand Corporation commissioned by the US Army outlines a war scenario with China

According to the Rand report:

Whereas a clear U.S. victory once seemed probable, it is increasingly likely that a conflict could involve inconclusive fighting with steep losses on both sides. The United States cannot expect to control a conflict it cannot dominate militarily.

http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_reports/RR1100/RR1140/RAND_RR1140.pdf

Attack China Preemptively  (“In Self Defense”)

The report is notoriously ambiguous. It focusses on how a war can be avoided while analyzing the circumstances under which a preemptive war against China is a win for the US:

The presumption of this report is that China is threatening us, which justifies pre-emptive warfare. There is no evidence of  a Chinese military threat.  The purpose of the RAND report is that Chinese policymakers will read it. What we are dealing with is a process of military intimidation including veiled threats:

While the primary audience for this study is the U.S. policy community, we hope that Chinese policymakers will also think through possible courses and consequences of war with the United States, includ ing potential damage to China’s economic development and threats to China’s equilibrium and cohesion. We find little in the public domain to indicate that the Chinese political leadership has given this matter the attention it deserves.

The Report outlines “Four Analytic Scenarios” on how a war with China could be carried out:

The path of war might be defined mainly by two variables: intensity (from mild to severe) and duration (from a few days to a year or more). Thus, we analyze four cases: brief and severe, long and severe, brief and mild, and long and mild. The main determinant of intensity is whether, at the outset, U.S. and Chinese political leaders grant or deny their respective militaries permission to execute their plans to attack opposing forces unhesitatingly.

The concluding comments of the report underscore the potential weakness of China in relation to US-allied forces “…they do not point to Chinese dominance or victory.”

The report creates an ideological war narrative. It is flawed in terms of its understanding of modern warfare and weapons systems. It is largely a propaganda ploy directed against the Chinese leadership. It totally ignores Chinese history and China’s military perceptions which are largely based on defending the Nation’s historical national borders.

While the US, according to the report, does not contemplate the use nuclear weapons, the report examines the circumstances under which China might use nukes against the US to avoid defeat.The analysis is diabolical:

Thus, it cannot be entirely excluded that the Chinese leadership would decide that only the use of nuclear weapons would prevent total defeat and the state’s destruction. However, even under such desperate conditions, the resort to nuclear weapons would not be China’s only option: It could instead accept defeat. Indeed, because U.S. nuclear retaliation would make the destruction of the state and collapse of the country all the more certain, accepting defeat would be a better option (depending on the severity of U.S. terms) than nuclear escalation. This logic, along with China’s ingrained no-first-use policy, suggests that Chinese first use is most improbable. (p. 30)

In other words, China has the option of being totally destroyed or surrendering to the US. The report concludes as follows:

In a nutshell, despite military trends that favor it, China could not win, and might lose, a severe war with the United States in 2025, especially if prolonged. Moreover, the economic costs and political dangers of such a war could imperil China’s stability, end its development, and undermine the legitimacy of the state. (p 68)

Unconventional Warfare (UW)

Included in the Pentagon’s arsenal is the use of  various instruments of subversion including the support of  terrorist insurgencies as outlined the Army Special Operations Forces Unconventional Warfare manual (leaked by Wikileaks).

The emphasis is on using “surrogates”, namely irregular forces, non-state and paramilitary terrorist entities which will do the dirty work for us:

UW [Unconventional Warfare] must be conducted by, with, or through surrogates; and such surrogates must be irregular forces. Moreover, this definition is consistent with the historical reasons that the United States has conducted UW. UW has been conducted in support of both an insurgency, such as the Contras in 1980s Nicaragua, and resistance movements to defeat an occupying power, such as the Mujahideen in 1980s Afghanistan. UW has also been conducted in support of pending or ongoing conventional military operations (p. 1-2)

The stated purpose outlined in Army Field Manual is to use UW to support “insurgencies” and “resistance movements”. The “War on Terrorism” (WAT) is also defined as part of the UW arsenal:

“UW remains an enduring and effective means of warfighting and is recognized as a central effort in the WOT…

ARSOF namely Army Special Forces “support the WOT by providing forces trained and equipped”.

The report focusses on the use of special forces which are integrated into the fabric of the War on Terrorism (WOT). What this means in practice is the processing of embedding of  US-NATO forces in Al Qaeda affiliated terrorist insurgencies in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya, etc.

Unconventional Warfare (UW) also extends into the realm of financial manipulation, acts of sabotage, cyberwarfare etc. The Army Field Manual on UW also details and condones the instruments of Irregular Warfare (IW) which may resort to illegal activities such as the Iran-Contra:

 “Transnational criminal activities, including narco-trafficking, illicit arms dealing, and illegal financial transactions, that support or sustain IW.”

The Anti-war Movement: How to Reverse the Tide

Pursuant to the Florence April 7, 2019 Stop NATO Conference, concrete actions would consist in:

  • demanding the withdrawal from NATO by the 29 member states leading to the abolition of NATO.
  • closing down of US bases and military facilities in all NATO member states
  • the withdrawal of all US military personnel from NATO member countries
  • the repeal of payments of NATO member countries for the financing of US military bases and facilities
  • freezing of military budgets, reallocating resources to civilian social programs.

The mass movement would integrate anti-war protest with the campaign against the gamut of neoliberal economic reforms. 

To achieve these objectives, what is required is the development of a broad based grassroots network which seeks to disable patterns of authority and decision making pertaining to war and the economy. This is by no means an easy and straightforward undertaking. The NGOs funded by Wall Street control a variety of “protest movements”. Since the Iraq war(2003) the anti-war movement is virtually non existent.

This network would be established nationally and internationally at all levels of society, towns and villages, work places, parishes. Trade unions, farmers organizations, professional associations, business associations, student unions, veterans associations, church groups would be called upon to integrate the antiwar organizational structure. Of crucial importance, this movement should extend into the Armed Forces as a means to breaking the legitimacy of war both within the command structure as well as among service men and women.

A related task (as a priority) would be to disable war propaganda through an effective campaign against media disinformation. (including support of the online independent and alternative media). This is no easy task given the wave of censorship against freedom of speech as well as the online manipulation of search engines and social media referrals.

What has to be achieved as a first priority is to dismantle the propaganda apparatus which sustains the legitimacy of war and neoliberalism. In that regard, the independent media has failed. The power structures behind the mainstream media, social media, etc, must be confronted.

Without this network of media disinformation, the war criminals in high office wouldn’t have a leg to stand on.

Beware however of the flow of ideas emanating from several alleged progressive NGOs and “Left intellectuals” who are often financed by the establishment foundations. These are the entities which organize the so-called protest movements, generously funded by corporate foundations.

Intellectuals should not be the driving force of a Worldwide anti-war movement. What is required is a democratization of research and analysis, which serves to support a mass grass roots movement. The complexity of the global system (its military,economic, political dimensions) must be understood by the grassroots of the movement.

Changes within the Armed Forces, Security, Intelligence Law Enforcement apparatus are required with a view to eventually democratizing the command structures. Democratizing the decision-making apparatus of police and law enforcement is also something to be contemplated.

It is worth mentioning that while millions of people across the World have gathered under the banner of “Global Warming” and Climate Change, todays wars including Syria, Yemen, Iraq, Afghanistan, Venezuela are not mentioned. Nor are the dangers of a Third World War.

The issue of poverty and Worldwide unemployment resulting from the imposition of neoliberal reforms is also sidetracked.

And the police apparatus is repressing the Yellow Vest movement.

There is also the unspoken issue pertaining to “Left intellectuals” who are often coopted into playing lip service in favor of US-NATO humanitarian wars including Yugoslavia (1999), Afghanistan (2001), not to mention Syria (2011) and Libya (2011).

While climate change is a legitimate concern, why are these protest movements limited to global warming. The answer is that many of the key organizations involved are generously funded by Wall Street foundations, including the Rockefellers, Tides, Soros., et al.

The Wall Street protagonists of war and neoliberalism are funding dissent against Wall Street. It’s what I would describe as “manufactured dissent”.

Challenging the Corporate Media

The corporate media would be directly challenged including major news outlets, which are responsible for channelling disinformation into the news chain.  This endeavor would require a parallel process at the grass roots level, of sensitizing and educating fellow citizens on the nature of  the war and the global crisis, as well as effectively “spreading the word” through advanced networking, through alternative media outlets on the internet, etc. It would also require a broad based campaign against the search engines involved in media censorship on behalf of the Pentagon.

The creation of such a movement, which forcefully challenges the legitimacy of the structures of political authority,  requires a degree of solidarity, unity and commitment unparalleled in World history. It would require breaking down political and ideological barriers within society and acting with a single voice. It would also require eventually unseating the war criminals in high office, and indicting them for war crimes.

Abandon the Battlefield: Refuse to Fight

The military oath taken at the time of induction demands unbending support and allegiance to the US Constitution, while also demanding that US troops obey orders from their President and Commander in Chief:

“I,____________, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to the regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God”

The President and Commander in Chief Donald Trump [now Joe Bidenhas blatantly violated all tenets of domestic and international law. So that making an oath to “obey orders from the President” is tantamount to violating rather than defending the US Constitution.

“The Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) 809.ART.90 (20), makes it clear that military personnel need to obey the “lawful command of his superior officer,” 891.ART.91 (2), the “lawful order of a warrant officer”, 892.ART.92 (1) the “lawful general order”, 892.ART.92 (2) “lawful order”. In each case, military personnel have an obligation and a duty to only obey Lawful orders and indeed have an obligation to disobey Unlawful orders, including orders by the president that do not comply with the UCMJ. The moral and legal obligation is to the U.S. Constitution and not to those who would issue unlawful orders, especially if those orders are in direct violation of the Constitution and the UCMJ.” (Lawrence Mosqueda, An Advisory to US Troops A Duty to Disobey All Unlawful Orders,

http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/MOS303A.html,

See also Michel Chossudovsky, “We the People Refuse to Fight”: Abandon the Battlefield!  March 18, 2006 )

The Commander in Chief is a war criminal. According to Principle 6 of the Nuremberg Charter:

“The fact that a person [e.g. Coalition troops] acted pursuant to order of his Government or of a superior does not relieve him from responsibility under international law, provided a moral choice was in fact possible to him.”

Let us make that “moral choice” possible, to enlisted American, and US-NATO Coalition servicemen and women.

Disobey unlawful orders! Abandon the battlefield! … Refuse to fight in a war which blatantly violates international law.

But this is not a choice which enlisted men and women can make individually.

It is a collective and societal choice, which requires an organizational structure.

Across the land in North America, Western and Eastern Europe and in all NATO coalition countries, the new anti-war movement must assist enlisted men and women to make that moral choice possible, to abandon military service at US military bases around the World, as well as in the battlefield in occupied Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as in Syria and Yemen.

This will not be an easy task. Committees at local levels must be set up across the United States, Canada, Britain, France, Italy, Japan among other countries, which have troops engaged in US led military operations.

We call upon veterans’ associations and local communities to support this process.

US-NATO coalition servicemen and women including senior military officers are victims of internal propaganda. This movement needs to dismantle the internal disinformation campaign. It must effectively reverse the indoctrination of coalition troops, who are led to believe that they are fighting “a just war”: “a war against terrorists”, a war against the Russians, who are threatening the security of America. It must also, as mentioned earlier, “democratize” the command structures.

The legitimacy of the US military authority must be broken.

What has to be achieved:

  • Reveal the criminal nature of this military project,
  • Break once and for all the lies and falsehoods which sustain the “political consensus” in favor of a pre-emptive nuclear war.
  • Undermine war propaganda, reveal the media lies, reverse the tide of disinformation, wage a consistent campaign against the corporate media
  • Break the legitimacy of the war-mongers in high office.
  • Dismantle the US sponsored military adventure and its corporate sponsors.
  • Bring Home the Troops
  • Repeal the illusion that the State is committed to protecting its citizens.
  • Uphold 9/11 Truth. Reveal the falsehoods behind 9/11 which are used to justify the Middle East Central Asian war under the banner of the “Global War on Terrorism” (GWOT)
  • Expose how a profit driven war serves the vested interests of the banks, the defense contractors, the oil giants, the media giants and the biotech conglomerates
  • Challenge the corporate media which deliberately obfuscates the causes and consequences of this war,
  • Reveal and take cognizance of the unspoken and tragic outcome of a war waged with nuclear weapons.
  • Call for the Dismantling of NATO
  • Implement the prosecution of war criminals in high office
  • Close down the weapons assembly plants and implement the foreclosure of major weapons producers
  • Close down all  US military bases in the US and around the World
  • Develop an antiwar movement within the Armed Forces and establish bridges between the Armed Forces and the civilian antiwar movement
  • Forcefully pressure governments of both NATO and non-NATO countries to withdraw from the US led global military agenda.
  • Develop a consistent antiwar movement in Israel. Inform the citizens of Israel of the likely consequences of  a US-NATO-Israeli attack on Iran.
  • Confront the pro-war lobby groups including the pro-Israeli groups in the US
  • Dismantle the homeland security state, call for the repeal of the PATRIOT legislation
  • Call for the removal of the military from civilian law enforcement. In the US, call for the enforcement of the Posse Comitatus Act
  • Call for the demilitarization of outer space and the repeal of Star Wars
  • Call for the freezing of military budgets as well as a reallocation of resources in favor of the civilian economy

People across the land, nationally and internationally, must mobilize against this diabolical military agenda, the authority of the State and its officials must be forcefully challenged.

War can be prevented if people forcefully confront their governments, pressure their elected representatives, organize at the local level in towns, villages and municipalities, spread the word, inform their fellow citizens on the implications of a nuclear war, initiate debate and discussion within the armed forces.

What is required is the development of a broad and well organized grassroots antiwar network which challenges the structures of power and authority, the nature of the economic system, the vast amounts of money used to fund the war, the shear size of the so-called defense industry.

What is required is a mass movement of people which forcefully challenges the legitimacy of war, a global people’s movement which criminalizes war.

What is needed is to break the conspiracy of silence, expose the media lies and distortions, confront the criminal nature of the US Administration and of those governments which support it, its war agenda as well as its so-called “Homeland Security agenda” which has already defined the contours of a police State.

The World is at the crossroads of the most serious crisis in modern history. The US  and its NATO allies have embarked on a military adventure, “a long war”, which threatens the future of humanity.

It is essential to bring the US war project to the forefront of political debate, particularly in North America and Western Europe. Political and military leaders who are opposed to the war must take a firm stance, from within their respective institutions. Citizens must take a stance individually and collectively against war.

We call upon people across the land, in North America,  Western Europe, Israel, The Arab World, Turkey and around the world to rise up against this military project, against their governments which are supportive of US-NATO led wars, against the corporate media which serves to camouflage the devastating impacts of modern warfare.

The military agenda supports a profit driven destructive global economic system which impoverishes large sectors of the world population.

This war is sheer madness.

The Lie must be exposed for what it is and what it does.

  • It sanctions the indiscriminate killing of men, women and children.
  • It destroys families and people. It destroys the commitment of people towards their fellow human beings.
  • It prevents people from expressing their solidarity for those who suffer. It upholds war and the police state as the sole avenue.
  • It destroys both nationalism and internationalism.

Breaking the lie means breaking a criminal project of global destruction, in which the quest for profit is the overriding force.

This profit driven military agenda destroys human values and transforms people into unconscious zombies.

Let us reverse the tide.

Challenge the war criminals in high office and the powerful corporate lobby groups which support them.

Break the American inquisition.

Undermine the US-NATO-Israel military crusade.

Close down the weapons factories and the military bases.

Bring home the troops.

Members of the armed forces should disobey orders and refuse to participate in a criminal war.

[part of this section  was written in 2010]

Source

The Downing of Malaysian Airlines MH17: The Quest for Truth and Justice. Review of the Evidence

The Downing of Malaysian Airlines MH17: The Quest for Truth and Justice. Review of the Evidence

Eight years ago, on 17 July 2014, Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 (MH17) was shot down in Eastern Ukraine.

In recent development, A Netherlands Court on November 17, 2022 found the Kremlin responsible for the alleged attack: two Russians and
a separatist Ukrainian” were identified as “guilty of mass murder for their involvement in the downing of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17”. 

The media has highlighted the downing of MH17 in the context of the war in Ukraine. The Court ruling is fraudulent, based on fabricated evidence. 

***

This background text was prepared in the context of the Kuala Lumpur MH17 Conference entitled MH17: The Quest for Justice, organized by JUST, the PGPF and the CRG in August 2019.  

This comprehensive report provides detailed evidence that Russia was not involved in the downing of MH17.

It also confirms the insidious role of  Ukraine’s intelligence agency. 

****

The underlying objective is to examine the evidence, reveal the truth and uphold the rule of law. 

Today, July 29th 2021, our thoughts are with the families of the victims of the Malaysian Airlines MH17 tragedy.

The 2019 Conference was dedicated to the memory of the victims. 

It is also a national tragedy for the people of Malaysia. The downing of MH17 with 283 passengers and 15 crew on board, took place barely a few months following the mysterious disappearance of Malaysian Airlines flight MH370 after departing on March 8, 2014 from Kuala Lumpur for Beijing, with 227 passengers and 12 crew members on board.

It is worth recalling that immediately after the MH17 plane crash on July 17 2014, prior to the conduct of a preliminary investigation, Secretary of State John Kerry and US Ambassador to the UN Samantha Power pointed their finger at Moscow without a shred of evidence. In turn,  the allegations directed against Russia were used to justify the imposition of sweeping economic sanctions  against the Russian Federation. 

According to President Obama (hours after the tragedy):

“… the downing of MH17 should be “a wake-up call” to Europe to get serious about confronting Russia over Ukraine after EU leaders have proved reluctant to impose tought sanctions.” (Telegraph, July 18,2019)

The Wall Street Journal reports (July 18, 2014) that “Obama is getting his wish and Brussels is now weighing new sanctions”:

European governments, jolted by the downing of a passenger plane over eastern Ukraine that killed nearly 300 people, are contemplating a major expansion of sanctions on Russia as early as next week.

European Union leaders decided in recent days to expand the penalties to a broad new category of people and companies. But the apparent shooting down of a plane carrying more than 200 EU citizens has intensified a desire to act quickly and forcefully, including sanctions against oligarchs with ties to the Kremlin.

In Brussels, some diplomats described the incident as a game-changer. “It would have major consequences if it was certain it came from the rebels— major consequences,” said one official. (WSJ, July 18, 2014)

On July 22, 2014, The European Union decided to expand its sanctions blacklist against Moscow including Vladimir Putin’s inner circle.

EU foreign ministers decided to “draw up further broad measures including an arms embargo and financial restrictions on Russian businesses, … following the downing of Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17.” (Guardian, July 22, 2019)

Michel Chossudovsky, August 2019, updated July 17, 2020, July 16, 2022


DATE : 17th AUGUST 2019 (SATURDAY)
Time: 7:30am-6:00pm
Venue: Main Auditorium, International Islamic University Malaysia (IIUM), Kuala Lumpur


According to the official narrative, Malaysian Airlines MH 17 was downed by a BUK anti-aircraft missile by “pro-Russian separatists” with the support of Moscow.

The MH17 Inquiry has been conducted in an insidious fashion, largely responding to political interests.  

Important pieces of evidence including eye witness reports, audio and video material  transmitted through Ukraine Intelligence (SBU) have either been manipulated or excluded from the Dutch inquiry, which largely endorses Washington’s accusations directed against Moscow.

According to Prime Minister Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad  in a statement at the Prime Minister’s office in May 2019:

“They never allowed us to be involved from the very beginning.  This is unfair and unusual. So we can see they are not really looking at the causes of the crash and who was responsible. But already they have decided it must be Russia. So we cannot accept that kind of attitude. We are interested in the rule of law, in justice for everyone irrespective of who is involved.

“They [the West] are accusing Russia but where is the evidence?  

Screenshot Travel Weekly, July 18,2019

The Dutch investigation

Moscow was accused without evidence of being behind the downing of MH17 from the very outset. Both Kiev and Washington concluded prior to the conduct of an investigation that:

“MH17 had likely been brought down by a ground-to-air missile fired from separatist-controlled territory in eastern Ukraine.”

There are three distinct reports:

The first official report on behalf of the Ukrainian government was released by Ukraine’s SBU secret service on August 7 2014, barely three weeks after the MH 17 tragedy (July 17, 2014).

The SBU report (which is discussed later in more detail) accuses pro-Russian rebels of having downed the plane with Moscow’s support.

The Dutch Safety Board Report released in September 2015 largely endorses the BUK missile narrative.

And, a year later in September 2016,  The Dutch Joint investigation Team (JIT)  as part of a criminal investigation “confirmed” that the Malaysian airlines plane was “hit by a Russian-made BUK surface-to-air missile that was brought into Ukraine from Russia before the shootdown and subsequently taken back across the border.”

The assumption prior to the conduct of the DSB investigation was that a BUK missile had brought down MH17, and Russia was behind it.

Concrete evidence supporting other interpretations (including  on site testimonies and the presence of a second aircraft) was casually dismissed by the DSB:

Dutch Safety Board, September 2015 report  (p 9)

The inquiry became increasingly politicized.

President Barack Obama had called up Malaysia’s (former) Prime Minister Najib Razak. At a press conference (July 18, 2014),  “Najib told the press that he had spoken to the Dutch prime minister and the Ukrainian president; In subsequent developments, Prime Minister Najib Razak tacitly accepted the consensus imposed by Washington prior to the conduct of an investigation.

 ‘Obama and I agreed that the investigation will not be hidden and the international teams have to be given access to the crash scene.’

In August 2016, Ukraine president Poroshenko visited Malaysia for discussions with Prime Minister Razak Najib:

Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak said Malaysia will work with Ukraine to bring the perpetrators to justice. “We will do whatever we can to find the truth for the sake of families who lost their loved ones in this tragic incident. “We are waiting for the criminal investigation report, which is expected to be tabled by the year-end, followed by a meeting to decide on the next course of action,” said Najib. (New Straits Times, August 4, 2016)

Washington’s agenda in liaison with the Kiev regime was to blame Russia. This agenda was never questioned by the Najib government.

Erasing the Initial Evidence

Much of the initial evidence and testimony including eyewitness reports (from various independent sources), recorded in July-August 2014 (in the immediate wake of the event) contradicts the official version. This body of evidence has been dismissed and in some cases destroyed.

In September 2015, in its final report, the Dutch Safety Board presented its findings regarding the Buk TELAR surface-to-air missile system which allegedly shot down MH-17 over eastern Ukraine on July 17, 2014.

Flash forward to 2018

On 24 May 2018 the Joint Investigation Team (JIT) published an update of its findings pointing (without firm evidence) to the role of the 53 Anti-Missile Brigade of the Russian Army. In May 2018, they launched an appeal for people in Donesk to come forward to corroborate their “findings” re. the deployment of the BUK missile system:

On the following day, the governments of Australia and the Netherlands officially declared that “they hold Russia responsible for the incident”. (see Polygraph Info, May 25, 2018)

Moscow remains the “main suspect” in this politically twisted investigation, which has now led to a legal procedure in the Netherlands directed against the alleged perpetrators.

On June 19, 2019, the International Joint Investigation Team (JIT) announced (video) that international arrest warrants have been issued against four “separatist commanders” of the Donetsk People’s Republic (DNR). These warrants concern Ukrainian citizen Leonid Kharchenko, and Russian citizens Sergei Dubinsky, Oleg Pulatov, and Igor Girkin.

Moreover, Britain’s Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt announced in mid-July 2019 that “the UK will provide financial support to the specialist criminal court in the Hague” which is slated to host the trial of the four suspects.

In this report we will first focus on the Timeline as well as selected evidence which has been suppressed including the presence of a second aircraft.

We will then review the official report of the Kiev government prepared by Ukraine’s intelligence service (SBU) as well as the role of the SBU in feeding “evidence” to the Dutch Safety Board (DSB) and the Joint Investigation Team (JIT)

Timeline

July 15, 2014. Two Days Before the Tragic Event

A division of Buk missile systems of the Ukrainian Armed Forces was, according to Pravda, deployed to the Donetsk Oblast on July 15, two days before the downing of the Malaysian airlines MH17 flight. The Buk missile system has the capabilities of downing an aircraft flying at 35,000 feet.

Russian Defense sources confirmed the presence of several Ukraine missile batteries in the Donesk oblast operated by the Ukraine armed forces:

‘The Ukrainian military has several batteries of Buk surface-to-air missile systems with at least 27 launchers, capable of bringing down high-flying jets, in the Donetsk region where the Malaysian passenger plane crashed, Russian Defense Ministry said”(RT, July 17, 2014)

The Prosecutor General of Ukraine Vitaliy Yarema confirmed that the Donesk rebels did not have [Ukrainian] Buk or S 300 ground to air missiles which could have downed the plane, which suggests that the missiles of the Ukraine armed forces had been deployed but they were not in the possession of the rebels, a premise which remains central to the US-Kiev official version that the rebels, supported by Moscow, were responsible for attacking Malaysian Airlines MH17.

According to the Kiev Post report: “Ukrainian prosecutor general says militants did not seize Ukrainian air defense launchers”:

“Members of illegal armed units have not seized air defense launchers of the Ukrainian Armed Forces in Donetsk, Ukrainian Prosecutor General Vitaliy Yarema said.” (Kiev Post, July 19, 2014)

According to Russia’s Itar-Tass report (July 2014)

“After the passenger airliner was downed, the military reported to the president that terrorists do not have our air defense missile systems Buk and S-300,” the general prosecutor [of Ukraine] said. “These weapons were not seized,” he added.

Ukrainian Interior Minister Anton Gerashchenko said on July 17 that the Malaysia Airlines Boeing 777 airliner had been downed by an air defense missile system Buk.

From both Russian and Ukrainian sources there was evidence of Ukrainian BUK missiles deployed in Eastern Ukraine and official statements that the Donesk rebel forces had no access to the Ukraine Buk air missiles. The Kiev Post report did not (in this July 19 report) mention the presence of Russia BUK missiles in Donetsk oblast.

July 17, 2014. Day of the MH17 Tragedy 

The Boeing-777 of the Malaysian Airlines flight MH17 from Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur “disappeared from the radars and crashed on Thursday evening July 17 near Grabovo in Ukraine’s Donetsk oblast.

The Flight Path of MH17 Was Changed?  July 17 Plane Route was over the Ukraine War-zone

The maps below clearly indicate a change in flight path for Malaysian airlines MH17 on July 17. They also indicate on the map the two regions of Ukraine which are part of the warzone, namely Donetsk and Lugansk.

The first dynamic map compares the two flight paths:

It indicates the regular flight path on July 16th which takes the plane in a Southeasterly direction across the Sea of Azov.

The second flight path which is that of July 17th takes the plane over the Donesk oblast warzone, bordering onto Lugansk oblast.

The four static images  indicate screen shots of the Flight Paths of MH17 for July 14-17, 2014

The information conveyed in these maps suggests that the flight path on July 17 was changed.

MH17 was diverted from the normal South Easterly route over the sea of Azov to a path over the Donetsk oblast.

Who was behind the change of  the flight path? And why was the flight path changed?

CLICK IMAGES TO ENLARGE

Changing MH17 Route From July 14, 2014 to July 17, 2014

IngoGraph

Screenshots of Flight Paths of MH17 for July 14-17, 2014

14th July Route15th July Route  16th July Route17th July Route

 The Presence of a Second Aircraft

The presence of another aircraft is corroborated by the Russian Ministry of Defense which pointed to the presence of a Ukrainian Su-25 jet in the flight corridor of the MH17, within proximity of the plane.

While Russian official sources may be considered unreliable and politically inclined, the presence of a second aircraft was also confirmed by numerous witnesses in Donesk oblast as well as by a BBC  report conducted at the crash site on July 23.

“eyewitnesses in the Donetsk region saw Ukrainian warplanes near the passenger jet. They say they heard sounds of powerful blasts and saw a Ukraine warplane shortly before the crash. (ITAR Tass)

The presence of a second aircraft was also confirmed by air traffic controller Luis Lopez reporting in real time (on his twitter) from the Borisopol airport. This source is controversial and cannot be corroborated.  His twitter account was closed down. He was reported to have left Ukraine. He gave a couple of interviews and then disappeared. Was his life threatened?

Suppressed BBC Report

All the eyewitnesses  interviewed by the BBC confirmed the presence of a Ukrainian military aircraft flying within proximity of Malaysian Airlines MH17 at the time that it was shot down:

Eyewitness #1: There were two explosions in the air. And this is how it broke apart. And [the fragments] blew apart like this, to the sides. And when …

Eyewitness #2: … And there was another aircraft, a military one, beside it. Everybody saw it.

Eyewitness #1: Yes, yes. It [second aircraft] was flying under it, because it could be seen. It was proceeding underneath, below the civilian one.

Eyewitness #3: There were sounds of an explosion. But they were in the sky. They came from the sky. Then this plane [second plane] made a sharp turn-around like this. It changed its trajectory and headed in that direction [indicating the direction with her hands].

BBC Report below (removed by BBC) scroll down for alternative youtube version

The original BBC Video Report published by BBC Russian Service on July 23, 2014 was removed by the BBC.

In a bitter irony, The BBC is suppressing its own news productions.

This is the BBC Report which is still available on Youtube  

BELOW SCREENSHOT OF BBC TV REPORT ENTITLED “AND THERE WAS ANOTHER AIRCRAFT” SUPPRESSED BY THE BBC

It had been blocked [March 8, 2016] once more by the BBC. The BBC censors its own reports.

Several other reports and eyewitness testimonies confirm the presence of a second aircraft. Of significance is a December 2014 report by Komsomolskaya Pravda which conducted an interview with a Ukrainian serviceman.

While the substance of the interview (translated from Russian) is contradictory it nonetheless suggests the presence of a second aircraft as confirmed by the suppressed BBC report.

The BBC Refutes and Confirms its Own Lies

It is worth noting that subsequent BBC reports tend to refute the substance of their first onsite investigation in Donesk Oblast with the exception of  a May 2016 BBC documentary which puts forth “several theories”. The documentary puts forth evidence which initially refutes the official story while also intimating and concluding that Russia might have been behind the MH17 tragedy.

The official investigation report into MH17 flight argues that only a powerful ground-to-air missile could be responsible. Yet, there are eyewitness accounts of other aircrafts seen flying next to MH17 close to impact. To further fuel the conspiracies, Russia and Ukraine blame each other but both countries are unable to provide all the critical radar data from that day.  ( See BBC notice here),

According to Australia News in a review of the May 2016 BBC documentary, the Kiev regime is identified as the culprit:

A CONTROVERSIAL new documentary will investigate claims that Malaysia Airlines flight MH17 was shot down by a Ukraine fighter jet, instead of a Russian missile.In a new BBC documentary titled ‘The Conspiracy Files: Who Shot Down MH17?’, eyewitnesses will share their accounts of how they saw the aircraft being downed by a nearby fighter jet.

“There are eyewitness accounts of other aircraft seen flying next to MH17 close to impact,” a statement from the BBC said.

Link to the May 2016 BBC Documentary 

Bullet Sized Holes

According to the report of German pilot and airlines expert Peter Haisenko, the MH17 Boeing 777 was not brought down by a missile.

What he observed from the available photos were perforations of the cockpit:

 The facts speak clear and loud and are beyond the realm of speculation: The cockpit shows traces of shelling! You can see the entry and exit holes. The edge of a portion of the holes is bent inwards. These are the smaller holes, round and clean, showing the entry points most likely that of a 30 millimeter caliber projectile. (Revelations of German Pilot: Shocking Analysis of the “Shooting Down” of Malaysian MH17. “Aircraft Was Not Hit by a Missile”Global Research, July 30, 2014)

[click image right to enlarge]

Based on detailed analysis Peter Haisenko reached  the conclusion that the MH17 was not downed by a missile attack:

This aircraft was not hit by a missile in the central portion. The destruction is limited to the cockpit area. Now you have to factor in that this part is constructed of specially reinforced material

Peter Haisenko’s study is consistent with the BBC  report conducted at the crash site on July 23. (which was subsequently suppressed by the BBC).

The OSCE Mission

It is worth noting that the initial statements by OSCE observers (July 31) broadly confirm the findings of Peter Haisenko:

Monitors from the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe reported that shrapnel-like holes were found in two separate pieces of the fuselage of the ill-fated Malaysia Airlines aircraft that was believed to have been downed by a missile in eastern Ukraine.

Michael Bociurkiw of the OSCE group of monitors at his daily briefing described part of the plane’s fuselage dotted with “shrapnel-like, almost machine gun-like holes.” He said the damage was inspected by Malaysian aviation-security officials .(Wall Street Journal, July 31, 2014)

The monitoring OSCE team has not found evidence of a missile fired from the ground as conveyed by official White House statements. As we recall, the US ambassador to the UN Samantha Power stated –pointing a finger at Russia– that the Malaysian MH17 plane was “likely downed by a surface-to-air missile operated from a separatist-held location”:

The team of international investigators with the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) are uncertain if the missile used was fired from the ground as US military experts have previously suggested, the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) reported. (Malay Mail online, emphasis added)

The initial OSCE findings dispelled the claim that a BUK missile system brought down the plane.

Evidently, inasmuch as the perforations are attributable to shelling, a shelling operation conducted from the ground could not have brought down an aircraft traveling above 30,000 feet.

No firm evidence that a BUK missile had actually been fired on July 17th 2014

Expert analysis confirms that the firing of a BUK missile would have left a visible white vapor trail in the sky for about ten minutes after firing (see below).

According to witnesses in Donesk oblast, no vapor trail was seen in the sky on that day. What they saw was a second plane.

There were various images of smoke trails presented and analyzed. (see the BBC documentary). These pictures however do not correspond to a clearcut white vapor trail associated with the launching of a BUK missile.

There were no satellite images or photographic evidence of a vapor trail.

The following images (from BUK missile tests) indicate the nature of the vapor trail.

   Screenshots of RT documentary, October 22, 2019 

Report of the Russian Union of Engineers (RUE)

A detailed and comprehensive report by the Russian Union of Engineers (English translation) largely corroborates the presence of a Second Aircraft (confirmed by eye witnesses, BBC interviews).

“… Russian air traffic control recorded the ascent of a Ukrainian Air Force aircraft, presumably an Su-25, in the direction of the Malaysian Boeing 777. The distance between the SU-25 aircraft from the Boeing 777 was between 3 and 5 km.”

The RUE report also corroborates the “bullet hole” analysis as well as the statements of the OSCE and Peter Haisenko (mentioned above):

A detailed analysis of its fragments can provide a more complete picture of the causes of the crash. … you can see the different forms of damage to its shell or skin – tears and factures, holes with folds on the outer and the inner sides of the fuselage, tell- tale signs of a powerful external impact on the plane.

Of particular note are the holes folded inward in the fuselage. They are round- bored, and usually grouped. Such holes can only be formed by metal objects with a circular cross-section, possibly rods or shells from an aircraft gun. The question arises: who could deliver such projectiles to the aircraft, by what means, and what might they look like?

The report also focusses on the absence of photographic evidence of a visible vapor trail of a BUK missile.
In this case there has been no evidence of a trail of white condensation which would be by-product of the consumption of rocket fuel which would appear and persist for some minutes after the launch and be visible to those standing in a radius of within 10 km from the missile launch-site. (RUE report, p. 7)
It concludes after careful investigation that the MH17 Boeing 777 was “not brought down by the means of anti-aircraft missile fire from a BUK-M1 installation.”

According to the Russian Union of Engineers: the MH17 Boeing 777  “flying a horizontal course at 10000 metres could quite feasibly find itself within range of the Rocket / Cannon armament of a fighter, either a MIG-29 or an SU-25.” 

Thus, according to the analysts from the Russian Union of Engineers, we have the complete destruction of the Boeing 777 as [a result of] missile systems using “air-to-air” close-combat missiles as well as a 30-mm aircraft cannon or an SPPU-22 container with GSh-23L 23-mm dual-barrel guns. At the same time, when firing on a target, a laser range finder can be used, or a laser sight, that allows for significantly improved accuracy. This is indicated by the pattern of damage and the dispersal of the fragments: there are round holes, which are typically produced as a result of gun shots, and discontinuous holes characteristic of flechette rockets. (RUE report, page 12)

Media Spin: Shrapnel, Bullet Holes, “High Energy Objects” 

 The media has reported that a BUK surface to air missile was indeed fired and exploded before reaching its target.

According to the official explanation (DSB), it was not the missile that brought down the plane, it was the shrapnel resulting from the missile explosion (prior to reaching the plane) which punctured the plane and then led to a loss of pressure.

This is largely the position of the Dutch Safety Board which explains the holes as a result of the explosion of the missile. This is analysis is tenuous. A shelling operation from a jet fighter was simply not considered by the DSB.

The holes according to the DSB report were the result of so-called “high energy objects coming from the warhead [Buk missile]” (i.e shrapnel from the missile). This assessment was used to dispel the evidence concerning the second aircraft.

According to a BBC report (September 9, 2014) “Cockpit window contained numerous small puncture holes suggesting small objects entered from above level of cockpit floor. Damage to forward section indicates plane penetrated by large number of high energy objects from outside”. 

The holes from outside were presented as the result of the explosion of the missile, according to the DSB (13 October 2015)

At 13.20 UTC (Coordinated Universal Time) a 9N314M warhead, launched by a Buk surface-to-air missile system from a 320-square-kilometre area in the eastern part of Ukraine, detonated to the left and above the cockpit. The forward section of the aircraft was penetrated by hundreds of high-energy objects coming from the warhead.  

The statement of the OSCE observer Michael Bociurkiw is not acknowledged by the Dutch Safety Board and JIT reports.

According to Ukraine’s National Security and Defence Council spokesman Andriy Lysenko 

“… international investigators believed data from the flight recorders show “the reason for the destruction and crash of the plane was massive explosive decompression arising from multiple shrapnel perforations from a rocket explosion”.

Surface-to-air missiles such as the Buk system widely believed to have shot the passenger jet down can explode near their targets, blasting a cloud of shrapnel into them.”

In a report, the BBC quoting the official Ukraine statement  says that:

” The downed Malaysia Airlines jet in eastern Ukraine suffered an explosive loss of pressure after it was punctured by shrapnel from a missile…. They say the information came from the plane’s flight data recorders, which are being analysed by British experts.”

“Machine Gun Like Holes” Caused by a Second Aircraft or a BUK Missile?

The shrapnel marks should be distinguished from the small entry and exit holes “most likely that of a 30 millimeter caliber projectile” fired from a military aircraft.  According to the findings of Peter Haisenko:

If we now consider the armament of a typical SU 25 we learn this: It is equipped with a double-barreled 30-mm gun, type GSh-302 / AO-17A, equipped with: a 250 round magazine of anti-tank incendiary shells and splinter-explosive shells (dum-dum), arranged in alternating order. The cockpit of the MH 017 has evidently been fired at from both sides: the entry and exit holes are found on the same fragment of it’s cockpit segment

Our review of the evidence points to

  1. the presence of a second aircraft,
  2. “bullet like holes” pointing to the possibility of an attack by a second aircraft
  3. No firm evidence of a BUK missile attack directed against MH17.
  4. Absence of photographic evidence of a vapor trail from a BUK style missile on July 17, 2014

Of significance, Ukraine’s Secret Service (SBU) was given the mandate by the Ukraine authorities of coordinating and gathering the evidence in Eastern Ukraine as well as transmitting it to the Dutch Safety Board and the JIT.

According to the official SBU report entitled Terrorists and Militants planned cynical terrorist attack at Aeroflot civil aircraft  published on August 7, 2014, the SBU accused Russia of having ordered a false flag attack involving the shooting down of its own Aeroflot plane leading to the death of its own citizens, and then blaming it on Kiev, with Russia using the tragedy as a casus belli pretext to invade Ukraine. According to the report: The Donetsk militia were aiming at a Russian Aeroflot passenger plane and shot down the Malaysian MH17 airliner by mistake.

That’s the official Ukraine government story which was acknowledged by the Ukrainian as well as several Western media. See below.

Kiev Post August 7, 2014

According to Britain’s foremost news tabloid, The Mail on Sunday, quoting the head of Ukraine intelligence, the insidious design of the pro-Russian rebels (allegedly supported by Moscow) was to shoot down a Russian commercial airline plane with tourists en route to Cyprus, with a view to blaming the Ukrainian government. The objective of this alleged “false flag” covert op was to create a justifiable and credible pretext for Vladimir Putin to declare war on Ukraine.

In an utterly twisted logic, according to Ukraine’s head of intelligence:

“the [Donesk] rebels were meant to down [the] Aeroflot plane… to justify the invasion [of Ukraine by Russia]”,

Valentyn Nalyvaichenko (right), head of Ukraine intelligence (24 February 2014 – 18 June 2015)  that the pro-Russian rebels were “aiming at a Russian passenger plane “so Putin had reason to invade”.

“the crime was planned as a ground for bringing of Russian troops into Ukraine, that is – CASUS BELLI for the Russian military invasion.” (Official statement of Ukraine Security Service, in annex below)

In a bitter irony, according to the report, the alleged “false flag” covert op got muddled. The Donesk rebels got it all wrong and hit the MH17 plane by mistake.

That’s the “official line” which was made public by the Kiev government on August 7, 2014, 3 weeks after the MH17 tragedy.

The former head of Ukraine’s secret service has claimed rebels intended to down a Russian airliner to give Vladimir Putin a pretext for invasion – but blasted Flight MH17 out of the sky by mistake.

Why on earth would pro-Russian rebels who are at war with the Kiev regime shoot down a Russian passenger plane AFL-2074 allegedly with a view to harnessing Russia’s support? It does not make sense.

What’s more, according to SBU Chief Valentyn Nalyvaichenko’s  statement, Moscow was helping the pro-Russian rebels in their alleged false flag op to shoot down Russia’s Aeroflot plane by providing them with a Buk missile system, which allegedly had been discretely smuggled across the border to the Donesk region of Eastern Ukraine. The Aeroflot plane was slated to be “shot down over territory controlled by Ukrainian government troops” with the support of Russia:

Valentyn Nalyvaichenko said that Russian-backed fighters were supposed to take their BUK rocket launcher – which had been transported across the Russian border – to a village called Pervomaiskoe in Ukrainian-held territory west of Donetsk.

But they “screwed up”. The Buk rocket launcher was apparently positioned in the wrong rural location and because of that it targeted the MH17 by mistake:

Instead, they mistakenly positioned it in a rebel-controlled village of the same name to the east of the city.

Got it wrong? Valentyn Nalyvaichenko claims pro-Russian rebels targeted the wrong civilian airliner

If they had gone where they had been ordered, he said, they would have hit an Aeroflot flight carrying civilians travelling from Moscow to Larnaca in Cyprus.

Crucially, the crash site would have been in Ukrainian-held territory. (Mail on Sunday, August 9, 2014)

The August 2014 “intelligence” report released by SBU Chief Nalyvaichenko bordered on ridicule and incompetence to say to the least.

(Since its release in August 2014, the link to the original SBU report is no longer available. The text of the SBU report (press release) is published in annex to this article.

Who is Valentyn Nalyvaichenko. His role in the MH17 investigation

Valentyn Nalyvaichenko commissioned the SBU report on behalf of the Kiev government in July 2014 in coordination with The National Security and National Defense Committee (RNBOU) of which the Secretary General was Andriy Parubiy (February 27, 2014 — August 7, 2014), followed by the appointment of Oleksandr Turchynov (December 16, 2014 — 19 May 2019)

The RNBOU oversees National Security and Intelligence (SBU), the Ministry of Defense, the Armed Forces, Law Enforcement.

Parubiy who became president (chair) of the Ukrainian Parliament is the co-founder of the Neo-Nazi  Social-National Party of Ukraine (subsequently renamed Svoboda). He has been routinely received with red carpet treatment in Canada, the US and the European Union.

Both  Nalyvaichenko and Parubiy are followers of Ukrainian Nazi leader Stepan Bandera, who collaborated in the mass murderer of Jews, Russians and Poles during World War II. (For more details on Parubiy click here)

Can we trust the SBU? 

Following the MH17 tragedy, the head of Ukraine’s SBU was entrusted with the gathering and feeding of evidence to the Dutch inquiries. In fact most of the information and analysis (including recordings of telephone conversations, video, audio material) transmitted to the JIT emanated from the SBU.

Is the information and evidence transmitted by the SBU reliable?

An indepth forensic analysis conducted by  OG IT Forensic Service led by Akash Rosen points to the manipulation of telephone conversations, video and audio material by the SBU. The OG IT report confirms unequivocally that the “evidence” submitted by Ukraine’s SBU to the JIT has been manipulated.

Akash Rosen was interviewed in the MH17 documentary entitled MH17 Call for Justice, directed by Yana Yerloshova, which sheds light on the deceptive role of Ukraine’s Secret Service.

Fraud and Corruption within the SBU. The Neo-Nazi connection

While the media has remained silent on the matter, the insidious and corrupt role of the SBU has nonetheless been acknowledged. A December 2015 report in the Irish Times suggests that:

The Dutch government has been warned that the criminal case against those who shot down Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17 could be undermined because the Ukrainian security service, the SBU, which has provided key evidence, is widely regarded as institutionally corrupt.

Both justice minister Ard van der Steur and the Dutch public prosecutor’s office are coming under increasing pressure to make statements about the integrity of the evidence gathered by the SBU following a string of scandals, including the sacking of its boss, Valentyn Nalyvaichenko.

The SBU has played a crucial role in two elements of the MH17 investigation. It has handed over phone conversations between pro-Russian rebels intercepted shortly before the jet, …  It was also responsible for securing the main elements of the Boeing 777’s shattered fuselage in the hours after it crashed in the Donetsk region of eastern Ukraine, spreading debris over 50 sq km.

“Institutionally corrupt” is an understatement. The former head of the SBU is an avowed Nazi. Ukraine’s intelligence service not to mention the National Guard and elements within the military in 2014-2015 were largely under the control of the two neo-Nazi parties: Svoboda and Right Sector.

The SBU was also in permanent liaison with Western intelligence including the CIA and MI6.

The head of Ukraine intelligence Valentyn Nalyvaichenko appointed by the Kiev regime worked in tandem with the Neo-Nazi Right Sector leader Dmitro Yarosh who in turn played a key role in setting up the Azov Battalion (see image right), a National Guard entity integrated by Neo-Nazis, operating in Eastern Ukraine in so-called “anti-terrorist” operations. Dmitro Yaroch, who became member of parliament was appointed advisor to the Chief of general staff of the Ukrainian army.

Eduard Dolinsky, director of the Ukrainian Jewish Committee, “made the accusation on Facebook against Valentyn Nalyvaichenko, head of the Security Service of Ukraine (see the news website evreiskiy.kiev.ua reportafter Nalyvaichenko said his organization [the SBU] needed to base its work on the Ukrainian Insurgent Army, or UPA, which murdered thousands of Jews in the ’40s. The UPA under the leadership of Stepan Bandera collaborated with the Third Reich during World War II”( quoted in The Times of Israel 15 April 2015)

In an [April 2015] interview with the local media … Nalyvaichenko said the Security Service “does not need to invent anything new, it is important to build on the traditions of the [Nazi] Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists and UPA in the 1930-1950 years.”

The popularity of UPA, which for a time collaborated with the Nazi occupation to further UPA’s ambitions of sovereignty from Russia, has soared in Ukraine since a 2013 revolution that led to armed conflict with pro-Russian militias in Ukraine’s east.

Earlier this month [April 2015], the Ukrainian Parliament passed a bill that opened the door to state recognition of UPA, previously a taboo because of the widespread war crimes committed by its troops. The Times of Israel (15 April 2015)

Those war crimes have not ceased. The Atlantic Council, (June 18, 2015) a Washington Think Tank with close links to both the Pentagon and the US State Department acknowledged that the Right Sector had permeated Ukraine’s military intelligence apparatus:

Poroshenko Bloc MP Serhiy Leshchenko released a document confirming old rumors that Right Sector’s Dmitro Yarosh [Neo-Nazi leader] worked for Nalyvaichenko when he was a member of parliament from 2012 to 2014. While the connection between the two raises some questions about the events of Euromaidan and the origins of Right Sector, this attack alone wasn’t enough to discredit Nalyvychenko. Yarosh is now a member of parliament and an advisor to the chief of general staff of the Ukrainian army. In other words, Yarosh has been legitimized by the political establishment. . . .

Details of the SBU Report

While the SBU report focussing on an alleged false flag was casually acknowledged by the Western media, Washington remained silent on the matter. Nobody in the US intelligence community acknowledged or corroborated the statement of their Ukrainian counterparts.

Moreover, while the SBU was feeding “evidence” to the Dutch inquiries, the SBU report (August 7, 2014) was not acknowledged or mentioned in the reports of the Dutch Safety Board and the JIT.

As we recall, immediately after the MH17 plane crash on July 17 2014, Secretary of State John Kerry and US Ambassador to the UN Samantha Power pointed their finger at Moscow without a shred of evidence. In the wake of this official and “authoritative” SBU August 7 2014 announcement by the Kiev regime, Obama, Kerry, Samantha Power et al, chose to remain mum.  The Ukraine Secret Service’s official statement concerning the crash of Malaysian airlines MH17 was so outlandish. It simply did not fit the usual mold of media disinformation.

In a new and rather unusual twist, however,  according to the Kiev regime, the Donetsk militia did not intend to shoot down Malaysian airlines MH17.

What the “pro-Russian rebels” (according to the SBU report) were aiming at was a Russian Aeroflot passenger plane. The MH17 was shot down “by mistake” according to an official statement by the head of Ukraine’s Secret Service, Valentyn Nalyvaichenko (Ukraine News Service, August 7, 2014).

According to SBU Chief Nalyvaichenko:

“Ukraine’s law enforcement and intelligence agencies have established during the investigation into a terrorist attack on the Boeing… that on that day, July 17, and at that time military mercenaries and terrorists from the Russian Federation planned to carry out a terrorist attack against a passenger aircraft of Aeroflot en route from Moscow to Larnaca… as a pretext for the further invasion by Russia,”

“This cynical terrorist attack was planned for the day when the [Malaysia Airlines] plane happened to fly by, planned by war criminals as a pretext for the further military invasion by the Russian Federation, that is, there would be a casus belli,” he added.

Thus, according Nalyvaichenko, the terrorists downed the Malaysian airliner by mistake.” (Ukraine Interfax News, August 8, 2014)

According to the Daily Mail (August 9, 2014):

The head of Ukraine’s secret service has claimed rebels intended to down a Russian airliner to give Vladimir Putin a pretext for invasion – but blasted Flight MH17 out of the sky by mistake.

Nalyvaichenko said that the Kiev government reached this conclusion “in the course of its own investigation into the downing of MH17”.

“Had the terrorists succeeded in downing the Aeroflot jet, it would have created the needed casus belli for Russia to invade Ukraine from its East to its West” according to Nalyvaichenko (see Tweet above, see also Transcript of August 7, 2014 SBU document in Annex)

While Nalyvaichenko was dismissed by Poroshenko from the SBU in June 2015, much of the “evidence” of MH!7 had been gathered and processed during his mandate.  There was no visible shift in direction of the SBU following his dismissal. Nalyvaichenko’s Deputy Vasyl Hrytsak was appointed head of SBU (July 2015- May 2019)

The so-called “pro-Russian rebels” had allegedly planned an Operation Northwoods type “false flag” with utmost proficiency. The covert op allegedly consisted in downing a Russian passenger plane with Moscow’s support. The alleged objective was for Moscow to place the blame on the government of Ukraine for having ordered the downing of the Aeroflot plane (resulting in the deaths of Russian tourists), thereby creating a “useful wave of indignation” across the Russian Federation.

The  alleged “false flag” slated to be implemented by the Donetsk “terrorists and mercenaries” would then, according to the scenario depicted by Ukraine’s Chief Spy, spearhead public support for a Russian invasion of Ukraine, with patriotic Russian troops coming to the rescue of the “pro-Russian separatists”:

The mass killing of Russian tourists could then have been blamed on the Ukrainian army, giving Moscow a justification for invasion, said Mr Nalyvaichenko, head of the Ukrainian intelligence service, the SBU. (Daily Mail, August 9, 2014)

The official SBU report states that the:

“The Russian side would need a compelling argument for such a step, for example accusation of the Ukrainian government in mass murder of the Russian citizens [on the plane]” (See complete SBU statement in Annex below).

According to the head of Ukraine’s Secret Service: “It is incredibly cynical that the act of terrorism was planned [by the rebels] against peaceful innocent Russian citizens who were on the way to their holidays with children”:

‘This cynical terrorist act was intended to justify an immediate military invasion by the Russian Federation,’ he said.

Aeroflot flight AFL2074 was close to Malaysia Airlines flight MH17 when it was blown out of the sky on July 17, killing all 298 on board, he said.

… He claimed this was a significant conclusion of Kiev’s probe into MH17’s downing. (Daily Mail, August 8, 2019)

A Russian invasion plan had allegedly been scheduled –according to the official SBU report– to commence on July 18, on the day following the planned downing of Aeroflot flight 2074. But when the MH17 flight was downed by mistake, the Russian invasion plan scheduled for July 18, according to the Kiev scenario, was cancelled.

This whole scenario was fabricated. There were no indications or evidence that Russia was preparing to invade Ukraine on July 18th, 2014.

Mainstream Media Response to Kiev Regime’s Accusations

Normally, the Western media would provide ample coverage and commentary to an official Kiev statement pertaining to MH17 accusing Russia. It’s part of the MSM routine of “Russia bashing” and demonizing president Vladimir Putin.

With the exception of Ukraine News Service and London’s Daily Mail, however, the official statement of the head of Ukraine’s Secret Service went largely unnoticed. Normally, a declaration of this nature would be picked up by the wire services with syndicated reports flooding the front page of the Western news chain.

 Screenshot Daily Mail on Sunday, August 09, 2014

Was the mainstream media instructed to temporarily “put a hold” on reporting the “revelations” of  Ukraine’s Secret Service.

The Kiev regime’s allegations are far-fetched to say the least: the Donesk rebels –largely involved in combat operations– had neither the capabilities nor the desire to undertake a complex intelligence operation of this nature. What purpose would it serve? Cui Bono?

Does Russia require a fake humanitarian pretext to intervene when several thousand civilians in the Donbass region had been killed by the Azov Battalion (image right, flag with Nazi SS symbol) and Ukrainian Armed Forces, not to mention the Odessa massacre perpetrated by the Kiev regime’s Neo-Nazi national guard.

Ironically, barely four days after being accused by Kiev of planning to invade Ukraine, Russia’s President Putin agreed with European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso that Moscow would not only collaborate with the Red Cross on channeling humanitarian aid to Eastern Ukraine through Russian territory, but that the agreement reached with the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), had the support of the Kiev government.

It is worth noting that neither the Russian government nor the Russian media have commented extensively on (or responded to) the accusations directed against Moscow contained in Ukraine’s dodgy Secret Service’s MH17 report.

Dodgy Ukraine MH17 Intelligence Report: Kiev’s Western “Allies”

Was Washington consulted before the release of the dodgy SBU False Flag report?

Did Washington give them the “Green Light” to release the SBU report as a means of “Framing Russia”? Or did the White House or the State Department decide that the SBU’s “fake intelligence” was visibly flawed and could not effectively be used for propaganda purposes against Russia?

Were the CIA and MI6 consulted? Britain’s Secret Service MI6 subsequently had access to the plane’s black box, which was handed over by a Malaysian official to the Dutch task force and which in turn was entrusted to an unnamed partner entity in the UK.

Concluding Remarks

The Day After

According to the SBU in its August 7, 2014 official report on behalf of the Ukraine government, the Kremlin’s planned “false flag” to bring down a commercial Aeroflot flight en route to Cyprus and blame the tragedy on the Kiev regime, was to be used to justify the launching of a major war against Ukraine.

the crime was planned as a ground for bringing of Russian troops into Ukraine, that is – CASUS BELLI for the Russian military invasion.  …

“the [Donesk] rebels were meant to down [the] Aeroflot plane… to justify the invasion [of Ukraine by Russia]” (see complete text in Annex)

These statements border on ridicule. They reveal the corrupt and criminal nature of  the SBU.

If a Russian military invasion of Ukraine had been planned to commence on July 18th, 2014 there would have been ample evidence of deployment and movement of Russian forces in proximity of the border in the days prior to the July 17th tragedy. Sloppy intelligence? No such evidence was forthcoming indicating the movement of Russian forces.

It is worth noting that the only movement of military hardware documented by both Ukrainian and Russian sources was the deployment of a BUK missile system belonging to the Ukrainian armed forces, reported on July 15, 2014.

According to Ukrainian sources, the Prosecutor General of Ukraine Vitaliy Yarema confirmed that “the Donesk rebels did not have [Ukrainian] Buk or S 300 ground to air missiles which could have downed the plane”, which suggests that the missiles of the Ukraine armed forces had been deployed but they were not in the possession of the rebels, a premise which remains central to the US-Kiev official version that the rebels, supported by Moscow, were responsible for attacking Malaysian Airlines MH17.

A final note:

The alleged Russian Invasion Plan was slated to start on the 18th according to SBU Chief Nalyvaichenko.

Intelligence data proved that on July 18 the militants have already waited for the introduction of Russian Armed forces into the territory of Ukraine. (See official report of Ukraine Security Service (SBU, in annex below)

This account  seems to be at odds with both the SBU and JIT statements that the alleged Russian BUK Missile  had been brought in secretly on the 16th of July into Donesk, and was planned to be discreetly moved back across the border into Russia on the 17th or 18th.

If Russia had been planning an invasion to commence on July 18th, why on earth would they need to discretely move their military hardware back across the border to Russia.


sbu.gov.ua/…/article;jsessionid=73352780A12C97E27DD0BF852482D3C0.app1

retrieved at Way Back Machine Archive

https://web.archive.org/web/20140807205620/http://www.sbu.gov.ua/sbu/control/en/publish/article?art_id=129860&cat_id=35317

Screenshot of original report

[emphasis added]

During the investigation of Malaysia Airlines Boeing-777 downing the law enforcement and intelligence bodies established that terrorists and militants have cynically planned the terrorist attack at Aeroflot civil aircraft, AFL-2074 Moscow-Larnaca, which was flying over the territory of Ukraine at that moment. Hereof informed the Head of the Security Service of Ukraine Mr. Valentyn Nalyvaichenko during the briefing today.

He underlined – the crime was planned as a ground for bringing of Russian troops into Ukraine, that is – CASUS BELLI for the Russian military invasion.

According to the official Ukrainian data, June 17, 2014, at the mentioned time two regular international flights were operating over the territory of Ukraine following the filed requests for aircraft clearance – MAS17 plane of the Malaysia Airlines and AFL-2074 one of Aeroflot.

The routes of the mentioned international flights were approaching the sky over Donetsk. At 16:09 in the area of Novomykolaivka town the routes of the mentioned flights crossed. It is worth noting that the flight specifications of the aircrafts were almost identical – the Malaysian aircraft flew at a height of 10,100 m at a speed 909 km/h, while the Russian one – at a height of 10,600 m at a speed 768 km/h.

At 16:20 from the area of ‘Pervomaiske’ village, north-east from Donetsk, near the town of Torez, terrorists shot down the Malaysian jet, which then crashed near Grabove, Donetsk region.

According to the intercepted and published data about the ‘Buk” missile system, the terrorists had received an order to place the system near ‘Pervomaiskoe’ village, V. Nalyvaichenko mentioned. The namesake village is located about 20 km to the north-east from Donetsk.

The terrorists (most of them are not locals, but the Russian mercenaries) misrecognized the namesake villages and moved the other way, the SSU Head said. The odd route of the ‘Buk’ missile system on the territory of Ukraine proves that fact. The system crossed the Russia-Ukraine border in Luhansk region, then was deployed westward to Donetsk and moved back to the border between Donetsk and Luhansk regions afterwards.

By setting up the ‘Buk’ missile system in ‘Pervomaiske’ village located to the west from Donetsk and taking into consideration the military specifications of the weapon, the terrorists could have shot down the Russian civilian jetliner with its further crashing on the Ukrainian territory controlled by the ATO [Ukraine] forces.

In that case Russia would receive an opportunity to accuse the Ukrainian authorities of downing the Russian plane, assaulting the Russian citizens and would use this irresistible proof for its invasion into Ukraine.

Russian side would need a compelling argument for such a step, for example accusation of the Ukrainian government in mass murder of the Russian citizens.

“A peculiar cynicism appears in the fact that the terrorist act was planned just against the peaceful, innocent Russian citizens, who were flying with their children on vacation”, – V. Nalyvaichenko, stressed.

Intelligence data proved that on July 18 the militants have already waited for the introduction of Russian Armed forces into the territory of Ukraine. The Russian side had been giving grounding for such developments for the several previous days. The Russian Mass Media had massively published information about the alleged shelling of the RF territory from the Ukrainian side.

For further details see  [link no longer available]

http://www.sbu.gov.ua/sbu/control/en/publish/article;jsessionid=73352780A12C97E27DD0BF852482D3C0.app1?art_id=129860&cat_id=35317

can be retrieved at the WayBack archive

screenshot of original report

https://web.archive.org/web/20140807205620/http://www.sbu.gov.ua/sbu/control/en/publish/article?art_id=129860&cat_id=35317

Source

Selected Articles: U.S. “Weaponized” Dollar Economics. “This Global Instrument of Fraud and World Dominance Must be Broken Once and for All”

Selected Articles: U.S. “Weaponized” Dollar Economics. “This Global Instrument of Fraud and World Dominance Must be Broken Once and for All”

U.S. “Weaponized” Dollar Economics. “This Global Instrument of Fraud and World Dominance Must be Broken Once and For All”

By Peter Koenig, November 16, 2022

For decades the world has been exposed to US-weaponized dollar-economics – US sanctions dished out left and right, whenever an autonomous, sovereign regime refuses to do Washington’s bidding.

Stop the Warmongers. The New “Krefeld Appeal”. “NATO Out – Out of NATO”

By Dr. Rudolf Hänsel, November 16, 2022

The activities of those who endanger life on our planet and have already destroyed it to a considerable extent are becoming more and more obvious. Worldwide wars, strangulating sanctions, embargoes and hunger blockades were and are part of the actions of the US power complex.

World War I, History of the Kingdom of Serbia: The First Defeat of the Central Powers in the Great War: The 1914 Battle of Cer

By Dr. Vladislav B. Sotirović, November 16, 2022

It passed more than the 100th anniversary of the end of the Great War in 1914−1918. Proportionally, in the war, Serbia suffered mostly among all countries involved in the conflict as it lost ¼ of its population followed by 50% of industrial destruction.

An Open Letter to Bill Gates on Food, Farming, and Africa

By Community Alliance for Global Justice and Alliance for Food Sovereignty in Africa, November 16, 2022

We, 50 organizations focused on food sovereignty and justice worldwide, want you to know there is no shortage of practical solutions and innovations by African farmers and organizations. We invite you to step back and learn from those on the ground.

Russia Strategises with Iran for the Long Haul in Ukraine

By M. K. Bhadrakumar, November 16, 2022

Ignoring the hype in the US media about White House National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan’s Kissingerian diplomacy over Ukraine, the secretary of Russia’s Security Council Nikolai Patrushev, former KGB counterintelligence officer and longstanding associate of President Putin, travelled to Tehran last Wednesday in the equivalent of a knockout punch in geopolitics. 

Israeli Nuclear Arsenal Condemned by World’s Governments in Overwhelming UN Vote

By Sameena Rahman, November 16, 2022

In an overwhelming vote, the United Nations General Assembly declared last week that apartheid Israel must immediately cease operations of all its nuclear weapons, get rid of the ones that exist, and place all its nuclear sites under the supervision of the International Atomic Energy Agency.

Defense Department Records Reveal U.S. Funding of Anthrax Laboratory Activities in Ukraine

By Judicial Watch, November 16, 2022

Judicial Watch announced today it received 345 pages of records from the Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA), a component of the U.S. Department of Defense, revealing that the United States funded anthrax laboratory activities in a Ukrainian biolab in 2018.

Biden Says It’s ‘Unlikely’ Missile that Hit Poland Was Fired from Russia

By Dave DeCamp, November 16, 2022

President Biden told reporters in Indonesia on Wednesday that it’s “unlikely” the missile that hit a village in Poland Tuesday near the Ukrainian border was fired by Russia and that “preliminary” information indicates otherwise.

“The US is a Paper Tiger where Saudi Arabia is concerned”: Interview with Ambassador Peter Ford

By Peter Ford and Steven Sahiounie, November 16, 2022

Israel is already viciously attacking Lebanon – economically. The Israeli/US strategy is to avoid war, which they would lose, but instead to create enough suffering in Lebanon to make the Lebanese people turn against Hezbollah. In particular, they are trying to block oil reaching Lebanon from Iran. This is similar to their strategy towards Syria.

U.S. Will Have Spent $100 Billion on Ukraine this Year

By Eric Zuesse, November 16, 2022

On November 15th, U.S. President Joe Biden requested Congress to allocate another $37.7 billion to Ukraine, and the Democratic Chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, the neoconservative Gregory Meeks of New York, said it was “urgent to make sure that we get them everything that we can … so that they have the weapons to continue the momentum moving through the winter,” against the Russians.

Source

error

Please help truthPeep spread the word :)