Het volgende vond ik op Twitter, werd gebracht door ‘Rachel Swindon’ en is wat mij betreft een terecht aanklacht tegen de reguliere media, de de bek vol hebben over fake news (of nepnieuws, wat je wilt).
Terwijl deze media zelf de grootste brengers van fake news zijn….. Niet alleen dat, deze media hebben geen probleem om haat te zaaien tegen, of angst te zaaien voor: -minderheden, -Rusland, Iran, China en Noord-Korea, -critici van het ijskoude, inhumane neoliberalisme (dat men in die media met grote graagte steunt), -critici van de grootscheepse terreur die de VS en de NAVO o.a. in het Midden-Oosten uitoefenen, enz. enz……..
Wat betreft Nederland kan je de volgende media hetzelfde verwijten >> Telegraaf, AD, Volkskrant, NRC, Trouw, Nederlands Dagblad, Parool, de publieke radio en tv zendgemachtigden (ook de zogenaamde onafhankelijken NOS en NPO), RTL, BNR, enz……)
De
reactie, of beter gezegd de hysterie na de ‘aanslag’ gepleegd op Skripal en zijn dochter is
werkelijk ongelofelijk, zonder ook maar één flinter van bewijs werd
en wordt Rusland (het liefst gebruikt men de naam Putin) de schuld in
de schoenen geschoven…. Alsof het een oorlogsdaad betrof, wezen een aantal NAVO landen Russische diplomaten uit, nogmaals op
basis van nul komma nada bewijs…… VVD volksverlakkers Rutte en Blok spraken zelfs over ‘plausibel bewijs….’ ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!
Drie dagen geleden werd bekend gemaakt dat de dochter van Skripal uit het ziekenhuis werd ontslagen, terwijl eerder vorige week werd gesteld dat wanneer de Skripals de aanslag zouden overleven, ze de rest van hun leven zwaar gehandicapt zouden zijn, als een soort van levende planten…….. Met het ontslaan uit het ziekenhuis van Skripals dochter werd de internationale hysterie nog eens verder aan de kaak gesteld en moeten er nog grotere vraagtekens worden gezet bij de beschuldigingen aan het adres van de Russen…………
Rob
Slane schreef eerder een artikel genaamd: ’30 More Questions That
Journalists Should be Asking About the Skripal Case’ (de link naar
dat artikel vindt je als eerste link in het tweede artikel van Slane,
dat hieronder is opgenomen). 30 vragen waarmee Slane duidelijk maakt
dat de Britse versie over de ‘aanslag’ is gebaseerd op lucht.
Intussen
is er weer heel wat meer bekend over de leugens waarmee Rusland
werd/wordt beschuldigd, reden voor Slane om een vervolg te schrijven
op zijn eerste artikel met de titel: ’20 More Questions That
Journalists Shoul be Asking About the Skripal Case’. (zoals gezegd hieronder te vinden)
Slane vraagt zich o.a. af hoe andere landen dan Groot-Brittannië op 26
maart het besluit hebben kunnen nemen Russische diplomaten uit te
zetten, terwijl de Organisation
for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) het
onderzoek naar de zaak nog niet had afgerond en de bloedmonsters nog niet kon analyseren (voor toestemming dit bloed te onderzoeken door de OPCW, was godbetert een proces nodig….)……
Zelfs de analyse van de bloedmonsters door Porton Down laten vragen open……. (Porton Down is een instituut van de Britse overheid, dus gekleurde onderzoeksuitslagen, die in het straatje van de regering May passen, zijn niet te ontlopen, ofwel: Porton Down ondersteunt de anti-Russische propaganda* van de Britse overheid en de reguliere westerse media…..)
Gezien alles wat intussen bekend is geworden, ‘zou je je zelfs af kunnen vragen’, of het hier niet om een false flag operatie gaat, ofwel een operatie gedaan om in dit geval een ander land (Rusland) in een kwaad daglicht te stellen.
20
More Questions That Journalists Should be Asking About the Skripal
Case
To
my knowledge, none of the questions I wrote in my previous piece – 30
questions That Journalists Should be Asking About the Skripal Case –
has been answered satisfactorily, at least not in the public domain.
Yet despite the fact that these legitimate questions have not yet
been answered, and many important facts surrounding the case are
still unknown, the case has given rise to a serious international
crisis, with the extraordinary expulsion of Russian diplomats across
many EU countries and particularly the United States on March 26th.
This
is a moment to stop and pause. A man and his daughter were poisoned
in the City of Salisbury on 4th March. Yet despite the fact that
investigators do not yet appear to know how they were poisoned, when
they were poisoned, or where they were poisoned, a number of Western
nations have used the incident as a pretext for the co-ordinated
expulsion of diplomats on a scale not witnessed even during the
height of the Cold War. These are clearly very abnormal and very
dangerous times.
I
pointed out in my previous piece that it is not my intention to
advance some sort of conspiracy theory on this blog. It remains the
case that I simply don’t have any holistic theory — “conspiracy”
or otherwise — for who carried this out, and I continue to retain
an open mind. But since the Government of my country has rushed to
judgement without many of the facts of the case being established,
and since this has led to the biggest deterioration in relations
between nuclear-armed nations since the Cuban Missile Crisis, it
seems to me that it is more important than ever to keep asking
questions in the hope that answers will come.
And
so, for what it’s worth, here are 20 more important questions that
I think that journalists ought to be asking regarding this case:
1. Have
the police yet identified any suspects in the case?
2. If
so, is there any evidence connecting them to the Russian Government?
3. If
not, how is it possible to determine culpability, as the British
Government has done?
“It
is now clear that Mr Skripal and his daughter were poisoned with a
military-grade nerve agent of
a type developed by Russia. This
is part of a group of nerve agents known as ‘Novichok’.
Based on the positive
identificationof
this chemical agent by world-leading experts at the Defence Science
and Technology Laboratory (DSTL) at Porton Down” [my emphasis added].
In
the judgement at the High Court on 22nd March on
whether to allow blood samples to be taken from Sergei and Yulia
Skripal for examination by the Organisation for the Prohibition of
Chemical Weapons (OPCW), evidence submitted by Porton Down to the
court (Section 17 i) stated the following:
“Blood
samples from Sergei Skripal and Yulia Skripal were analysed and the
findings indicated exposure to a nerve agent or
related compound.
The samples tested positive for the presence of a Novichok class
nerve agent or
closely related agent”
[my emphasis added].
So
the Prime Minister said that Porton Down had positively
identifiedthe
substance as a Novichok nerve agent. The statement from Porton Down
says that their tests indicated that it was a Novichok
agent orclosely
related agent.
Are these two statements saying exactly the same thing?
5. Why
were the phrases “related compound” and “closely related agent”
added to the statement given by Porton Down, and is this an
indication that the scientists were not 100% sure that the substance
was a “Novichok” nerve agent?
6. Why
were these phrases left out of the Prime Minister’s statement to
the House of Commons?
7. Why
did the Prime Minister choose to use the word “Novichok” in her
speech, rather than the word Foliant,
which is the actual name of the programme initiated by the Soviet
Union when attempting to develop a new class of chemical weapons in
the 1970s and 1980s?
8. When
asked in an
interview with Deutsche Welle how
scientists at Porton Down had found out so quickly that the nerve
agent was of the “Novichok” class of chemical weapons, the
Foreign Secretary, Boris Johnson, was asked whether Porton Down
possesses samples of it. Here is how he replied:
“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” [My
emphasis].
If
Mr Johnson’s statement is correct, and the Defence Science and
Technology Laboratory (DSTL) at Porton Down has samples of “Novichok”
in its possession, where did they come from?
9. Were
they produced at Porton Down?
10. How
long have they had them?
11. Why
has the DSTL not registered possession of these substances with the
OPCW, which it is legally obliged to do under the Chemical Weapons
Convention (CWC)?
12. Does
this admission by Mr Johnson not indicate that “Novichoks” can be
made in any advanced chemical weapons facility, as indeed they were
under the auspices of the OPCW
in Iran in 2016?
13. If
so, how can the Government be sure that the substance used to poison
Mr Skripal and his daughter was made in or produced by Russia?
“Either
this was a direct act by the Russian State against our country. Or
conceivably, the Russian government could have lost control of a
military-grade nerve agent and allowed it to get into the hands of
others.”
Other
than the actual substance used, is there any hard evidence that led
the Government to conclude these as being the only two plausible
scenarios?
15. On
March 26th, a number of countries expelled Russian diplomats in an
apparent response to the incident in Salisbury. Yet at this time, the
OPCW had not yet investigated the case, nor analysed blood samples.
Why was the clearly co-ordinated decision to expel diplomats taken
before the OPCW’s investigation had concluded?
16. Has
this not put huge pressure on the OPCW to come up with “the right”
conclusion?
17. It
is reckoned that the OPCW’s investigation into the substance used
will take at least three weeks to complete, whereas it took Porton
Down less than a week to analyse it. What accounts for this
difference?
18. Will
the OPCW be using the samples of “Novichok” that Boris Johnson
says are held at Porton Down to compare with the blood samples of Mr
Skripal and his daughter?
19. If
not, on what basis will this comparison be made, since the first
known synthesis of a “Novichok” was made by Iran in 2016?
20. If
the OPCW discovers that the substance is indeed a “Novichok”,
will this be sufficient evidence with which to establish who carried
out the attack on the Skripals or — given that other countries
clearly have the capability to produce such substances — would more
evidence be needed?
===================================
* Anti-Russische propaganda waarvan de zaak Skripal maar één voorbeeld uit velen is……
Moet wel toegeven dat ik de vraagstelling van Slane niet helemaal begrijp, immers de hijgerige reguliere westerse massamedia brengen met grote graagte zoveel mogelijk ‘nieuws’ (voornamelijk ‘nepnieuws’) waarmee Rusland als de slechterik wordt afgeschilderd….. Neem alleen al het continu volhouden door deze media van de leugen dat Rusland De Krim heeft geannexeerd, terwijl men dondersgoed weet dat de bevolking van De Krim (inclusief de oorspronkelijke bevolking) zich in een door internationale waarnemers als eerlijk en goed beoordeeld referendum hebben uitgesproken voor aansluiting bij Rusland. Vooral de VS coup tegen de door hen democratisch gekozen president Janoekovytsj, stak de bevolking van De Krim, waar de door de VS geparachuteerde fascistische junta (gecontroleerd door neonazi’s) de druppel was, die hen tot het besluit brachten te stemmen voor aansluiting bij Rusland……
Ja ik weet ‘t VVD hufter Blok is geen licht, echter hij weet mij telkens weer te verrassen met zijn meer dan belachelijke uitspraken.
Vanmorgen op BNR (rond 7.42 u.) een ‘interview’ van Groot-Brittannie correspondent van Bekhoven met Blok, die momenteel in Londen verblijft. ‘Uiteraard’ ging het gesprek over de aanslag met ‘novitsjok’ (novichok) op de ex-dubbelspion Skripal en zijn dochter. Opvallend hoe eerbiedig van Bekhoven sprak met Blok, als betrof het een groot staatsman…… ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! (de toon van van Bekhoven is ‘normaal’ heel anders)
En nee, Blok heeft geen bewijzen gezien voor de Russische schuld voor deze aanslag. Toch is Blok overtuigd van die schuld….. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! Hoe dat zit: wel het is volgens Blok ‘plausibel’ dat Rusland de schuldige is (hij noemde nog net niet Putin zelf, maar het scheelde niet veel)……
Volgens leeghoofd Blok is het nu aan Rusland is om duidelijkheid te geven in deze zaak….. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! Met andere woorden: of Rusland even zo goed wil zijn haar schuld voor deze aanslag toe te geven……. ha! ha ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! Je snapt natuurlijk wel, dat van Bekhoven geen kritische woord liet vallen tijdens het ‘interview…..’
Hoe is het mogelijk dat flapdrol Blok minister van Buitenlandse Zaken mag spelen??!!!
Overigens geldt hetzelfde voor Rutte, in eerste instantie zei deze disfunctionerende VVD volksverlakker dat hij onomstotelijk bewijs wilde zien voor de Russische schuld aan deze aanslag, maar na een theekrans in Brussel stelde ook Rutte dat Rusland schuldig is en stelde hij dat twee Russische diplomaten Nederland zullen worden uitgewezen…… Wedden dat ook Rutte het wel plausibel vindt dat Rusland achter de aanslag zit?
Ongelofelijk en totaal ongeloofwaardig! Terecht dat Rusland de excuses eist van landen die haar volkomen onterecht beschuldigen voor het uitvoeren van deze aanslag!
Rutte stelde eerder t.a.v. de ‘moordaanslag’ op ex-dubbelspion Skripal zowaar, eerst onomstotelijk bewijs te willen zien waaruit de Russische schuld voor die aanslag zou blijken, voordat hij actie wilde ondernemen. Echter na een theekrans in Brussel stuurt het onzelfstandig VVD ventje en opperhufter Rutte nu 2 Russische diplomaten naar huis, zonder ook maar een flinter van bewijs voor die Russische verantwoordelijkheid…….
Om deze beslissing te steunen stelde VVD volksverlakker Blok dat Rusland met de bewijzen moet komen, dat het deze aanslag niet heeft gepleegd……. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! Uiteraard zal Rusland dit niet doen, te zot voor woorden, maar Blok zal daarop zeggen dat het wel duidelijk is:’ Rusland is onomstotelijk bewezen de dader….’ Blok, die stelde dat Rusland moet meewerken aan het onderzoek, vertelt het Nederlandse volk natuurlijk niet, dat Rusland een onafhankelijk onderzoek eiste en zelf deel wil uitmaken van het onderzoek’, iets dat NB door de Britten werd afgewezen!!
Het BNR nieuws van 9.00 u. vanmorgen haalde de uitspraak in deze van zijne kwaadaardigheid Turnbull, de Australische premier aan: deze flapdrol durfde te zeggen dat Rusland voor het eerst sinds WOII gifgas heeft gebruikt in Europa…….. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! Sinds WOII is er heel veel gifgas gebruikt in Europa, namelijk traangas en dat door diverse staten, waaronder Nederland, godbetert tegen de eigen bevolking!!!
Na 9.30 u. op Radio1 in het programma ‘Smaakmakers’ (ofwel: praatjesmakers) werd Ben Bot gevraagd naar deze zaak en hij begon over de pokerface van Putin, die hij daarna dan ook de schuld voor de aanslag op Skripal en zijn dochter in de schoenen schoof……
Uiterst vermakelijk waren daarna de uitlatingen van de ‘journalisten’ in het onvolprezen suffe ‘Mediaforum’ (Radio1 na 10.00 u.). Vooral Joost Oranje, de regeringsgetrouwe hoofdredacteur van Nieuwsuur was ronduit humoristisch, ondanks dat er totaal geen bewijs is voor Russische betrokkenheid bij de aanslag op Skripal, weet hij het middels veel geblaat zeker: Rusland is de dader! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! Tja we moeten nu eenmaal de geheime diensten vertrouwen (althans Oranje vertrouwt ze volledig), ook de Engelse en ja als die dan allen stellen dat Rusland de dader is, kan er geen twijfel bestaan……. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!
Alsof de geheime diensten ook maar voor 20% geloofwaardig zijn…….. Een herhaling van zetten zoals in Russiagate, waar men durfde te stellen dat alle geheime diensten van de VS tot dezelfde conclusie waren gekomen: Rusland heeft de presidentsverkiezingen van 2016 gemanipuleerd en daarmee zou het bewijs geleverd zijn……. Echter van de meer dan 15 geheime diensten in de VS waren dit er 3: de FBI, de NSA en de CIA, alle 3 bekend om hun enorme leugens……. Het hele Russiagate verhaal is dan ook (en bepaald niet alleen vanwege deze leugen) niets meer dan bewezen enorme kul!
Overigens was voor Oranje ook zwaarwegend dat de Nederlandse regering overtuigd is van de Russische schuld in deze…….. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! Hoe kan je de Nederlandse regering nu plotsklaps als geloofwaardig zien, terwijl het door de leider van deze regering verlangde onomstotelijke bewijs volledig ontbreekt??!!!
Opvallend trouwens: op de landelijke radio nieuwszenders, BNR en Radio1 (en die in Duitsland en Groot-Brittannie), hoor je het woord ‘novitsjok’ (novichok), de naam die aan het gif werd gegeven, amper of niet meer terug…….
Zie voorts de reacties van Artwave Art onder dit bericht!
Israëlische
bronnen meldden onlangs dat Israël bezig is met de voorbereiding op
een oorlog, die op meerdere fronten gevoerd moet gaan worden…… Hierin staat Israël bepaald niet
alleen, ook de VS is daar mee bezig gezien de feiten en agressie in
Syrië en tegen Iran, en diezelfde agressie, al is het nog niet met (volledig) militair geweld tegen Rusland, Noord-Korea en… China.
De
VS stelt de soevereiniteit en democratie van landen als de Filipijnen, Japan en
Taiwan ‘te verdedigen*‘ tegen Chinese ‘agressie’, agressie die bestaat uit het
opspuiten van eilandjes in de Zuid-Chinese Zee, een zee die niet aan
de VS grenst, maar zoals de naam al doet vermoeden, wel aan China…….
Gezien
de grootschalige terreur die de VS verspreidt in bijvoorbeeld het
Midden-Oosten (waartoe men voor voor het gemak ook Afghanistan en
Libië rekent) en het feit dat de VS rond China en Rusland
meer dan 600 militaire bases hebben ingericht, is het bepaald niet
vreemd dat China een buffer rond haar land probeert in te richten. (een buffer rond Rusland werd door de uiterst agressieve VS met de NAVO aan de lijn, voor een groot deel afgebroken, dit volkomen tegen de eerder gemaakte afspraken met Gorbatsjov in…….)
Tel
daar de VS import heffingen op Chinees staal en aluminium bij op en je kan niets anders zien dan het begin van een handelsoorlog….. Het plaatje is
compleet: ook China moet zich onderwerpen aan de VS hegemonie, daar
het anders te maken krijgt met het leger van de VS……..**
Het nieuwe budget voor de VS defensie, uh oorlogsvoering is hoger dan ooit tevoren, ondanks dat het Pentagon 11,5 biljoen over de laatste jaren niet kan verantwoorden…… (en niet goedgekeurd door het congres) Gezien dit enorme budget en het voorgaande, kan je niet anders concluderen dan dat het hier om een oorlogsbudget gaat, niet alleen voor de illegale oorlogen die de VS nog voert (Afghanistan, Irak en Syrië), maar vooral t.b.v. komende (illegale) oorlogen, die de ‘neocons***‘ op hun verlanglijst hebben staan…… Deze neocons hebben in feite het Witte Huis overgenomen…..
De grote winnaar van dit alles? Het militair-industrieel complex!!
US
Warship Infuriates China After Sailing Within 12 Miles of Disputed
Island
(ANTIMEDIA) — A
U.S. Navy destroyer carried out a “freedom of navigation”
operation on Friday, coming within 12 nautical miles of one of
China’s artificial islands, according to an
exclusive Reuters report.
Speaking
to Reuters on the condition of anonymity, U.S.
officials said the destroyer Mustin traveled close to Mischief Reef
in the Spratly Islands and carried out maneuvering operations.
Washington’s intention was to counter what it sees as China’s
attempts to limit the freedom of navigation in the strategically
located waters.
The
navigation reportedly infuriated Beijing, which still has territorial
disputes with its neighbors. As Reuters highlighted,
12 nautical miles is an internationally recognized territorial limit
and fits a recent pattern of U.S. navigational behavior. However, it
is highly likely that the U.S. purposely brought the ship as close as
possible, as it has become increasingly concerned that China’s
build-up in the area will eventually drive the U.S. out and make its
so-called free nautical movement non-existent.
According
to Reuters, the U.S. military believes its activities are
carried out under international law and relies on the fact that
American forces regularly operate in the region.
“We
conduct routine and regular freedom of navigation operations, as we
have done in the past and will continue to do in the
future,” Lieutenant
Commander Nicole Schwegman, a spokesperson for the U.S. Pacific
Fleet, said, as quoted by Reuters.
China’s
response to this latest move was to send two naval ships of its own
to identify the ships and warn the destroyer to leave. In turn, China
has vowed to accelerate its plans for the region in order to combat
the American presence.
“The
provocative behaviour by the U.S. side will only cause the Chinese
military to further strengthen building up defense abilities in all
areas,” a
Chinese Defense Ministry statement read.
Its
navy will also carry out combat drills in the South China Sea,
calling the development part of regular annual exercises.
This
is not the first time this year Washington has sent a warship to the
area, rattling China in the process. In January,
China vowed to take “necessary measures” to protect its
sovereignty after the U.S. Navy destroyer USS Hopper came within 12
nautical miles of Huangyuan Island, which is subject to a rival claim
by the Philippines.
This
latest operation occurred just one day after Donald Trump signed a
presidential memorandum that will target $60 billion in Chinese goods
with tariffs following a 30-day consultation period that will begin
once the list of targeted Chinese goods is published. China already
warned against
this provocative move, urging the U.S. to step away from what it
termed as “the brink.”
The
move also follows the revelation that the Trump administration signed
the Taiwan
Travel Act into
law. The bill calls for increased high-level visits to Taiwan by U.S.
civilian and military leaders. Just last week, Anti-Mediareleased
a report predicting
that the situation would quietly start to escalate with little more
than a blink from the media, which is busy debating gun control,
Facebook’s much-needed scrutiny, and anything else that doesn’t
involve a potential nuclear holocaust.
In
early February, President Trump said he planned
to nominate Admiral
Harry B. Harris Jr., the commander of the U.S. Pacific Command, as
ambassador to Australia. Not long after, Harris was quick to
advise Congress to prepare for a war with China in the South China
Sea.
Australia
has recently been caught in a war of words of its own with China and
had plans to send a British
warship into
the South China Sea earlier this month, as well.
It
might sound simplistic, but Washington’s concern with the area and
rationale for risking an all-out confrontation is about one thing:
money. China’s use of the South China sea attracts approximately $5
trillion in ship-borne trade every year, according to Reuters.
All
that is preventing China from injecting itself into the rest of the
global market eastward through the Pacific Ocean is a chain of
islands known as the “first
island chain,” an
island chain that includes the Kuril Islands of Russia, the Japanese
archipelago, Taiwan, the northern Philippines, and Borneo. America
has blocked China through its control of these islands and with the
help of its allies on the ground, but this has recently started to
change.
Since August
last year,
China has had an incursion of its own into the area, flying bombers
and intelligence aircraft near these southern outlying islands of
Japan. Russia, a stalwart ally of China, is also looking to build
a naval base in the area even
though control of the islands in question continues to be a point of
dispute between Japan and Russia. It seems likely that Russia’s
military presence will only aid China’s regional ambitions — as
opposed to presenting a buffer to it — as the two nuclear powers
often view U.S. hegemony through the same lens. Further
complicating this issue, in February of this year,
2,000 Russian troops held military exercises on the Southern Kurils,
irking Japan in the process.
Clearly,
things are building up for a reason, though one would be hard-pressed
to find any mainstream media outlet that pays this story the amount
of coverage it deserves.
* ‘Verdedigen’, ofwel de VS is bezig haar sleutelposities in de regio van de Zuid-Chinese Zee uit te breiden……….
** Dit zet ten overvloede nog eens het belachelijke praatje van Heleen Mees in het juiste daglicht, deze neoliberale hufter weet niet waar ze over praat, als ze zegt dat Trump groot gelijk heeft met het instellen van importheffingen, immers een handelsoorlog eindigt meestal in een echte oorlog, zoals de geschiedenis ons leert….. Zie: ‘Heleen Mees, Trump heeft gelijk met zijn handelsoorlog tegen China………‘
*** Neoconservatieven die verdomd veel gemeen hebben met het ijskoude, inhumane neoliberalisme.
Professor
Mark Skidmore van de Michigan State University ging uitzoeken waar
6,5 biljoen dollar was gebleven, 6,5 biljoen die niet waren goedgekeurd door
het Congres en kwam er achter dat het werkelijke bedrag veel groter
was dan eerder aangegeven en uiteindelijk uitkomt op 21 biljoen (in VS aangeduid als 21 triljoen dollar) niet goedgekeurde uitgaven….
Voor het ‘defensie’ budget bedroeg dit bedrag al meer dan 11 biljoen……. En
dan wil Trump dat de andere NAVO partners hun budgetten verder
opschroeven……. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! Moet je nagaan: de VS het land dat
graag woorden gebruikt als ‘corrupte regering’ en ‘democratie brengen’ als een regime niet
in de smaak valt……
Ongelofelijk!
Vergeet voorts niet dat de VS alleen deze eeuw al 4 illegale oorlogen is gestart, oorlogen die een enorm beslag leggen op het defensie uh oorlogsbudget…… De VS geeft alleen al 4 keer zoveel aan defensie uit dan Rusland en China samen! De NAVO lidstaten Groot-Brittannië, Frankrijk, Duitsland en Italië geven al meer dan 3 keer zoveel uit aan defensie dan Rusland……. En maar zeiken om meer geld en dat om de ongebreidelde terreur van de VS en het uitlokken van oorlogen elders te steunen………
Overigens heeft Trump het leger ‘carte blanche’ gegeven om naar eigen goeddunken extra personeel of wapens in te zetten, zodat controle op de uitgegeven gelden nog veel moeilijker zal worden…….
Professor
Mark Skidmore of Michigan State University set out to prove Catherine
Austin Fitts and her claims of “missing trillions” and “black
budgets” was wrong.
Instead,
he discovered the hole was even bigger than that.
The
Army alone had $11.5 trillion missing.
Some
individual unsupported journal adjustments are SIX TIMES the total
annual budget of the Army.
A
overall 1% error in government budgets is considered “normal.”
Theese
numbers are astronomical.
How
can you do a proper evaluation of numbers with figures like this? All
spending needs to be a approved by Congress.
“It
looks like there’s a whole lot of money flowing in and a whole lot
of money flowing out”…completely outside the rule of law.
===========================
Hier nog een artikel van Forbes over deze zaak:
Has
Our Government Spent $21 Trillion Of Our Money Without Telling Us?
I
am co-authoring this column with Mark Skidmore, a Professor of
Economics at Michigan State University.
“No
Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of
Appropriations made by Law; and a regular Statement and Account of
the Receipts and Expenditures of all public Money shall be published
from time to time.” ~
Article I, Section 9, Clause 7, The US Constitution
On
July 26, 2016, the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) issued a
report “Army General Fund Adjustments Not Adequately Documented or
Supported”. The report indicates that for fiscal year 2015
the Army failed to provide adequate support for $6.5 trillion in
journal voucher adjustments. According to
the GAO’s Comptroller General, “Journal vouchers are
summary-level accounting adjustments made when balances between
systems cannot be reconciled. Often these journal vouchers are
unsupported, meaning they lack supporting documentation to justify
the adjustment or are not tied to specific accounting
transactions…. For an auditor, journal
vouchers are a red flag for
transactions not being captured, reported, or summarized correctly.”
(Note,
after Mark Skidmore began inquiring about OIG-reported
unsubstantiated adjustments, the OIG’s webpage, which
documented, albeit in a highly incomplete manner, these unsupported
“accounting adjustments,” was mysteriously taken
down. Fortunately, Mark copied the July 2016 report and all other
relevant OIG-reports in advance and reposted them here.
Mark has repeatedly tried to contact Lorin Venable, Assistant
Inspector General at the Office of the Inspector General. He
has emailed, phoned, and used LinkedIn to ask Ms. Venable about OIG’s
disclosure of unsubstantiated adjustments, but she has not
responded.)
Given
that the entire Army budget in fiscal year 2015 was $120 billion,
unsupported adjustments were 54 times the level of spending
authorized by Congress. The July 2016 report indicates that
unsupported adjustments are the result of the Defense Department’s
“failure to correct system deficiencies.” The result,
according to the report, is that data used to prepare the year-end
financial statements were unreliable and lacked an adequate audit
trail. The report indicates that just 170 transactions accounted for
$2.1 trillion in year—end unsupported adjustments. No
information is given about these 170 transactions. In addition
many thousands of transactions with unsubstantiated adjustments
were, according to the report, removed by the Army.
There
is no explanation concerning why they were removed nor their
magnitude. The July 2016 report states, “In addition, DFAS
(Defense Finance and Accounting Service) Indianapolis personnel did
not document or support why DDRS (The Defense Department Reporting
System) removed at least 16,513 of 1.3 million feeder file records
during the Third Quarter.”
An
appendix to the July 2016 report shows $2 trillion in changes to the
Army General Fund balance sheet due to unsupported adjustments. On
the asset side, there is $794 billion increase in the Army’s Fund
Balance with the U.S. Treasury. There is also an increase of
$929 billion in the Army’s Accounts Payable. This information raises
additional major questions. First, what is the source of the
additional $794 billion in the Army’s Fund Balance? This adjustment
represents more than six times appropriated spending.
Second,
do these transfers represent a flow of funds to the Army beyond those
authorized by Congress? Third, were these funds authorized and if so
when and by whom? Fourth, what is the source of these funds? Finally,
the $929 billion in Accounts Payable appears to represent an amount
owed for items or services purchased on credit. What entities have
received or will receive payment?
The
July 2016 report is not the only such report of unsubstantiated
adjustments. Mark Skidmore and Catherine Austin Fitts, former
Assistant Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, conducted
a search of government websites and found similar reports dating back
to 1998. While the documents are incomplete, original
government sources indicate$21
trillion in
unsupported adjustments have been reported for the Department of
Defense and the Department of Housing and Urban Development for the
years 1998-2015.
While
government budgets can be complex, our government, like any business,
can track receipts and payments and share this information in ways
that can be understood by the public. The ongoing occurrence
and gargantuan nature of unsupported, i.e., undocumented, U.S.
federal government expenditures as well as sources of funding for
these expenditures should be a great concern to all tax payers.
Taken
together these reports point to a failure to comply with basic
Constitutional and legislative requirements for spending and
disclosure. We urge the House and Senate Budget Committee to initiate
immediate investigations of unaccounted federal expenditures as well
as the source of their payment.
PS,
On December 11, 2017 we learned that the key documents had been
reposted on the OIG website, but with different URLs. On October 5,
2017 we discovered that the link to the report “Army General Fund
Adjustments Not Adequately Documented or Supported” had been
disabled. Within a several days, the links to other OIG documents we
identified in our search were also disabled. The sequential
non-random nature of this disabling process suggests a purposeful
decision on the part of OIG to make key documents unavailable to the
public via the website, as opposed to website reorganization, etc. We
also revisited the website intermittently to see whether the
documents had been reposted under different URLs—until very
recently they had not been reposted. The OIG link to the most report
“Army General Fund Adjustments Not Adequately Documented or
Supported”, which indicates $6.5 trillion in unsupported
adjustments, can now be found here:
We are currently searching the OIG website for the other reports and
will share the links here once
we have completed the search.
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, 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:
Information
Clearing House bracht gisteren een artikel waarin min of meer wordt
aangekondigd dat de ‘gematigde rebellen’ aan de kant van de VS, een
gifgasaanval voorbereiden met chlorine. Een grote hoeveelheid, 20 ton
chlorine en ontstekers zijn geleverd aan de terreurgroep in al-Tanf.
De
bedoeling is om dit gif te gebruiken tegen een dichtbevolkt gebied,
waarna de White Helmets (ofwel Al Qaida Syrië) en de hysterische westerse reguliere media met beelden van de slachtoffers de wereld zullen overspoelen (‘uiteraard’ met zoveel mogelijk kinderen) en de mededeling dat de
reguliere Syrische troepen deze aanval hebben uitgevoerd….. Een
‘false flag operatie’ noemt men een dergelijke ‘werkwijze…..’
Ongelofelijk
maar waar: alle gifgasaanvallen tot nu toe tijdens de illegale oorlog
tegen het Syrische bewind, werden door de westerse media en het
overgrote deel van de westerse politici toegewezen aan aan het Syrische bewind….. Dit
blijft men volhouden, ondanks dat na onderzoek keer op keer blijkt
dat de schuld bij de door het westen aangeduide en gesteunde ‘gematigde rebellen’
(lees: moordenaars, verkrachters, martelbeulen en…. gebruikers van
gifgasaanvallen!)……..
Gezien
de uitlatingen van o.a. VS ambassadeur bij de VN, hare leeghoofdige
kwaadaardigheid Nikki Haley en de uiterst agressieve Trump administratie, zal bij een
‘volgende’ gifgasaanval ‘van het reguliere Syrische leger, of de
Russen’, de VS ingrijpen en zal Damascus, inclusief het paleis van Assad
worden gebombardeerd…….
Haley
durfde daar zelfs aan toe te voegen dat men geen rekening zal houden
met de aanwezige Russen in Damascus……
Intussen
heeft Rusland aangegeven dat het niet zal toezien hoe Damascus of
haar onderdanen worden gebombardeerd en heeft beloofd terug te zullen slaan………
Echter
gezien de geschiedenis van het gedrag vertoond door VS coalitie in deze illegale oorlog tegen Syrië, zal er geen rekening worden gehouden
met de woorden van de Russische minister van buitenlandse zaken
Lavrov en de stafchef van het Russische leger Gerasimov……. Ofwel
een oorlog tussen de VS en Rusland is bijna niet te voorkomen…..
US
Planning a Terrorist False Flag Chemical Attack in Syria: Russia Says
It Will Respond
By
Federico Pieraccini
March
20, 2018 “Information
Clearing House” –Events
in Syria increasingly resemble a direct confrontation between major
powers rather than a proxy war. Lavrov’s words, delivered a few
days ago, reveal the critical phase of international relations the
world is going through, with a potentially devastating conflict ready
to ignite in the Middle East region.
An
alarming warning by
Sergei Lavrov and Chief of the Russian General Staff, Valery
Gerasimov,
was announced via the RT broadcaster and several Russian
media. The content is explosive and deserving of the widest possible
dissemination. Gerasimov claimed that
Moscow had “reliable information that fighters are preparing to
stage the use by government troops of chemical weapons against the
civilian population.” He alleged that the US intends to accuse
Assad’s troops of using chemical weapons against civilians, and then
“carry out a bombing attack” on Damascus. Gerasimov warned
that Russia would “take retaliatory measures” if the US
targeted areas where its military are located in the Syrian capital.
“Russian military advisers, representatives of the Center for
Reconciliation and members of military police” are currently in
the Syrian capital, Gerasimov said, adding that in the event that the
lives of Russian military personnel are placed in danger, the Russian
Armed Forces will respond with certain measure to both “missiles”
and their “launchers”. A few hours earlier, Lavrov responded,
“criticizing the remarks by the US envoy to the UN, Nikki Haley,
about Washington’s readiness to “bomb Damascus and even the
presidential palace of Bashar Assad, regardless [of the] presence of
the Russian representatives there.” “It is an absolutely
irresponsible statement,” the Russian top diplomat added.
The
words of Gerasimov are even more dire,
since he explains how the United States and its allies are preparing
the ground to justify an attack on Syria. According to reports,
terrorists stationed in Al-Tanf (an illegal US military base in
Syria) received 20 tons of chlorine gas and detonators, disguised as
cigarette packs, in order to attack in an area under the control of
the terrorists that is densely inhabited by civilians.
What would
then happen is already obvious, with the White Helmets (AKA
Al-Qaeda) and
mainstream media ready to broadcast the images of the victims of
the attack, tugging at the heartstrings of Western viewers otherwise
unaware of the conspiracy being
played out. Efforts to frame Russia have already reached the highest
alert levels, with the false-flag poisoning of the Russian spy in the
United Kingdom. It seems that there is a significant effort by the
United States, the United Kingdom, France and Germany to provoke a
military confrontation with Moscow. How else are we able to
interpret threats from
Macron to strike Damascus, together with his ominous advice to
foreign journalists not to go to Damascus in the coming days and, for
those already there, to leave the capital immediately? There has even
been chatter within diplomatic circles that suggest that UN personnel
are leaving Damascus. This could be psychological warfare, or it
could be a prelude to war. With the stakes so high, we cannot afford
to ignore any detail, even if it may be disinformation. The American
attack seems imminent, with mounting signs of movements of American
and Russian warships in the Mediterranean in attack
formation.
Russian
military representatives have reiterated that in the event of an
attack, they will respond by
hitting both the missiles launched as well as the ships from which
the missiles were launched. Things are getting pretty dicey, and the
risk of a direct confrontation between the United States and the
Russian Federation are rising with every passing hour.
The transfer of
numerous US aircraft from Incirlik, Turkey, to Al-Azrak, Jordan,
is another indication of preparations for an attack, since the forces
moved to Jordan are close to the Al-Tanf base. The
proposed strategy could
involve an assault on the city of Daraa, for the purposes of securing
the borders between Syria and Jordan and Syria and Israel.
The
warnings raised by Lavrov and Gerasimov appear unprecedented, given
that they detail a plan already set in course, evidently approved at
the highest levels and aimed at provoking and justifying an attack on
Syria; and attack that would encompass the Russian forces in Syria.
Tensions continue to grow, following Russia’s shooting
down of
a drone by two surface-to-air missiles launched from its Hmeimim Air
Base. Moscow has even deployed to
the Mediterranean the Admiral Grigorovich-class frigate Admiral
Essen and the Krivak II-class anti-submarine frigate Pytivyy.
Both are prepared for anti-ship and anti-submarine operations.
Sources claim that this deployment was planned some time ago and is
part of a routine deployment of the Russian navy. But during such a
delicate moment, it pays to focus on every detail. Without resorting
to excessive alarmism, if Lavrov said that “the movements of the
warships of the United States and its allies in the Mediterranean
seem compatible with the strategy of using this chemical attack to
justify an attack on the Syrian Arab army and government
installations”, then it is reasonable to speculate on whether the
Russian ships are moving in to the area to counter any provocations.
There
are two fundamental flaws in the reasoning of US policy-makers and
the US military establishment. They are convinced that an American
demonstration of strength (involving a large number of cruise missile
launched against Syria through a significant involvement of aircraft
carriers as well as bombers) would stun Russia into passivity.
Furthermore, US military generals are convinced that Syria and Russia
do not have the ability to defend themselves for an extended period
of time. They seem to be fooling themselves with their own
propaganda. As their Israeli colleagues have already learned, such an
assumption is mistaken. While the idea that a high level of firepower
would meet with some kind of success, the possibility of a response
from Syrian and Russian forces remains. And this possibility seems
not to have been given sufficient weight by the US and her allies.
How
would the American military and the Trump presidency react to a US
warship being sunk by anti-ship missiles? It would only serve to
demonstrate how vulnerable American naval forces are when confronted
with such advanced weapons. It would represent a tremendous shock for
the US military, possibly the biggest shock since the end of WWII.
What would Trump and the generals in charge do?
They would respond
with further bombardment of Russian forces, leaving themselves open
to a devastating Russian response. The conflict could escalate within
the space of a few minutes, leading to a situation where there could
be no possible winners.
The
normal reasoning I
employ when considering total annihilation is placed to one side when
US special forces deliver 20 tons of chlorine gas to Al Qaeda
terrorists in Syria order to execute a false flag for the purposes of
blaming Damascus and Moscow. If we connect this event to what is
currently happening in the United Kingdom, and the hysteria in the
United States surrounding alleged Russian hacking during the American
elections, we can understand just how much international relations
have deteriorated. This situation is reminiscent of Ukraine in 2015.
Ukrainian forces suffered repeated defeats at the hands of the
Donbass resistance, being contained in the thousands in different
“cauldrons.
Within NATO headquarters in Brussels during that time, there were
open discussion over sending a contingent to support Ukrainian
troops. The plan, however, was never realized, given the possibility
of direct confrontation in Ukraine between the Russian Federation and
NATO.
In
recent months, the possibility of a war on the Korean Peninsula has
also been evoked and perhaps simultaneously averted by the
unpredictable consequences for both Seoul and the American forces in
the region.
In
Syria, the approach of Washington and its diplomatic and military
emissaries seems more reckless and less tied to a chain of command
where the buck stops at the American president. It seems that the US
deep state in Syria has a greater and more hidden control over
American forces, sabotaging every agreement made between Moscow and
Washington. We saw this during the Obama presidency, where the US Air
Force bombed government
troops in Deir ez-Zor only a few hours after a ceasefire had been
reached between Lavrov and Secretary of State Kerry.
The
grave circumstance about which we write seem to be without precedent,
seeming as they do to lead towards a direct confrontation between
nuclear-armed powers. Alas, in such circumstances, we can only hope
for the best but prepare for the worst; we can only wait to read on
the mainstream media notifications of the latest chemical attack in
Syria. We can only hope that there is someone in Washington retaining
enough sense to factor in the devastating consequences of an attack
on Damascus and the Russian forces in the region.
Never
before has the region been on the verge of such an explosion as in
the next few hours — as a result of the typically reckless actions
of the United States.
Federico
Pieraccini : Independent freelance writer specialized in
international affairs, conflicts, politics and strategies.
Afgelopen maandag maakten Europese waarnemers bij de Russische verkiezingen bekend dat de verkiezingen in Rusland eerlijk en rustig waren verlopen……
Deze vaststelling was aan dovemansoren van de reguliere westerse ‘onafhankelijke’ (ha! ha!) media, zij schermden met honderden incidenten tijdens deze verkiezingen…… Waar uiteraard nog even ‘oppositieleider’ Navalny van stal werd gehaald als een geweldige vent en een goed politicus (o.a. BBC) die door het (smerige) Putin bewind was uitgesloten van deelname aan de verkiezingen*.
Vanmorgen was de meer dan defecte BNR ‘navigator van de internationale politiek’ Hammelburg op deze zender te horen met zijn wekelijkse lulpraatje. Ook hij moest tot een paar keer aangeven dat hij grote vraagtekens zet bij de enorme winst van Putin en sprak o.a. over een ‘opgeleukte’ verkiezingsuitslag, schijt aan de internationale waarnemers…..
BNR’s ‘navigator’ had het gore lef nog eens te stellen dat Rusland verantwoordelijk is voor ‘de aanslag’ op Skripal in Engeland, terwijl daarvoor nog steeds geen enkel steekhoudend bewijs is……. Blijkbaar heeft flapdrol Hammelburg niet het vermogen om te bedenken hoe dom dit zou zijn, nu Rusland al van alles en nog wat de schuld krijgt en straks het WK Voetbal binnen haar grenzen heeft….. Nogmaals: alsof Rusland deze Skripal niet echt had kunnen vermoorden, zonder ook maar één bewijs achter te laten, sterker nog door zijn sterven op een natuurlijke dood te laten lijken (terwijl Skripal nog steeds leeft…..)
* Navalny is naast misdadiger ook nog eens een racist en fascist (beetje dubbelop, een racist is immers altijd een fascist)
Alle
tekenen wijzen naar een komend groot conflict >> het samenspannen van de VS en
haar (andere) slaafse westerse landen tegen Rusland, Syrië en Iran, plus
natuurlijk China en Noord-Korea, gesteund middels een enorme propaganda van de westerse media, zorgt ervoor dat er niet veel nodig is of we
zitten middenin WOIII…… Wat betreft China en Noord-Korea: daar
zijn nog geen officiële NAVO oefeningen gehouden, al zijn de spanningen er daar niet minder om…. (hoewel Australië, Nieuw-Zeeland en de Filipijnen natuurlijk ook een soort NAVO bondgenoot zijn*) Neem de alweer grote militaire oefening van Zuid-Korea en de
VS langs de grenzen en territoriale wateren van Noord-Korea……
Tijdens de Spelen kon de wereld even ademhalen en toenadering tussen
de 2 Korea’s was even een feit…..
De
Spelen zijn nog niet afgelopen of de VS kondigt aan dat de grote
jaarlijkse militaire oefening ‘gewoon’ doorgaat…..
Blijkbaar heeft de VS Moon Jae-in, de Zuid-Koreaanse president en de Zuid-Koreaanse regering dusdanig onder druk gezet dat men toestemde in het laten doorgaan van
die oefeningen, militaire oefeningen die de Noord-Koreanen al
decennia lang steken, maar waar vooral de VS niet van af wil zien…….. Tja,
zeg nu zelf, ‘wat is belangrijker’, een voor de winsten en macht van het militair-industrieel
complex en de macht van de VS te houden grootschalige militaire
oefening, of vrede?? Vrede is (blijkbaar) voor dombo’s……
Niet
alleen de agressie tegen landen als Syrië, Rusland, Iran, China en
Noord-Korea wijzen in de richting van WOIII, maar met de wisselingen
aan de top van de Trump administratie, kan het bijna niet anders of we stevenen af op een grootschalige oorlog……. De
ene psychopathische houwdegen van die administratie na de andere wordt op straat gezet, waarvoor in de plaats psychopaten worden ingezet die nog een fikse portie kwaadaardiger zijn……… De VS heeft zelfs gesteld dat een aanval met conventionele wapens (dus niet met kernwapens) op bevriende landen niet wordt uitgesloten, een aanval gericht op de bevolking en infrastructuur van die bevriende landen………
Darius
Shahtahmasebi noemt het niet in het volgende artikel, maar er ligt ook nog eens een enorme Himalaya aan VS schulden, het is dat de munt van de VS een internationaal betaalmiddel is en bijvoorbeeld de olieprijs in
dollars wordt uitgedrukt, anders zou het er wel eens heel anders uit
kunnen zien voor de VS en haar onafzienbare schuldenlast……
Vreemd
trouwens dat een land als China zulke enorme voorraden dollars heeft,
als dit land deze op de markt dumpt, kan de VS financieel
inpakken….. Dan blijft de vraag over wat goed is voor een land met enorme schulden? Juist,
oorlog!! Vandaar ook dat de geldpersen in de VS overuren maken…..
Het zou me trouwens niet verbazen als China de dollar niet eens durft
te dumpen als betaalmiddel (valuta om mee te investeren)……. Gezien
deze zaak zijn de agressieve woorden van Trump over een importheffing op Chinees
staal en aluminium nog vreemder…….. Blijkbaar wil hij
daarmee zeggen schijt te hebben aan China en haar enorme
dollarvoorraad………
Het
vorige voorbeeld is nog meer van belang, immers China en Rusland
hebben al een paar keer gesproken over een ander internationaal
betaalmiddel dan de dollar. Khadaffi wou de olie dollar inruilen voor
de gouden dinar, een munt waarvan de tegenwaarde altijd in goud
aanwezig zou zijn, één van de redenen voor de illegale oorlog van de
VS en haar oorlogshond NAVO tegen Libië…….. (de enorme goudvoorraad van Libië is tijdens de illegale oorlog van de VS en andere NAVO lidstaten tegen dit land ‘verdwenen….’)
Zo bezien is WOIII eigenlijk niet meer te ontwijken…….
A
World War Might Sound Crazy, but It Could Be America’s Last Act of
Desperation
(ANTIMEDIA Op-ed) — Though some have
been warning about
the catastrophic potential for a third global conflict for years, it
wasn’t until recently that
these warnings became more
mainstream.
The calamitous nature of the violence in Syria — which has one
nuclear power defending a government that has been the target of a
regime change operation led by the world’s superpower —
combined with 2017’s threats of “fire
and fury” against
another state intently pursuing a nuclear weapons supply of its own,
has pushed the issue
of a third world war directly
into the public
discourse.
While
certain hotspots throughout the Middle East, Asia, and Eastern Europe
(i.e. Ukraine)
have seen some notable escalations in the last few years, a direct
conflict between Russia and the United States is still yet to emerge.
That’s because the idea of a third world war in today’s world is
completely insane. If the two countries that currently possess the
world’s greatest supplies of nuclear weapons go to war, there
may not be a world left for
the victors to inhabit after the war is done, thereby making it an
unthinkable proposal.
Then
again, the U.S. did just recently bomb a significant
number of
Russian-linked forces in Syria, reportedly killing scores of them.
The targets of these air strikes were also predominantly
Iranian-backed militias (just
in case there weren’t enough state actors already involved in this
ongoing conflict).
Speaking
of Iran, Donald Trump recently fired Rex Tillerson as secretary of
state and immediately appointed CIA director Mike Pompeo to replace
him. Pompeo is a notable
anti-Iran hawk who
will almost certainly go further than Tillerson was ever
prepared to
go with regard to the Iranian nuclear accord, a deal Pompeo believes
is “disastrous.”
There
are also reports now emerging that Donald Trump is planning to
oust his national security advisor, General H.R. McMaster. McMaster
originally replaced anti-Iran war hawk Michael
Flynn,
but apparently, McMaster’s non-stop
allegations against
Iran were not
enough to please Trump.
McMaster was not on board with Trump’s attempt to completely derail
the Iranian nuclear deal.
One
should bear in mind that when Donald Trump made the decision to
strike the Syrian government in April of last year in what amounted
to one of the year’s most important and over-publicized
geopolitical events, it was McMaster who
drew up the strike plan options and presented them to Trump to choose
from. If this is a man not hawkish enough for Trump’s
administration, his looming removal from the administration is a
worrying sign of what’s to come.
Donald
Trump’s Nuclear
Posture Review entails
that, as Katrina vanden Heuvel noted in
an article published in the Washington
Post:
“The
United States reserves the right to unleash
nuclear weapons first in ‘extreme circumstances’ to defend the
‘vital interests’ not only of the United States but also of its
‘allies and partners’ — a total of some 30 countries. ‘Extreme
circumstances,’ the review states explicitly, include ‘significant
non-nuclear attacks,’ including conventional attacks on ‘allied
or partner civilian population or infrastructure.’ The
United States also maintains a ‘portion of
its nuclear forces’ on daily alert, with the option of launching
those forces ‘promptly.’ [emphasis
added]
Considering
that a former analyst for the Council on Foreign Relations, Micah
Zenko, just warned that
Pentagon officials are actively searching for a “big war” against
Russia and China, the trajectory we are currently on starts to make a
lot more sense.
In
other parts of the world, we are witnessing a new era of hostilities
towards Russia. The debacle taking place in the U.K. right now, which
has seen allegations of a Russian chemical attack on British soil,
has prompted the U.K., U.S., France, and Germany to band
together and
condemn Russia for something that hasn’t even been conclusively
investigated yet.
After
years of constantly being painted as the enemy, Russia
just declared via
Twitter that a “Cold War II” has begun, and who can blame them?
A
third world war might sound crazy, but it is only crazy if we fail to
understand the desperation that continues to plague the men in suits
who pull the strings guiding American foreign policy. Consider that
the Syrian government, with Russian and Iranian backing, has
managed to
stabilize significant parts of the country despite
all odds so that refugees can return home safely. It should be clear
that the best way to solve the Syrian crisis is to discontinue
America’s regime change policy in Syria and allow the people of
Syria to normalize their own lives without Washington’s
interference. Yet, after seven years of brutal violence, the U.S.
still refuses to admit defeat in Syria. If anything, the U.S. has now
officially set its sights on
directly combatting Iranian influence in
the country, raising the potential for significant escalations.
Maybe,
just maybe, the U.S. is that desperate. Apparently, the U.S. has to
remain in Syria out of necessity. It cannot afford to sit on the
sidelines as Russia re-emerges as the major power broker in the
region, eating up all the major contracts coming
out of Syria (together
with Iran) as it looks to poach American allies left, right, and
center.
Additionally,
Russia recently warned the U.S. that it will not tolerate
Washington’s aggressive attacks on the Syrian government and will
respond with strikes of their own should
the U.S. military threaten Russian personnel. One should expect that
eventually, there will be a point where Russia will no longer allow
these attacks to go unanswered.
As
America’s power and influence wane, the time will come for both
Russia and China to make their mark on the global stage. Just on a
side note, it should come as no surprise that Trump’s nominated
ambassador to Australia, Adm. Harry Harris, is a known anti-China war
hawk who recently warned
Congress to prepare for a war with China.
Why
should we need to prepare for a war with China? Who talks and thinks
like that? A nation on a slow and inevitable decline that cannot
refuse to admit defeat in almost any battle theater since World War
II, that’s who.
Realistically,
nobody wants a third world war, but as the U.S. increasingly
thrashes to maintain its control of the global financial markets, its
network of over 1,000 bases worldwide, and its status as the world’s
global policemen, a third world war may be Washington’s only hope
at staying afloat as the world’s top power.
* Australië, Nieuw-Zeeland, de Filipijnen, Thailand en Zuid-Korea zijn zogenaamde MNNA’s (van: ‘Major non-NATO Ally). Deze landen werken op militair gebied nauw samen met de VS (en gegarandeerd met andere NAVO lidstaten), ook wat betreft bewapening en training. (zie wat dat betreft ook de bemoeienis van de VS met de strijd tegen IS op de Filipijnen en de militaire oefeningen met Zuid-Korea langs de grens en de territoriale wateren van Noord-Korea). Voorts heeft de VS militaire bases in die landen, samen met die in westerse landen, kan je spreken van een omsingeling van Rusland en China met militaire bases van de VS……
