VS wet geeft regeringen en politie in buitenland de kans in data van burgers te grasduinen, zonder enig verzoek daartoe………

Posted on March 28, 2018June 14, 2024 by Willem Wachtmeester

Terwijl
in de EU de hysterie compleet is over de aanslag op Skripal en zijn
dochter*, waar de ene leugen en veronderstelling na de andere met grote graagte als waarheid en feit wordt omhelsd, is in de VS een nieuwe wet aangenomen, die geheime
diensten, politie en regeringen van andere landen inzage geven in alle internetgegevens
van iedere gebruiker……

E.e.a.
is samengevat in de z.g. Clarifying Lawful Overseas Use of Data Act
(CLOUD). Ook in de VS is deze wet ongemerkt aangenomen, daar was het
de discussie over wapenbezit en de smerige streken van Facebook, die
de media domineerden, wat ervoor zorgde dat eigenlijk niemand in de
gaten had, wat hier op het spel stond…….. Uiteraard is deze wet
ook voor burgers in de VS een ramp en is de privacy met deze wet
volkomen uitgekleed en uitgerangeerd……..

Op
naar een ‘mooie, nieuwe wereldorde’, je weet wel zoals beschreven
in het boek 1984 van George Orwell, al had zelfs hij vreemd opgekeken
wat politie- en geheime diensten nu allemaal ter beschikking hebben op het gebied van controle op ‘gewone’ burgers en wat er allemaal mogelijk is bij het volgen van die burgers……. Ach
ja, de technologie op het gebied van controle en de beheersing/manipulatie van
burgers is dan ook gigantisch veel verder dan destijds in 1949 toen het boek 1984 werd gepubliceerd……..

Ongelofelijk
dat andere westerse regeringen niet ongelofelijk hard aan de
noodrem hebben getrokken bij de VS, niet alleen vanwege ons recht op
privacy, maar bijvoorbeeld ook voor bedrijven, daar het nu helemaal
een koud kunstje wordt om bedrijfsgeheimen te achterhalen…..
Bedrijven als Microsoft zijn dan ook blij met deze nieuwe wet……. Je kan er donder op zeggen dat dit bekend is bij ‘onze’ regering en reken maar dat men blij is dat andere onderwerpen de media domineerden, immers bekendmaking zou weer een kleine aardbeving teweeg hebben gebracht…….

Nu kunnen de geheime diensten en politie buiten de Nederlandse wetgeving om, alle internetgegevens over ons allen inzien……. De verantwoordelijken in het kabinet zouden strafrechtelijk vervolgd moeten worden voor dit ontoelaatbare laakbare wegzien…. De sleepwet (Wiv) is verder niets anders dan ‘de kers op de taart’, sterker nog men kan zelfs buiten die sleepwet om aan gegevens komen, daarmee zijn alle zogenaamde ingebouwde veiligheden in die wet van nul en generlei waarde……

Regeringen die het niet nauw nemen met de bescherming van mensenrechten zouden uitgesloten worden, aldus de opstellers van deze wet, echter gezien de VS praktijk op dat gebied, hoeven we daar niets van te verwachten……Neem de innige banden van de VS met de fascistische apartheidsstaat Israël, de reli-fascistische dictatuur in Saoedi-Arabië en ga nog maar even door…….. Met andere woorden: de verdrukte bevolking in dat soort landen en dan m.n degenen die opkomen voor mensenrechten en/of degenen die zich keren tegen de dictatuur, zullen veel meer kans lopen opgepakt te worden met deze nieuwe wet……….

Voor
je verder gaat naar het artikel over deze zaak van Carey Wedler op
Anti-Media, nog even dit: je begrijpt zeker wel dat met deze wet in
de VS ook ons laatste restje recht op privacy de nek is omgedraaid……..

The
US Government Just Destroyed Our Privacy While Nobody Was Paying
Attention

March
26, 2018 at 1:28 pm

Written
by Carey
Wedler

(ANTIMEDIA) —
While the nation remained fixated on gun control and Facebook’s
violative practices last week, the U.S. government quietly codified
the CLOUD Act, its own intrusive policies on citizens’ data.

While
the massive, $1.2 trillion omnibus spending bill passed Friday
received widespread media attention, the CLOUD Act — which
lawmakers snuck into the end of the 2,300-page bill — was hardly
addressed.

The Clarifying
Lawful Overseas Use of Data Act (CLOUD) “updates
the rules for criminal investigators who want to see emails,
documents and other communications stored on the
internet,” CNET reported.
“Now
law enforcement won’t be blocked from accessing someone’s Outlook
account, for example, just because Microsoft happens to store the
user’s email on
servers in Ireland.”

The
CLOUD Act will also allow the U.S. to enter into agreements that
allow the transfer of private data from domestic servers to
investigators in other countries on a case-by-case basis, further
globalizing the ever-encroaching surveillance state. The Electronic
Frontier Foundation (EFF), which has strongly opposed the
legislation, listed several
consequences of the bill, which it called “far-reaching” and
“privacy-upending”:

Enable
foreign police to collect and wiretap people’s communications from
U.S. companies, without obtaining a U.S. warrant.

Allow
foreign nations to demand personal data stored in the United States,
without prior review by a judge.

Allow
the U.S. president to enter “executive agreements” that empower
police in foreign nations that have weaker privacy laws than the
United States to seize data in the United States while ignoring U.S.
privacy laws.

Allow
foreign police to collect someone’s data without notifying them
about it.

Empower
U.S. police to grab any data, regardless if it’s a U.S. person’s
or not, no matter where it is stored.

The
bill is an update to the current MLAT (Mutual Legal Assistance
Treaty), the current framework for sharing internet user data between
countries, which both legislators and tech companies have criticized
as inefficient.

Some
tech companies, like Microsoft, have endorsed the
new CLOUD policy. Brad Smith, the company’s president and chief
legal officer, called it “a
strong statute and a good compromise,” that “gives
tech companies like Microsoft the ability to stand up for the privacy
rights of our customers around the world.”

They
echoed the sentiment of lawmakers like Orrin Hatch (R-UT). In
February, he said of
the bill:

“The
CLOUD Act bridges the divide that sometimes exists between law
enforcement and the tech sector by giving law enforcement the tools
it needs to access data throughout the world while at the same time
creating a commonsense framework to encourage international
cooperation to resolve conflicts of law.”

But
one of the biggest complaints from privacy advocates, however, it
that the new legislation places too much unmitigated power in the
hands of governments with abysmal human rights records while also
giving too much discretion to the U.S. government’s executive
branch. Noting that the executive branch will decide which countries
are human rights compliant and that those countries will then be
able to engage in
data collection and wiretaps without any further restrictions or
oversight, the ACLU warned:

“Flip
through Amnesty International or Human Rights Watch’s recent annual
reports, and you can find a dizzying array of countries that have
ratified major human rights treaties and reflect those obligations in
their domestic laws but, in fact, have arrested, tortured and killed
people in retaliation for their activism or due to their identity.”

The
organization pointed out that no human rights organizations have
endorsed the CLOUD Act, adding that “in the case of
countries certified by the executive branch, the CLOUD Act would not
require the U.S. government to scrutinize data requests by the
foreign governments — indeed, the bill would not even require
notifying the U.S. government or a user regarding a request.”

Further,
the ACLU says, if a foreign government’s human rights record
deteriorates, there is no mechanism to revoke its access to data.
Considering the U.S.’ existing record on supporting regimes that
severely restrict basic
rights like freedom of expression, the expanded access the CLOUD Act
provides is undoubtedly worrisome.

Also
predictable is the government’s stale justification for expanding
its power. As the CLOUD Act claims,
it is purportedly to “protect
public safety and combat serious crime, including terrorism” —
even if it further empowers governments that support and commit said
terrorism.

In
an age where the government already engages in mass surveillance and
is eager to disable the people’s efforts to protect their privacy
through encryption technology, it is unsurprising, albeit dangerous,
that Congress continues to encroach on what little is left of
safeguards against unwarranted intrusions.

Creative
Commons / Anti-Media / Report
a typo

======================================

* Hoe is het eigenlijk met de Skripals? Zijn ze nog steeds in coma, of zijn ze al naar huis? Toen Litvinenko in 2006 werd vergiftigd met Polonium, was er dagelijks minstens één update betreffende zijn gezondheid……. Vreemd dat er nu geen berichten zijn over Skripal en zijn dochter…….. Daarover gesproken, de agent die ook besmet zou zijn met novitsjok (novichok) werd vorige week uit het ziekenhuis ontslagen. Als ik het goed begrepen heb, is hierover niet bericht in de reguliere media van ons land……. Je weet wel, dezelfde media die het liefst zo min mogelijk negatief nieuws willen brengen, tenzij het ‘natuurlijk’ negatief nieuws betreft over Rusland, Syrië, Iran of Noord-Korea…….

Zie ook:

‘Amazon heeft lak aan privacy en werkt mee aan natiegroot ‘veiligheidsnetwerk’ in de VS‘ (zie ook de links in dat bericht, anders dan de hier getoonde)

‘Israël houdt 24 uur per dag Palestijnen in de gaten met gezichtsherkenningsapparatuur en hulp Microsoft‘

‘Gezichtsherkenningssoftware in zonnebrillen en zelfs voor het scannen van rijdende auto’s: Big Brother neemt een reuzenstap………‘

‘Duitsland begint vandaag proef met gezichtsherkenningssoftware……….‘

Novitsjok (novichok) uitgelegd door wetenschappers, Groot-Brittannië zit ‘goed fout….’

Posted on March 23, 2018June 14, 2024 by Willem Wachtmeester

Op deze
plek heb ik een paar artikelen en berichten gebracht over de aanslag
op ex-dubbelspion Skripalski en zijn dochter. Keer op keer blijkt het
hele novitsjok (novichok) verhaal doorgestoken kaart om Rusland nog
verder te demoniseren.

VVD volksverlakker Rutte stelde eerder nog dat hij onomstotelijk bewijs wil zien voor de Russische verantwoordelijkheid (en nee, dat had ik niet verwacht), echter een theekransje met leiders van EU landen was voldoende om z’n mening om te doen slaan, zo werd vanmorgen gemeld….. Het ‘bewijs’ dat Groot-Brittannie opvoert is nu wel voldoende voor het pedant onzelfstandige ventje……

Ook in
het volgende artikel van Moon of Alabama op Information Clearing House, wordt het novitsjok verhaal
doorgeprikt als onzin (o.a. met ‘de onthulling’ dat de georganiseerde misdaad in Rusland ook over dit soort gif beschikt):

Russian
Scientists Explain ‘Novichok’ – High Time For Britain To Come Clean

By
Moon Of Alabama

March
21, 2018 “Information
Clearing House” – A
week ago we asked if
‘Novichok’ poisons are real. The answer is now in: It is ‘yes’ and
‘no’. Several Russian scientist now say that they once researched and
developed lethal poisons but they assert that other countries can and
have copied these. ‘Novichok’, they say, is a just western
propaganda invention. They see the British accusations as a cynical
plot against Russia. The people who push the ‘Novichok’ accusations
have political and commercial interests.

The
British Prime Minister Theresa May insinuated that
the British-Russian double agent Sergej Skripal and his daughter
Yulia, who collapsed
on March 4 on
a public bench in Salisbury, were affected by a ‘Russian’ nerve
agent:

It
is now clear that Mr Skripal and his daughter were poisoned with a
military-grade nerve agent of
a type developed by Russia.
It is part of a group of nerve agents known
as Novichok.

Theresa
May’s claims are highly questionable.

Maria Zakharova, spokeswomen of the Russian Foreign Ministry: “‘Novichok’ has never been used in the USSR or in Russia as something related to the chemical weapon research” – bigger

A
highly potent nerve agent would hurt anyone who comes in contact with
it. But the BBC reported that a doctor who administered first aid to
the collapsed Yulia Skripal for 30 minutes was not
affected at all.
Another doctor, Steven Davies who heads the emergence room of the
Salisbury District Hospital, wrote in
a letter the London Times:

“… no
patients have experienced symptoms of nerve agent poisoning in
Salisbury and
there have only been ever been three patients with significant
poisoning.”

The
name ‘Novichok’ comes from a
book written
by Vil Mirzayanov, a 1990s immigrant to the U.S. from the former
Soviet Union. It describe his work at Soviet chemical weapon
laboratories and lists the chemical formulas of a new group of lethal
substances.

AFP interviewed the
author of the ‘Novichok’ book about the Salisbury incident:

Mirzayanov,
speaking at his home in Princeton, New Jersey, said he is convinced
Russia carried it out as a way of intimidating opponents of President
Vladimir Putin.
…The
only other possibility, he said, would be that someone used the
formulas in his book to make such a weapon.

“Russia
did it”, says Mirzanyanov, “OR SOMEONE WHO READ MY BOOK”

A
‘Novichok’ nerve agent plays a role in the current seasons of the
British-American spy drama Strike
Back which
broadcasts on British TV. Theresa May might have watched this
clip (vid)
from the series. Is it a source of her allegations?

The
Russian government rejects the British allegations and demands
evidence which Britain has not provided. Russia joined the Chemical
Weapon Convention in 1997. By 2017 it had destroyed all
its chemical weapons and chemical weapon production facilities. Under
the convention only very limited amounts of chemical weapon
agents are
allowed to
be held in certified laboratories for defense research and testing
purposes. The U.S. has such laboratories at Fort Detrick
in Frederick, Maryland, the British lab is in Porton Down, a few
miles from Salisbury. The Russian lab is in Shikhany in
the southern Saratov Oblast. The Organisation for the Prohibition of
Chemical Weapons (OPCW) audits these laboratories and their declared
stocks “down to the milligram level”.

The
spokeswoman for the Russian Foreign Ministry and famous high
heels folk dancer (vid)
Maria Zakharova explains ina
TV interview (vid,
English subtitles) that ‘Novichok’ was not and is not the name of any
Soviet or Russian program. The word was introduced in the “west”
simply because it sounded Russian.

Western
media claimed that Vil Miranzayanov is the developer of the
‘Novichok’ chemicals. It turns out that this is not the case.
Interviews with two retired Russian chemists, both published only
yesterday, tell the real story. The Russia news agency RIA
Novostni talked
with Professor
Leonid Rink (machine
translation):

Did
you have anything to do with creating what the British authorities
call the “Novice”?

–
Yes. This was the basis of my doctoral dissertation.

At
that time I worked in Shikhany, in the branch of GosNIIOKhT (State
Research Institute of Organic Chemistry and Technology, during Soviet
times was engaged in the development of chemical weapons), was a
leading researcher and head of the laboratory.

Professor
Rink says that:

‘Novichok’
or ‘novice’ was never used as a program name. New Soviet formulas
had alphanumeric codes.
Several
new nerve agents were developed in Shikhany in the 1970s and 80s.
These
new substances can cause immediate deadly reactions when applied to
humans.
Vil
Mirzayanov was head of the chromatographer group, chemists who deals
with the separation and analysis of various mixtures of substances.
He was responsible for environmental control and not a developer of
any new substances.

The Associated
Press summarizes other
parts of the interview with Professor Rink:

Rink
told Russia’s state RIA Novosti news agency Tuesday that Britain
and other western nations easily could have synthesized the nerve
agent after chemical expert Vil Mirzayanov emigrated to the United
States and revealed the formula.

Echoing
Russian government statements, Rink says it wouldn’t make sense for
Moscow to poison Sergei Skripal, a military intelligence officer who
spied for Britain, because he was a used asset “drained” by both
Russia and Britain.

He
claims Britain’s use of the name Novichok for the nerve agent is
intended to convince the public that Russia is to blame.

The
English-Russian magazine The Bell interviews another
Russian scientists involved in the issue:

The
Bell was able to find and speak with Vladimir Uglev, one of the
scientists who was involved in developing the nerve agent referred to
as “Novichok”. […] Vladimir Uglev, formerly a scientist with
Volsk branch of GOSNIIOKHT (“State Scientific-Research Institute
for Organic Chemistry and Technology”), which developed and tested
production of new lethal substances since 1972, spoke for the first
time about his work as early as the 1990s. He left the institute in
1994 and is now retired.

– The
Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs insists that there was no
research nor development of any substance called “Novichok”, not
in Russia, nor in the USSR. Is that true?

–
In
order to make it easier to understand the subject matter, I will not
use the name “Novichok” which has is now commonly used by
everyone to describe those four substances which were conditionally
assigned to me to develop over a period of several years. Three of
these substances are part of the “Foliant” program, which was led
by Pyotr Kirpichev, a scientist with GOSNIIOKHT (State
Scientific-Research Institute for Organic Chemistry and Technology).
The first substance of a new class of organophosphorous chemical
agents, I will call it “A-1972”, was developed by Kirpichev in
1972. In 1976, I developed two substances: “B-1976” and “C-1976”.
The fourth substance, “D-1980”, was developed by Kirpichev in the
early 1980s. All of these substances fall under the group referred to
as “Novichkov”, but that name wasn’t given to the substances by
GOSNIIOKHT.

All
four chemical agents are “FOS” or organophosphorous compounds
which have a nerve paralyzing effect, but they differ in their
precursors, how they were discovered and in their usage as agents of
chemical warfare.

The
four substances were developed by Pyotr Kirpichev and Vladimir Uglev.
These substances were not readily usable by the military as they
could not be safely transported and used in the field like binary
chemical weapons can.
Once synthesized they were extremely dangerous. Professor Leonid
Rink, working later in a different group, tackled the problem but did
not succeed. Uglev confirms that Vil Miranzayanov was not involved in
the development at all. His group was responsible chemical analysis
and for environmental control around the laboratory.

Vladimir Uglev, via The Bell – bigger

Vladimir
Uglev, like Renk and Miranzayanov, notes that these agents “of a
type developed by Russia” can now be produced by any
sufficiently equipped laboratory, including private ones.

Uglev
mentions a criminal use of one of the agents in the 1990s:

One
of these substances was used to poison the banker, Ivan Kivelidi and
his secretary in 1995. A cotton ball, soaked in this agent, was
rubbed over the microphone in the handset of Kivelidi’s telephone.
That specific dose was developed by my group, where we produced all
of the chemical agents, and each dose which we developed was given
its own complete physical-chemical passport. It was therefore not
difficult to determine who had prepared that dose and when it was
developed. Naturally, the investigators also suspected me. I was
questioned several times about this incident.

Journalist
Mark Ames, who worked in Moscow at that time, remarks:

This
muddles the narrative a bit —”novichok” used in 1995
Moscow mafia poison hit on top mobster Ivan Kivelidi. So:
1)
novichok [is] in mob hands too
2) used during reign of #1
Mobfather Boris Yeltsin, Washington’s vassal

Uglev
further notes that blood samples from the Salisbury victims, which
Moscow demands but Britain has not handed over, can show what agent
(if any) were involved and “where the specific dose was produced
and by whom.”

A
new article in the New Scientists confirms the
claims by the Russian scientists that the ‘Novichok’ agents which may
have affected the Skripals may have been produced elsewhere:

Weapons
experts have told New Scientist that a number of countries legally
created small amounts of Novichok after it was revealed in 1992 and a
production method was later published.

In
2016 Iranian scientists, in cooperation with the
OPCW, published production
and detection methods for such agents. It is likely that the various
government labs secretly re-developed and produced these chemicals
for their own purposes even prior to the Iranian publication.

[UPDATE]
In an interview with Deutsche Welle British Foreign
Minister Boris Johnson admits that
Proton Down had (illegal?) ‘Novichok’ agents when the incident
in Salisbury happened:

DW:
You argue that the source of this nerve agent, Novichok, is Russia.
How did you manage to find it out so quickly? Does
Britain possess samples of it?

Boris
Johnson: Let me be clear with you … When I look at the evidence, I
mean the people from Porton Down, the laboratory …

DW: So
they have the samples …

Boris
Johnson: They
do. And
they were absolutely categorical and I asked the guy myself, I said,
“Are you sure?” And he said there’s no doubt.

But
Porton Down did not agree with the British government to claim that
the supposed nerve agent was “made by Russia.” It only
agreed to the compromise formulation “of
a type developed by Russia” i.e. it could have been made
anywhere. [End Update]

The
claims by the British government that a. the Skripals were affected
by a nerve agent and that b. Russia was involved in the Skripal
incident because it has some exclusive access to these agents seem
both baseless. Unless there is significant further evidence the
British incrimination of Russia looks like a cynical plot invented
for political and/or commercial purposes.

As
usual in the military-industrial complex the people who push such
scares, are the ones who profit from them.

The
British Morning Star points to
one former British military intelligence officer, Colonel (rtd)
Hamish de Bretton-Gordon, as a common protagonist in the Skripal
case, in the claims of Syrian chemical weapon use and in commercial
interests around chemical weapon defense:

Quoted
daily by multiple media outlets on the Skripal case, de
Bretton-Gordon has become a very public expert, relied upon for
unbiased comment and analysis by the British and foreign media on
chemical weapon threats from Salisbury to Syria.

He
is a former assistant director of Intelligence Surveillance and
Reconnaissance Land Forces with the Ministry of Defence. Before that
de Bretton-Gordon was commanding officer of Britain’s Chemical,
Biological, Radiological and Nuclear (CBRN) Regiment and Nato’s
Rapid Reaction CBRN Battalion.

While
his CBRN background is often mentioned, his military intelligence
links are rarely referred to publicly.

Long
before the Salisbury event, de Bretton-Gordon was urging greater
government expenditure on chemical protection counter-measures and
equipment.
…
de Bretton-Gordon is managing director CBRN of
Avon Protection Systems, based in Melksham, Wiltshire.
…
In
2017, the company made £50m from its US military contracts and a
further £63.3m from other “protection and defence” revenue.

The
former(?) army intelligence officer is also deeply involved in the
“moderate rebels” chemical weapon scams in Syria:

On
April 29 2014, the [Daily Telegraph] reported that it “obtained
soil samples collected from sites of chemical attacks inside Syria by
Dr Ahmad — a medic whose real identity cannot be revealed for his
own protection — who had previously received training in sample
collection by western chemical weapons experts.

“Mr
de Bretton-Gordon, a British chemical weapons expert and director of
Secure Bio, a private company, was one of the trainers.”

And
who carried out the tests? None other than de Bretton-Gordon himself.

The
“White Helmets” propaganda group in Syria was founded and
is run by the former(?) British army intelligence officer James Le
Mesurier with British and U.S. government money. His former(?)
colleague de Bretton-Gordon is running the parallel Syria chemical
weapon scam. Both profit from their government financed operations.

Other
British agents involved in the Skripal case are Pablo
Miller who recruited Skripal
for the MI6. He was a friend of Skripal, also lived in Salisbury and
worked for Christopher Steele, the former(?) MI6 agent who produced
the ‘dirty dossier’ about Donald Trump for the Clinton campaign. Both
are involved with
Russian mafia emigres in Britain like Boris Berezovski and the
deceased Alexander Litvinenko who’s father says that
he was killed by an MI6 or CIA guy.

While
the British government blamed the Russians just a week after the
incident in Salisbury happened it now seems interested in delaying
any further investigations. It took more than two weeks after the
incident for the British government to invite the OPCW to help with
the case. The head of the OPCW says it
will take another three weeks for
the organization to analyze the samples the British laboratory now
handed over. The British police requires several
months to
find out what happened to the Skripals.

How
could the British government be sure of “Russian”
involvement within a week and even expel Russian diplomats when the
primary chemical experts on the issue will need three weeks for their
first analyses and the British police predicts a several months long
investigation?

The
Russian scientist and their government have explained their history
and position in relation to ‘Novichoks’ and the Skripal incident. It
is high time now for the British government, its scientists at Porton
Down and its greedy mafia of former(?) British intelligence officer
and their criminal Russian emigres to come clean about their own
roles in it.

This
article was originally published by “Moon
of Alabama”
–

—

Previous Moon
of Alabama reports on the Skripal case:

March
8 – Poisioned
British-Russian Double-Agent Has Links To Clinton Campaign
March
12 – Theresa
May’s “45 Minutes” Moment
March
14 – Are
‘Novichok’ Poisons Real? – May’s Claims Fall Apart
March
16 – The
British Government’s ‘Novichok’ Drama Was Written By Whom?
March
18 – NHS
Doctor: “No Patients Have Experienced Symptoms Of Nerve Agent
Poisoning In Salisbury”

George
Galloway’ Interviews Peter Hitchens on Russia and the Salisbury
Poisoning

Ex-mayor
of London Ken Livingstone comments on UK-Russia scandal over Skripal
case.

==================================

Zie ook: ‘Rusland schuldig verklaard voor aanslag op Skripal, echter onafhankelijke controle van ‘het bewijsmateriaal’ wordt geweigerd……‘

en: ‘Novitsjok (Novichok) een Russisch chemische wapen >> één grote leugen, zoals de massavernietigingswapen van Saddam Hoessein‘

en: ‘Rusland verlangt terecht een excuus van de Britse regering voor valse beschuldiging ‘aanslag’ op Skripal…..‘

en: ‘Skripal: geen (onomstotelijk) bewijs voor Russische schuld en toch stuurt Rutte 2 Russische diplomaten het land uit……..‘

en: ‘Stef Blok (VVD minister BuZa): de Russische schuld voor de aanslag op Skripal is ‘plausibel…’ ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!‘

en: ‘Rusland mag niet deelnemen aan onderzoek naar ‘aanslag met novitsjok’ op Skripal‘

en: ‘Brits ministerie van Buitenlandse Zalen geeft toe dat Porton Down niet heeft gezegd dat ‘novitsjok’ uit Rusland komt….. Blok (VVD) alweer met 10 km/u. finaal uit de ‘novitsjok-bocht’‘

en: ‘Russisch zenuwgas verhaal is nonsens ook aldus Jeremy Corbyn….. Jimmy Dore met commentaar!‘

en: ‘OPCW bevestigt: novitsjok (novichok) van aanslag op Skripal komt uit Rusland……‘

en: ‘Skripal: wat journalisten echt zouden moeten vragen aangaande ‘de aanslag met gifgas’‘

en: ‘Skripal false flag operatie zakt als soufflé in elkaar…….‘

en: ‘Nieuwe ‘novitsjok aanslag’ nadat de Skripal vergiftiging definitief kan worden afgeschreven als false flag operatie‘

en: ‘Skripal: GB klaagt 2 Russen aan voor vergiftiging middels een sci-fi techniek: de 2 waren tegelijk op 1 plek, waar 1 Rus te zien was……. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!‘

en: ‘Skripal vergiftiging roept steeds meer vraagtekens op…..‘

en: ‘Joël Voordewind (ChristenUnie, Tweede Kamer) eist actie n.a.v. false flag actie Skripal‘

Putin is corrupt, aldus het ministerie van Financiën in de VS…… ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! Zo de waard is……

Posted on January 27, 2016June 14, 2024 by Willem Wachtmeester

De demonisering van Putin wordt verder opgevoerd*: gisternacht (1.00 u.) berichtte BBC World Service, dat het VS ministerie van Financiën (Treasury) een verklaring naar buiten bracht, dat Putin corrupt is……. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! Hoe luidt de spreuk ook alweer? Oh ja: ‘kijk eerst naar de balk in je eigen oog, voor je naar de splinter van een ander kijkt…’ (ik geloof dat deze uitspraak zelfs aan jezus wordt toegeschreven).

In de VS kan je niet eens president worden als je niet heel grote bedrijven, financiële instellingen en miljonairs hebt, die je met enorme kapitalen helpen tijdens de verkiezingscampagne……. Hoe bedoelt u, dat heeft niets met corruptie te maken….???? ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

* Eén van de laatste feiten, voorafgaand aan deze beschuldiging, was de hysterie die uitbrak na het dopingschandaal in de Russische atletiek, ook toen werd naar Putin gewezen. Nadat bleek dat er wereldwijd op dit gebied veel meer aan de hand was, stierf deze poging een stille dood. Om nog maar te zwijgen over de Britse rechter, die de moord op Litvinenko, gebaseerd op hoofdzakelijk vermoedens en aannames, in de schoenen van Putin schoof…….

Putin dader: Britse rechter doet uitspraak op vermoedens in de zaak Litvinenko……… Leve de onafhankelijke rechtspraak!

Posted on January 22, 2016June 14, 2024 by Willem Wachtmeester

Dat ik dat nog mag meemaken, een Britse rechter die zijn uitspraak baseert op een flink aantal vermoedens en aannames….!! Weg met de onafhankelijke rechtspraak, Rusland en Putin in het bijzonder, moeten gedemoniseerd worden, dat is veel belangrijker dan onafhankelijke rechtspraak, ja toch??? Je ziet het voor je, een onderzoeksrechter die spreekt met een chef van één van de geheime diensten in GB, die antwoordt op de vraag van de rechter, of Putin voor de vergiftiging van Litvinenko als verantwoordelijk kan worden aangewezen. Het geheime opperhoofd steekt twee vingers in de lucht en zegt dan: “Jazeker edelbelachelijke, ik voel het in de lucht en aan mijn water: Putin is is de dader……”

Kortom een vertoning, die een rechtstaat onwaardig is……

Op BNR gistermorgen (rond 11.35 u.) Joost Bosman, Rusland correspondent voor BNR (en oh ja, dat vertelde presentator Hemmen er bij: ook voor Oekraïne …. ha! ha! ha! Ja, ach dat is toch één pot nat!). Deze anti-Rusland lobbyist, stelde nog wel een klein vraagteken bij de uitspraak van de Britse rechter, maar verder was ook hij overtuigd, dat veel bewijzen, die louter berusten op van horen zeggen, de waarheid vertegenwoordigden.

Wat later gaf Bosman daar z’n eigen bewijzen voor. Het gesprek ging intussen over het associatieverdrag met Oekraïne. De video die door één van neonazi brigades die Oekraïne ‘rijk’ is, op het internet werd gezet, waarin Nederlanders werd gedreigd niet tegen het associatie verdrag met Oekraïne te stemmen bij het komende referendum, is volgens Bosman door Rusland gemaakt…… Wat is het bewijs daarvoor? Nou simpel, dat heeft de hoofdnazi van die brigade verklaart, een uiterst betrouwbare figuur in de ogen van Bosman……. Daarnaast heeft Bosman gehoord, dat het Oekraïens gebruikt in de video, van slechte kwaliteit is en de uniformen zouden niet kloppen met wat de neonazi-brigade zou dragen, al had Bosman ook deze zaken van horen zeggen……..

Verder stelde Bosman, dat e.e.a. wel klopt met de manier waarop Rusland bezig is, zo noemde hij nog even MH17* en gefotoshopte foto’s……. Het zal aan mij liggen, maar ik wist niet, dat de Oekraïense rebellen, of Rusland foto’s die te maken hebben met MH17, zouden hebben gefotoshopt…. Terwijl intussen wel algemeen bekend is, dat m.n. het neonazi bewind van Porosjenko zich daar schuldig aan heeft gemaakt, naast het antidateren van ‘bewijzen’ en alle andere leugens en bedrog in deze zaak, opgevoerd door de junta in Kiev………

Ach ja, Bosman is ook zo’n journalist die denkt dat de NAVO en het westen hebben geslapen, terwijl Rusland zijn slag sloeg…… Terwijl de Russische reactie i.z. De Krim, juist een reactie op de agressie van de NAVO was, die o.l.v. de VS steeds verder opschoof in de richting van Moskou…… Rusland kon zich eenvoudigweg niet veroorloven de marine havens in De Krim te verliezen….. Die ‘annexatie’ was uiteraard de bedoeling van de VS, immers zo kon de Koude Oorlog weer leven ingeblazen worden en het militair-industrieel complex weer op volle toeren draaien, precies zoals gebeurde……. Terwijl die ‘annexatie’ (lees: aansluiting bij Rusland) pas gebeurde, nadat de bevolking van De Krim zich daarover had uitgesproken. Dezelfde bevolking, die tegen de staatsgreep was, die werd gepleegd tegen de door hen democratisch gekozen president Janoekovytsj en diens regering was en dat buiten dat referendum meer dan duidelijk hadden gemaakt…… Overigens een staatsgreep die precies als de opstand tegen Janoekovytsj, door de VS al een paar jaar daarvoor werd voorbereid en geregisseerd. De VS trok daar zelfs 4 miljard dollar voor uit………

Nog even over dat associatieverdrag: Bosman vond het wel wat ver gaan, om te zeggen, dat de groep die het referendum voor elkaar kreeg (met Jan Roos), direct door Rusland zou zijn aangestuurd. Echter hij sluit niet uit, dat er indirecte banden zijn met die groep……. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

Intussen heeft een Britse minister fijntjes verklaart, dat Rusland Groot-Brittannië in feite de oorlog heeft verklaard, met de moord op Litvinenko……….

Vanmorgen verklaarde ‘journalist’ van Scherrenburg in het Radio1 Mediaforum, dat we allemaal wel wisten, dat Putin schuldig was (aan de moord op Litvinenko). “Die Putin is probably als een totale gek bezig…”, aldus van Scherrenburg……. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! Wat een zin! Van Scherrenburg, die interessant Engels gebruikt, weet niet, dat ‘probably’ vertaald dient te worden als ‘waarschijnlijk…..’ Wat een domme trut, ik vrees dat Pim Fortuyn met terugwerkende kracht gelijk heeft, toen hij van Scherrenburg toevoegde, dat ze beter in de keuken kon gaan werken……

* De ramp met vlucht MH17 is zonder meer toe te schrijven aan Oekraïne, zoveel is nu wel bekend, niet dat u dat mag weten of geloven natuurlijk……

Voor meer berichten n.a.v. het voorgaande, klik op één van de labels, die u onder dit bericht terugvindt.

Wie haalde het A321 toestel met vluchtnummer 9268 neer in de Sinaï woestijn?

Posted on November 7, 2015June 14, 2024 by Willem Wachtmeester

Hier een scherpe analyse van Justin Raimondo, over vlucht 9268, die vorige week neerkwam in de Sinaï woestijn. De speculaties, de politieke bemoeienis, de gevolgen en een mogelijke ‘verantwoordelijke’ passeren de revue. Onder dit artikel kan u klikken voor een vertaling, al neemt het ‘downloaden’ wel wat tijd in beslag:

Who
Downed Metrojet Flight 9268?Was
it ISIS – or somebody else?By
Justin Raimondo

November 06, 2015
“Information
Clearing House”
– “Antiwar”
– First they said the downing of Russian Metrojet Flight 9268 was
most likely due to Russia’s “notorious”
regional airlines, which supposedly are rickety and unreliable. The
Egyptian government denied that terrorism is even a possibility, with
Egyptian despot Abdel Fatah al-Sisi proclaiming:

“When there is
propaganda that it crashed because of Isis, this is one way to damage
the stability and security of Egypt and the image of Egypt. Believe
me, the situation in Sinai – especially in this limited area – is
under our full control.”

However, it soon came
out that the person in charge of Sharm el-Sheikh airport, where the
Russia plane had landed before taking off again, had been “replaced”
– oh, but not
because of anything to do with the downing of the Russian passenger
plane! As the Egyptian authorities put
it:

“Adel Mahgoub,
chairman of the state company that runs Egypt’s civilian airports,
says airport chief Abdel-Wahab Ali has been ‘promoted’ to become
his assistant. He said the move late Wednesday had nothing to do with
media skepticism surrounding the airport’s security. Mahgoub said
Ali is being replaced by Emad el-Balasi, a pilot.”

Laughable, albeit in a
sinister way, and yet more evidence that something wasn’t quite
right: after all, everyone knows the Egyptian government does not
have the Sinai, over which the plane disintegrated in mid air, under
its “full control.” ISIS, which claimed
responsibility for the crash hours after it occurred, is all
over that peninsula.

Still, the denials
poured in, mostly from US government officials such
as Director of National Intelligence James
“Liar-liar-pants-on-fire”
Clapper, who said ISIS involvement was “unlikely.” Then they told
us it couldn’t have been ISIS because they supposedly don’t have
surface-to-air missiles that can reach the height attained by the
downed plane. Yet that wasn’t very convincing either, because a)
How do they know what ISIS has in its arsenal?, and b) couldn’t
ISIS or some other group have smuggled
a bomb on board?

The better part of a
week after the crash, we
have this:

“Days
after authorities dismissed claims that ISIS brought down a Russian
passenger jet, a U.S. intelligence analysis now suggests that the
terror group or its affiliates
planted a bomb on the plane.

“British Foreign
Minister Philip Hammond said his government believes there is a
‘significant possibility’ that an explosive device caused the
crash. And a Middle East source briefed on intelligence matters also
said it appears likely someone placed a bomb aboard the aircraft.”

According to numerous
news
reports, intercepts of “internal communications” of the Islamic
State/ISIS group provided evidence that it wasn’t an accident but a
terrorist act. Those intercepts must have been available to US and UK
government sources early on, yet these same officials said they had
no “direct evidence,” as Clapper put it, of terrorist
involvement. Why is that? And furthermore: why the general
unwillingness of Western governments and media to jump to their usual
conclusion when any air disaster occurs,

and attribute it to
terrorism?

The answer is simple:
they didn’t want to arouse any sympathy for the Russians. Russia,
as we all know, is The Enemy – considered even worse, in some
circles, than the jihadists. Indeed, there’s a whole section
of opinion-makers
devoted to the idea that we must help
Islamist crazies in Syria, including
al-Qaeda’s affiliate, known as al-Nusra, precisely in order to
stop the Evil Putin from extending Russian influence into the region.

In a broader sense,
the reluctance to acknowledge that this was indeed a terrorist act is
rooted in a refusal to acknowledge the commonality of interests that
exists between Putin’s Russia and the West. The downing of the
Metrojet is just the latest atrocity carried out by the head-choppers
against the Russian people: this includes not only the Beslan
school massacre, in which over 700 children were taken hostage by
Chechen Islamists, but also the five
apartment bombings that took place in 1999. The real extent of
Western hostility to Russia, and the unwillingness to realize that
Russia has been a major terrorist target, is underscored by the
shameful
propaganda pushed by the late Alexander Litvinenko, and endorsed
by Sen. John McCain, which claims that the bombings were an
“inside job” carried out by the Russian FSB – a version of
“trutherism” that, if uttered in the US in relation to the 9/11
attacks, is routinely (and rightly) dismissed as sheer crankery. But
where the Russians are concerned it’s not only allowable, it’s
the default. A particularly egregious example is Russophobic hack
Michael D. Weiss, who, days before the downing of the Russian
passenger plane, solemnly informed us that Putin was “sending
jihadists to join ISIS.” Boy oh boy, talk about ingratitude!

This downright creepy
unwillingness to express any sympathy or sense of solidarity with the
Russian people ought to clue us in to something we knew all along:
that the whole “war on terrorism” gambit is as phony as a
three-dollar bill. If US government officials were actually concerned
about the threat of terrorist violence directed at innocent
civilians, they would partner up with Russia in a joint effort to
eradicate the threat: that this isn’t happening in Syria, or
anywhere else, is all too evident. Not to mention our canoodling
with “moderate” Chechen terrorists, openly encouraging them to
carry on their war with Putin’s Russia. Our “war on terrorism”
is simply a pretext for spying on the American people, and most of
the rest of the world, and cementing the power of the State on the
home front, not to mention fattening up an already grotesquely obese
“defense” budget.

With the belated
admission that the downing of the Russian passenger jet was an act of
terrorism, we are beginning to hear that this a tremendous blow
to Putin’s prestige at home – something no one would dare
utter about Obama’s or Cameron’s “prestige” if the Metrojet
had been an American or British passenger plane. They say it’s
“blowback” due to Russia’s actions in Syria, with the clear
implication that it’s deserved. And yet, according to US officials
and the usual suspects, the Russians aren’t
hitting
ISIS so much as they’re smiting
the “moderate” Islamist head-choppers – the “Syrian rebels,”
as they’re known — who are being funded, armed, and encouraged by
the West.

If
that’s true, then what kind of blowback are we talking about –
and from which direction is it coming? Given this, isn’t it
entirely possible that Metrojet Flight 9268 was downed by US-aided
–and-supported “moderates,” who moderately decided to get back
at Putin?

Justin Raimondo is
the editorial director of Antiwar.com, and a senior fellow at the
Randolph Bourne Institute. He is a contributing editor at The
American Conservative,
and writes a monthly column for Chronicles.
He is the author of Reclaiming
the American Right: The Lost Legacy of the Conservative Movement[Center
for Libertarian Studies, 1993; Intercollegiate Studies Institute,
2000], and An
Enemy of the State: The Life of Murray N. Rothbard[Prometheus
Books, 2000].

Click
for
Spanish,
German,
Dutch,
Danish,
French,
translation- Note- Translation
may take a moment to load.

Zie ook: ‘Koenders geeft alleen reisadvies voor vliegveld Sharm-el-Sheikh…..‘

en: ‘Van Bommel vindt Egypte een fijn vakantieland……… AUW!!!‘

Voor meer berichten over/met vliegramp S, Sharm-el-Sheikh, Rusland, Putin, Tsjetsjenië, Cameron, Philip Hammond, ISIS en/of Abdul Fatah al-Sisi, klik op het desbetreffende label, onder dit bericht.

Excuus voor de layout, die ik niet juist kreeg.

The US Government Just Destroyed Our Privacy While Nobody Was Paying Attention

The
US Government Just Destroyed Our Privacy While Nobody Was Paying
Attention