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

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....'

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......

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!

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?

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.