Tag Archive: Russia



Jade Helm Drills in Exact Locations Russian Media Leaked They Would Hit Us… Coincidence?

Sunday, May 3, 2015 21:16

Jade States

By: Voice of Reason

FOR MORE NEWS BY VOICE OF REASON CLICK HERE!

YESTERDAY I LAID OUT DETAILS BEHIND THE SECRET TUNNEL PROGRAM…

HEAR FROM THOSE WHO DUG THE MASSIVE TUNNELS

NOW THAT YOU CAN BE SURE THEY ARE REAL…

THIS IS HOW YOU KNOW THEY COINCIDE WITH JADE HELM!

[Audio/Video below cannot be seen in Newsletter – have to go to Blog]

Russian soldiers have been coming in through Canada for months, infiltrating parts of our entire country. They have spread far and wide waiting for the order. The latest move by the USA to arm Ukraine has pushed Russia too far, and Russia’s response will be quick and severe. Recently a Texas Secessionist asked Russia for help, as it turns out their “help” might be coming to life. RUSSIA PLANS TO ARM INSURGENTS in the USA, specifically in the states of;  California, New Mexico, Arizona, Nevada, Utah, Colorado and Wyoming. This move by Russia is under the guise of arming Mexico. They plan to “supply weapons to guerrillas in those states.”

SO, FOR CLARIFICATION:

THESE ARE THE CITIES RUSSIA SAYS IT WILL ARM GUERRILLAS

Jade Cities

NOW: CITIES WERE JADE HELM IS TAKING PLACE…

With Police

NOTICE ANY STRANGE COINCIDENCES?

Furthermore, if you missed my post on PUTIN INVADING U.S. AIRSPACE WITH NUCLEAR BOMBERS AGAIN THIS WEEK, it should be of no shock that Obama did not even send interceptor jets into the air at all. Do you hear me? I said AT ALL! That post also details the God awful relationship between the U.S. and Russia regardless of what the White House or the mainstream media say. In that post I went on to say:

When it’s all said and done, I wonder how many deaths will be on Obama’s hands. The entire planet knows that the United States is getting completely CHUMPED on the world stage (again) with the whole Iran deal, and everyone with an IQ over 6 knew (LIBERALS, you are OUT) how that would play out sooner before later: You give your enemies and inch, and they’ll take a mile.

AFTER we allowed Iran to push the deadline out for the “deal” Obama HAD to have, the world (and more importantly the American People), got a “lose framework” for a deal that We the People get NOTHING from. That whole week while Obama and John “Rambo” Kerry were doing their victory laps, their Iranian counterparts were openly MOCKING them on TWITTER of all places. During that time, it seemed like almost daily I was screaming at the radio on my way home from work at some idiot liberal insisting that we didn’t look weak on the world stage.

I THOUGHT THE FOLLOWING WAS VERY APPROPRIATE ABOUT NOW!

1555551_247350695430526_90071138_n

ANSWER: NOPE!

THEY COME THAT WAY FACTORY INSTALLED!

It would be one thing if this was an isolated incident of Putin flying his bombers in our airspace, but Barack Obama, the chump of all chumps must have Putin on the floor in stitches from belly laughing so hard at this point. I first started covering the Russian encroachments back in 2013 when RUSSIAN AKULA CLASS NUCLEAR SUBMARINES WENT UNDETECTED RIGHT OFF OUR COAST FOR THE 2ND TIME without Obama saying or doing a damn thing. Just call him CAPTAIN DIPLOMACY!

That strategy of appeasement worked SO well, that there has been an ONGOING series of encroachments by the Russians into U.S. airspace and the airspace of our European Nato allies without us doing anything about that either. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying we need to nuke Putin, because quite frankly U.S. MILITARY READINESS FOR WAR HAS LOST ITS COMPETITIVE EDGE TO RUSSIA, not to mention it’s PUTIN’S GENERALS REQUESTING A CHANGE IN POLICY TO NUCLEAR FIRST FIRST STRIKE CAPABILITY, and it’s PUTIN SABER RATTLING SAYING HE’LL NUKE THE WEST AND OUR ALLIES! AT LEAST ONE OF OUR COUNTRIES IS SERIOUS!

SEE THE LIST OF RUSSIAN ENCROACHMENTS I’VE WRITTEN ABOUT:

Russian Spy Plane Continues To Fly Over U.S. Airspace

Russian Nuclear Bombers Near West Coast Twice in Two Weeks

Russian Bombers Near Canada Practice Cruise Missile Strikes on US

Russian Bombers Conduct Test Flights Over Northern Europe

NATO Says Russian Jets, Bombers Circle Europe in Unusual Incidents

Russian Nuclear Bombers Keep Roaming Closer to U.S. Airspace

Russian Bombers Circling American Airspace!

Russian Bombers in U.S. Airspace SIXTEEN TIMES in 10 Days!

Why stop there though right? As luck would have it, with all the problems the now infamous F35 has run into, American pilots are WELL aware that the NEW RUSSIAN 5th GENERATION STEALTH FIGHTER CAN OUTFLY AND OUTSHOOT AMERICA’S NEWEST JET. I don’t know why that would come as a shock ANYONE, considering our damn plane is GROUNDED it’s had so many problems. Furthermore, THANKS TO ACTS OF ESPIONAGE, THE NEW 5th GENERATION CHINESE STEALTH FIGHTER MATCHES ALL THE F-35 CAPABILITIES. As for our nuclear arsenals, there’s another problem: Russia is using newer technology, while our technology hasn’t been upgraded since the cold war, not to mention RUSSIA’S NUCLEAR BALLISTIC MISSILE INTERCEPTORS OUTNUMBER THOSE OF THE UNITED STATES.

WELCOME TO HOPE AND CHANGE FOLKS!

It’s not just Russia either. ONE U.S ADMIRAL HAS COMPLAINED WE ARE LOSING THE PACIFIC TO THE CHINESE WHO ARE OUTNUMBERING OUR SUBMARINES! In addition, 105 ADMIRALS TOOK THE TIME TO WRITE OBAMA A LETTER ADVISING HIM THAT HIS CUTS TO THE NAVY BROUGHT U.S. SAFETY DOWN TO AN ALL TIME LOW. They cited numerous repairs long past due, that if left unchecked much longer, our Navy would be a floating rust bucket. I’m somewhat kidding when I say that, but do you realize we don’t even HAVE 105 admirals? It took even RETIRED ADMIRALS signing that letter and Obama STILL did nothing. You can read what the admirals wrote by Downloading the document from Admirals HERE.

[Audio/Video below cannot be seen in Newsletter – have to go to Blog]

WITH PUTIN SCREAMING WWIII IS INEVITABLE, Obama continues to SHRINK OUR MILITARY, ALL WHILE BEEFING UP THE D.H.S. (the same move a U.S. FEDERAL JUDGE HAS ACCUSED OBAMA OF USING THE D.H.S. AS HIS OWN PERSONAL ARMY). While Obama shrinks, Putin expands as you can see below:

ALERT — Russia’s Arctic Airfield Reactivated After 20 Years…

Russia Dispatches Naval Force to Reopen Arctic Base…

Russian General Seeks Nuclear First-Strike Option Against US

Putin to the Western Elites: “WORLD WAR III IS INEVITABLE!”

Revealed: How the Soviets Planned To Go To War with America’s Navy

Russian Warplanes Send ‘GREAT POWER’ Message: NATO

Armada

TO THINK RELATIONS ARE OK BETWEEN U.S. AND RUSSIA…

IS INSANE!

Now, it is no coincidence that the USA is responding to these threats with a “realistic” two month-long military drill which is called Jade Helm 15. The purposes of this drill are in question, one reason being the oddity of the length of the drill. The drills begin in Texas which according to the Obama administration is ‘hostile’, and have expanded to Florida and Mississippi. According to our military source, these are not just drills. Texas will be the first state to be under martial law, and the military needs to be fully prepared to take control of the cities and counties at a moments notice for a widespread full on lock-down scenario.  Furthering proof is the newly found ‘Death Domes’ that are popping up all across Texas. These Death Domes are dual use shelters, they are not just for storms. These domes are the perfect induction sites for the thousands that will be bused to their locations, because US citizens will arrive in droves under the declaration of martial law.

“EDNA, Tex. (AP) — Most of the time, the windowless building with the dome-shaped roof will be a typical high school gymnasium filled with cheering fans watching basketball and volleyball games. But come hurricane season, the structure will double as a shelter from the weather, part of an ambitious storm-defense system that is taking shape along hundreds of miles of the Texas coast. Its rugged construction, including double-layer cinder-block walls reinforced by heavy-duty steel bars and cement piers that plunge 30 feet into the ground, should allow it to withstand winds up to 200 miles per hour.” –MORE

UPDATE: US Troops To Infiltrate Society

The following slide show is filled with compiled videos that we have made, these are video reports regarding the growing tension between Russian and the US.

[Audio/Video below cannot be seen in Newsletter – have to go to Blog]

The other daunting fact that raises much concern is that the border of the United States is being virtually overrun with illegals, and to this day is still wide open. This raises concern about Russia’s allegiance with Obama. The hidden relationship, how else would Russian and Foreign troops be entering our country so easily? The reason for their invasion is because foreign troops will run the FEMA camps. Where the powers that be will house American dissidents in the event of Martial Law. Those dissidents include Christians, Revolutionaries (not to be confused with the agenda following insurgents), and anyone who disagrees with the regime and the powers that be. FEMA camps all across this country are beginning to come to life, and now Russia has planned a deadly move upon the shores of the Unites States Of America.

This move by Russia is following the response path of “AN EYE FOR AN EYE.” Historically America annexed the now US states of California, New Mexico, Arizona, Nevada, Utah, Colorado and Wyoming.

The Jade Helm 15 map is identical to the map that Russia is planning to “liberate through insurgency”. Such proving that Jade Helm 15 is not a drill Russia To Start A Civil War within the USA.

Jade 1

Jade Helm 15 now covers the entire South. The Rebel States

Jade 2

Russian Armed States Are In Colors

As one can see the resemblance, both of these maps have similar points. These points show that this Jade Helm 15 ‘realistic military drill’ might actually be more than just a drill.

The actions taken by the US prove that something strange is going on, and that something just may be Russia arming insurgents inside the US. See Below for the translated article:

“03.24.2015. Speaker Dukuvakha Abdurakhmanov said resolution of the US Congress, which calls on Obama to supply weapons to Georgia.

US House of Representatives on Monday passed a resolution, the text of which calls for US President Barack Obama to send weapons to Kiev.

For this decision 348 Congressmen spoke against – 48.

“The House of Representatives urged President (USA) fully and immediately take advantage of the powers given to Congress and to provide Ukraine with defensive weapons systems to enhance the possibility of the Ukrainian people to defend its sovereign territory,” – said in the document.

Chairman of the Parliament of the Czech Republic Dukuvakha Abdurakhmanov commented the news and turned to American colleagues.

– Dear members of the Congress of the United States of America. From US citizens often hear about the exclusivity of the US Constitution. According to your basic law everyone has the right to freedom of expression. “No political speech should ban only on the grounds that it is in favor of one side and not the other. None of the citizens can not be forbidden to act only because The stated their opinion is false or dangerous, “- said the US Supreme Court in one of its decisions interpreting the US Constitution.

Meanwhile, your words with your own actions. For believing in a false American freedom of speech suffered Bradley Manning, Edward Snowden, Julian Assange, and many others.

We can not be happy that the US government takes all sorts of overt measures aimed at destabilizing the political situation in the neighboring Russian State promotes NATO to the East. All actions in Europe and the United States at the Russian borders are unacceptable, and so rapid expansion of the West (NATO enlargement) is, in fact, a manifestation of aggression.

The Soviet Union, to fight and which was founded by the Alliance, has died in August 1991. So what then is the purpose of NATO? And anyway, what is it still there?

In history there were many precedents, when the supply of US weapons in certain trouble spots of the world does not help resolve the conflict, but on the contrary, leads to a multiple increase in casualties among the illegal proliferation of gang and terrorist groups, to an escalation of conflict.

Let’s look at the results of the post-Soviet NATO activities:

– Millions of civilians have been victims of US military action and its allies in Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Iraq, torture and abuse of prisoners have become the norm in Abu Ghraib, Camp Nama, Guantanamo, the use of drones to attack targets in various countries became regular. Thus, only in the period from June 2004 to September 2012 as a result of air strikes US drones in Pakistan were killed from 2562 to 3325 civilians. This may also include the US destabilization of the situation in Libya, Syria, Egypt and Ukraine, where the government is formed by US Vice President Joe Biden, and guns and killing civilians in the Donbas and Luhansk troops operate under the guidance of American instructors.

For those of you who do advocate for the welfare of the friendly Ukrainian people, recall that in the world many countries where there is not only democracy but also the most basic conditions for human life – is, for example, most countries in Africa. Why are you not worried about their problems? Why is such a concern is democratic freedoms in countries adjacent to Russia – Georgia, Ukraine?

I often wonder: “What interests haunts America in Ukraine?”. Representatives of our country to protect the country from invaders. More than 3.5 million of our soldiers died defending the Ukrainian lands from Nazi invaders. At the same time, some NATO generals, often in Kiev today are representatives of countries that were once allied with the army of the Third Reich war, including the Ukrainian people.

In the USSR passed the Ukrainian state. Together with the Ukrainians in the development of post-war union republic worked Russian, Georgians, Chechens, Armenians and Jews. None of the US dollar has been spent on the reconstruction and development of Ukraine after the Second World War. Moscow and Kiev since ancient times built statehood together Russian and Ukrainian peoples today are fraternal.

It follows that the United States has no right to advise Russia to behave with neighboring friendly people. Supply of arms Ukraine will be perceived by us as a signal to the appropriate actions – we will begin delivery of new weapons Mexico to resume debate on the legal status of the territories annexed by the United States, which are now the US states of California, New Mexico, Arizona, Nevada, Utah, Colorado and Wyoming.

We reserve the right to perform in Russia, Mexico, America conferences with questions raised about the separation of the above-mentioned state of the United States and delivery of weapons to the guerrillas there.

We advise you to think again and abandon, finally, the imperialist ideas of his greatness and permissiveness and start an equal dialogue with our country. Only in this way can achieve mutually beneficial co-existence on this earth. Honest, diplomatic cooperation – is the main factor of foreign policy activity of the Russian President Vladimir Putin, and this course should the whole country. Its reliable support acts Chapter Czech Republic, Hero of Russia Ramzan Kadyrov, who is not just in words and in deeds demonstrated decisiveness execute any orders of the Supreme Commander and actions for the protection of Russia’s interests both at home and anywhere in the world. Russia is too tough for you, Humble, – said the speaker of the Chechen parliament Abdurakhmanov Dukuvakha.

Press Service of the Parliament of the Chechen Republic”

SOURCE FOR TRANSLATION: Freedom Fighters Reports (ORIGINAL: http://parlamentchr.ru/press-centre/news/1924-454-50)

Martial Law

FOR MORE LINKS ON MARTIAL LAW

Putin Finger

FOR MORE ON OBAMA’S ONGOING SUCESS WITH RUSSIA:

swat_fbi-300x202

LEARN HOW FEDERAL AGENCIES ARE ALL NOW FULLY ARMED!

Treason 6

FOR MORE ON ALL OBAMA’S TREASONOUS ACTS!

Revolutionaries

FOR MORE LINKS ON HOW CLOSE THE NATION IS TO INTERNAL WAR:

FEMA-2

FOR MORE ON FEMA CAMPS:

Economic-Collapse-header

FOR LINKS TO UNDERSTAND THE ECONOMY & THE COMING ECONOMIC COLLAPSE:

Advertisements

Putin: World War Is Inevitable

At This Point

Friday, October 31, 2014 7:35

(Before It’s News)

As the tide shifts back to war, because of winter nearing, Putin now states that war is inevitable in the following speech. The facts are that this world war is planned, it has been planned from the very beginning all the way from Pike’s letter about a world war in the 1800’s, which you can see at the bottom of this post. The planning of this war goes back further than that however. This is a biblical war that will be waged. This is the war of the End Times.

Crusaders2127 Video


As winter nears, war gets closer because of a timeline that parts of Europe will run out of resources for the winter. Russia recently enacted an embargo in the Arctic and is practically a declaration of war. The other part of this is the FACT that during this time if Ebola remains in America, which it will, then it will be able to spread just like influenza A. These are the days.

Below are the 10 main points posted by, “The Russian blogger chipstone summarized the most salient points from Putin speech as follows:

1. Russia will no longer play games and engage in back-room negotiations over trifles. But Russia is prepared for serious conversations and agreements, if these are conducive to collective security, are based on fairness and take into account the interests of each side.

2. All systems of global collective security now lie in ruins. There are no longer any international security guarantees at all. And the entity that destroyed them has a name: The United States of America.

3. The builders of the New World Order have failed, having built a sand castle. Whether or not a new world order of any sort is to be built is not just Russia’s decision, but it is a decision that will not be made without Russia.

4. Russia favors a conservative approach to introducing innovations into the social order, but is not opposed to investigating and discussing such innovations, to see if introducing any of them might be justified.

5. Russia has no intention of going fishing in the murky waters created by America’s ever-expanding “empire of chaos,” and has no interest in building a new empire of her own (this is unnecessary; Russia’s challenges lie in developing her already vast territory). Neither is Russia willing to act as a savior of the world, as she had in the past.

6. Russia will not attempt to reformat the world in her own image, but neither will she allow anyone to reformat her in their image. Russia will not close herself off from the world, but anyone who tries to close her off from the world will be sure to reap a whirlwind.

7. Russia does not wish for the chaos to spread, does not want war, and has no intention of starting one. However, today Russia sees the outbreak of global war as almost inevitable, is prepared for it, and is continuing to prepare for it. Russia does not war—nor does she fear it.

8. Russia does not intend to take an active role in thwarting those who are still attempting to construct their New World Order—until their efforts start to impinge on Russia’s key interests. Russia would prefer to stand by and watch them give themselves as many lumps as their poor heads can take. But those who manage to drag Russia into this process, through disregard for her interests, will be taught the true meaning of pain.

9. In her external, and, even more so, internal politics, Russia’s power will rely not on the elites and their back-room dealing, but on the will of the people.

To these nine points I would like to add a tenth:

10. There is still a chance to construct a new world order that will avoid a world war. This new world order must of necessity include the United States—but can only do so on the same terms as everyone else: subject to international law and international agreements; refraining from all unilateral action; in full respect of the sovereignty of other nations.”

Putin’s full speech: Video

1`

To sum it all up: play-time is over. Children, put away your toys. Now is the time for the adults to make decisions. Russia is ready for this; is the world?

Text of Vladimir Putin’s speech and a question and answer session at the final plenary meeting of the Valdai International Discussion Club’s XI session in Sochi on 24 October 2014.

It was mentioned already that the club has new co-organizers this year. They include Russian non-governmental organizations, expert groups and leading universities. The idea was also raised of broadening the discussions to include not just issues related to Russia itself but also global politics and the economy.

An organization and content will bolster the club’s influence as a leading discussion and expert forum. At the same time, I hope the ‘Valdai spirit’ will remain – this free and open atmosphere and chance to express all manner of very different and frank opinions.

Let me say in this respect that I will also not let you down and will speak directly and frankly. Some of what I say might seem a bit too harsh, but if we do not speak directly and honestly about what we really think, then there is little point in even meeting in this way. It would be better in that case just to keep to diplomatic get-together, where no one says anything of real sense and, recalling the words of one famous diplomat, you realize that diplomats have tongues so as not to speak the truth.
We get together for other reasons. We get together so as to talk frankly with each other. We need to be direct and blunt today not so as to trade barbs, but so as to attempt to get to the bottom of what is actually happening in the world, try to understand why the world is becoming less safe and more unpredictable, and why the risks are increasing everywhere around us.

Today’s discussion took place under the theme: New Rules or a Game without Rules. I think that this formula accurately describes the historic turning point we have reached today and the choice we all face. There is nothing new of course in the idea that the world is changing very fast. I know this is something you have spoken about at the discussions today. It is certainly hard not to notice the dramatic transformations in global politics and the economy, public life, and in industry, information and social technologies.

Let me ask you right now to forgive me if I end up repeating what some of the discussion’s participants have already said. It’s practically impossible to avoid. You have already held detailed discussions, but I will set out my point of view. It will coincide with other participants’ views on some points and differ on others.

As we analyze today’s situation, let us not forget history’s lessons. First of all, changes in the world order – and what we are seeing today are events on this scale – have usually been accompanied by if not global war and conflict, then by chains of intensive local-level conflicts. Second, global politics is above all about economic leadership, issues of war and peace, and the humanitarian dimension, including human rights.

The world is full of contradictions today. We need to be frank in asking each other if we have a reliable safety net in place. Sadly, there is no guarantee and no certainty that the current system of global and regional security is able to protect us from upheavals. This system has become seriously weakened, fragmented and deformed. The international and regional political, economic, and cultural cooperation organizations are also going through difficult times.

Yes, many of the mechanisms we have for ensuring the world order were created quite a long time ago now, including and above all in the period immediately following World War II. Let me stress that the solidity of the system created back then rested not only on the balance of power and the rights of the victor countries, but on the fact that this system’s ‘founding fathers’ had respect for each other, did not try to put the squeeze on others, but attempted to reach agreements.

The main thing is that this system needs to develop, and despite its various shortcomings, needs to at least be capable of keeping the world’s current problems within certain limits and regulating the intensity of the natural competition between countries.

It is my conviction that we could not take this mechanism of checks and balances that we built over the last decades, sometimes with such effort and difficulty, and simply tear it apart without building anything in its place. Otherwise we would be left with no instruments other than brute force.

What we needed to do was to carry out a rational reconstruction and adapt it the new realities in the system of international relations.

But the United States, having declared itself the winner of the Cold War, saw no need for this. Instead of establishing a new balance of power, essential for maintaining order and stability, they took steps that threw the system into sharp and deep imbalance.

The Cold War ended, but it did not end with the signing of a peace treaty with clear and transparent agreements on respecting existing rules or creating new rules and standards. This created the impression that the so-called ‘victors’ in the Cold War had decided to pressure events and reshape the world to suit their own needs and interests. If the existing system of international relations, international law and the checks and balances in place got in the way of these aims, this system was declared worthless, outdated and in need of immediate demolition.

Pardon the analogy, but this is the way nouveaux riches behave when they suddenly end up with a great fortune, in this case, in the shape of world leadership and domination. Instead of managing their wealth wisely, for their own benefit too of course, I think they have committed many follies.

We have entered a period of differing interpretations and deliberate silences in world politics. International law has been forced to retreat over and over by the onslaught of legal nihilism. Objectivity and justice have been sacrificed on the altar of political expediency. Arbitrary interpretations and biased assessments have replaced legal norms. At the same time, total control of the global mass media has made it possible when desired to portray white as black and black as white.

In a situation where you had domination by one country and its allies, or its satellites rather, the search for global solutions often turned into an attempt to impose their own universal recipes. This group’s ambitions grew so big that they started presenting the policies they put together in their corridors of power as the view of the entire international community. But this is not the case.

The very notion of ‘national sovereignty’ became a relative value for most countries. In essence, what was being proposed was the formula: the greater the loyalty towards the world’s sole power center, the greater this or that ruling regime’s legitimacy.

We will have a free discussion afterwards and I will be happy to answer your questions and would also like to use my right to ask you questions. Let someone try to disprove the arguments that I just set out during the upcoming discussion.

The measures taken against those who refuse to submit are well-known and have been tried and tested many times. They include use of force, economic and propaganda pressure, meddling in domestic affairs, and appeals to a kind of ‘supra-legal’ legitimacy when they need to justify illegal intervention in this or that conflict or toppling inconvenient regimes. Of late, we have increasing evidence too that outright blackmail has been used with regard to a number of leaders. It is not for nothing that ‘big brother’ is spending billions of dollars on keeping the whole world, including its own closest allies, under surveillance.

Let’s ask ourselves, how comfortable are we with this, how safe are we, how happy living in this world, and how fair and rational has it become? Maybe, we have no real reasons to worry, argue and ask awkward questions? Maybe the United States’ exceptional position and the way they are carrying out their leadership really is a blessing for us all, and their meddling in events all around the world is bringing peace, prosperity, progress, growth and democracy, and we should maybe just relax and enjoy it all?

Let me say that this is not the case, absolutely not the case.

A unilateral diktat and imposing one’s own models produces the opposite result. Instead of settling conflicts it leads to their escalation, instead of sovereign and stable states we see the growing spread of chaos, and instead of democracy there is support for a very dubious public ranging from open neo-fascists to Islamic radicals.

Why do they support such people? They do this because they decide to use them as instruments along the way in achieving their goals but then burn their fingers and recoil. I never cease to be amazed by the way that our partners just keep stepping on the same rake, as we say here in Russia, that is to say, make the same mistake over and over.

They once sponsored Islamic extremist movements to fight the Soviet Union. Those groups got their battle experience in Afghanistan and later gave birth to the Taliban and Al-Qaeda. The West if not supported, at least closed its eyes, and, I would say, gave information, political and financial support to international terrorists’ invasion of Russia (we have not forgotten this) and the Central Asian region’s countries. Only after horrific terrorist attacks were committed on US soil itself did the United States wake up to the common threat of terrorism. Let me remind you that we were the first country to support the American people back then, the first to react as friends and partners to the terrible tragedy of September 11.

During my conversations with American and European leaders, I always spoke of the need to fight terrorism together, as a challenge on a global scale. We cannot resign ourselves to and accept this threat, cannot cut it into separate pieces using double standards. Our partners expressed agreement, but a little time passed and we ended up back where we started. First there was the military operation in Iraq, then in Libya, which got pushed to the brink of falling apart. Why was Libya pushed into this situation? Today it is a country in danger of breaking apart and has become a training ground for terrorists.

Only the current Egyptian leadership’s determination and wisdom saved this key Arab country from chaos and having extremists run rampant. In Syria, as in the past, the United States and its allies started directly financing and arming rebels and allowing them to fill their ranks with mercenaries from various countries. Let me ask where do these rebels get their money, arms and military specialists? Where does all this come from? How did the notorious ISIL manage to become such a powerful group, essentially a real armed force?  

As for financing sources, today, the money is coming not just from drugs, production of which has increased not just by a few percentage points but many-fold, since the international coalition forces have been present in Afghanistan. You are aware of this. The terrorists are getting money from selling oil too. Oil is produced in territory controlled by the terrorists, who sell it at dumping prices, produce it and transport it. But someone buys this oil, resells it, and makes a profit from it, not thinking about the fact that they are thus financing terrorists who could come sooner or later to their own soil and sow destruction in their own countries.

Where do they get new recruits? In Iraq, after Saddam Hussein was toppled, the state’s institutions, including the army, were left in ruins. We said back then, be very, very careful. You are driving people out into the street, and what will they do there? Don’t forget (rightfully or not) that they were in the leadership of a large regional power, and what are you now turning them into?

What was the result? Tens of thousands of soldiers, officers and former Baath Party activists were turned out into the streets and today have joined the rebels’ ranks. Perhaps this is what explains why the Islamic State group has turned out so effective? In military terms, it is acting very effectively and has some very professional people. Russia warned repeatedly about the dangers of unilateral military actions, intervening in sovereign states’ affairs, and flirting with extremists and radicals. We insisted on having the groups fighting the central Syrian government, above all the Islamic State, included on the lists of terrorist organizations. But did we see any results? We appealed in vain.

We sometimes get the impression that our colleagues and friends are constantly fighting the consequences of their own policies, throw all their effort into addressing the risks they themselves have created, and pay an ever-greater price.

Colleagues, this period of unipolar domination has convincingly demonstrated that having only one power center does not make global processes more manageable. On the contrary, this kind of unstable construction has shown its inability to fight the real threats such as regional conflicts, terrorism, drug trafficking, religious fanaticism, chauvinism and neo-Nazism. At the same time, it has opened the road wide for inflated national pride, manipulating public opinion and letting the strong bully and suppress the weak.

Essentially, the unipolar world is simply a means of justifying dictatorship over people and countries. The unipolar world turned out too uncomfortable, heavy and unmanageable a burden even for the self-proclaimed leader. Comments along this line were made here just before and I fully agree with this. This is why we see attempts at this new historic stage to recreate a semblance of a quasi-bipolar world as a convenient model for perpetuating American leadership. It does not matter who takes the place of the center of evil in American propaganda, the USSR’s old place as the main adversary. It could be Iran, as a country seeking to acquire nuclear technology, China, as the world’s biggest economy, or Russia, as a nuclear superpower.

Today, we are seeing new efforts to fragment the world, draw new dividing lines, put together coalitions not built for something but directed against someone, anyone, create the image of an enemy as was the case during the Cold War years, and obtain the right to this leadership, or diktat if you wish. The situation was presented this way during the Cold War. We all understand this and know this. The United States always told its allies: “We have a common enemy, a terrible foe, the center of evil, and we are defending you, our allies, from this foe, and so we have the right to order you around, force you to sacrifice your political and economic interests and pay your share of the costs for this collective defense, but we will be the ones in charge of it all of course.” In short, we see today attempts in a new and changing world to reproduce the familiar models of global management, and all this so as to guarantee their [the US’] exceptional position and reap political and economic dividends.

But these attempts are increasingly divorced from reality and are in contradiction with the world’s diversity. Steps of this kind inevitably create confrontation and countermeasures and have the opposite effect to the hoped-for goals. We see what happens when politics rashly starts meddling in the economy and the logic of rational decisions gives way to the logic of confrontation that only hurt one’s own economic positions and interests, including national business interests.

Joint economic projects and mutual investment objectively bring countries closer together and help to smooth out current problems in relations between states. But today, the global business community faces unprecedented pressure from Western governments. What business, economic expediency and pragmatism can we speak of when we hear slogans such as “the homeland is in danger”, “the free world is under threat”, and “democracy is in jeopardy”? And so everyone needs to mobilize. That is what a real mobilization policy looks like.

Sanctions are already undermining the foundations of world trade, the WTO rules and the principle of inviolability of private property. They are dealing a blow to liberal model of globalization based on markets, freedom and competition, which, let me note, is a model that has primarily benefited precisely the Western countries. And now they risk losing trust as the leaders of globalization. We have to ask ourselves, why was this necessary? After all, the United States’ prosperity rests in large part on the trust of investors and foreign holders of dollars and US securities. This trust is clearly being undermined and signs of disappointment in the fruits of globalization are visible now in many countries.   The well-known Cyprus precedent and the politically motivated sanctions have only strengthened the trend towards seeking to bolster economic and financial sovereignty and countries’ or their regional groups’ desire to find ways of protecting themselves from the risks of outside pressure. We already see that more and more countries are looking for ways to become less dependent on the dollar and are setting up alternative financial and payments systems and reserve currencies. I think that our American friends are quite simply cutting the branch they are sitting on. You cannot mix politics and the economy, but this is what is happening now. I have always thought and still think today that politically motivated sanctions were a mistake that will harm everyone, but I am sure that we will come back to this subject later.

We know how these decisions were taken and who was applying the pressure. But let me stress that Russia is not going to get all worked up, get offended or come begging at anyone’s door. Russia is a self-sufficient country. We will work within the foreign economic environment that has taken shape, develop domestic production and technology and act more decisively to carry out transformation. Pressure from outside, as has been the case on past occasions, will only consolidate our society, keep us alert and make us concentrate on our main development goals.

Of course the sanctions are a hindrance. They are trying to hurt us through these sanctions, block our development and push us into political, economic and cultural isolation, force us into backwardness in other words. But let me say yet again that the world is a very different place today. We have no intention of shutting ourselves off from anyone and choosing some kind of closed development road, trying to live in autarky. We are always open to dialogue, including on normalizing our economic and political relations. We are counting here on the pragmatic approach and position of business communities in the leading countries.

Some are saying today that Russia is supposedly turning its back on Europe – such words were probably spoken already here too during the discussions – and is looking for new business partners, above all in Asia. Let me say that this is absolutely not the case. Our active policy in the Asian-Pacific region began not just yesterday and not in response to sanctions, but is a policy that we have been following for a good many years now. Like many other countries, including Western countries, we saw that Asia is playing an ever greater role in the world, in the economy and in politics, and there is simply no way we can afford to overlook these developments.

Let me say again that everyone is doing this, and we will do so to, all the more so as a large part of our country is geographically in Asia. Why should we not make use of our competitive advantages in this area? It would be extremely shortsighted not to do so.

Developing economic ties with these countries and carrying out joint integration projects also creates big incentives for our domestic development. Today’s demographic, economic and cultural trends all suggest that dependence on a sole superpower will objectively decrease. This is something that European and American experts have been talking and writing about too.

Perhaps developments in global politics will mirror the developments we are seeing in the global economy, namely, intensive competition for specific niches and frequent change of leaders in specific areas. This is entirely possible.

There is no doubt that humanitarian factors such as education, science, healthcare and culture are playing a greater role in global competition. This also has a big impact on international relations, including because this ‘soft power’ resource will depend to a great extent on real achievements in developing human capital rather than on sophisticated propaganda tricks.

At the same time, the formation of a so-called polycentric world (I would also like to draw attention to this, colleagues) in and of itself does not improve stability; in fact, it is more likely to be the opposite. The goal of reaching global equilibrium is turning into a fairly difficult puzzle, an equation with many unknowns.
So, what is in store for us if we choose not to live by the rules – even if they may be strict and inconvenient – but rather live without any rules at all? And that scenario is entirely possible; we cannot rule it out, given the tensions in the global situation. Many predictions can already be made, taking into account current trends, and unfortunately, they are not optimistic. If we do not create a clear system of mutual commitments and agreements, if we do not build the mechanisms for managing and resolving crisis situations, the symptoms of global anarchy will inevitably grow.

Today, we already see a sharp increase in the likelihood of a whole set of violent conflicts with either direct or indirect participation by the world’s major powers. And the risk factors include not just traditional multinational conflicts, but also the internal instability in separate states, especially when we talk about nations located at the intersections of major states’ geopolitical interests, or on the border of cultural, historical, and economic civilizational continents.

Ukraine, which I’m sure was discussed at length and which we will discuss some more, is one of the example of such sorts of conflicts that affect international power balance, and I think it will certainly not be the last. From here emanates the next real threat of destroying the current system of arms control agreements. And this dangerous process was launched by the United States of America when it unilaterally withdrew from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty in 2002, and then set about and continues today to actively pursue the creation of its global missile defense system.

Colleagues, friends, I want to point out that we did not start this. Once again, we are sliding into the times when, instead of the balance of interests and mutual guarantees, it is fear and the balance of mutual destruction that prevent nations from engaging in direct conflict. In absence of legal and political instruments, arms are once again becoming the focal point of the global agenda; they are used wherever and however, without any UN Security Council sanctions. And if the Security Council refuses to produce such decisions, then it is immediately declared to be an outdated and ineffective instrument.

Many states do not see any other ways of ensuring their sovereignty but to obtain their own bombs. This is extremely dangerous. We insist on continuing talks; we are not only in favor of talks, but insist on continuing talks to reduce nuclear arsenals. The less nuclear weapons we have in the world, the better. And we are ready for the most serious, concrete discussions on nuclear disarmament – but only serious discussions without any double standards.

What do I mean? Today, many types of high-precision weaponry are already close to mass-destruction weapons in terms of their capabilities, and in the event of full renunciation of nuclear weapons or radical reduction of nuclear potential, nations that are leaders in creating and producing high-precision systems will have a clear military advantage. Strategic parity will be disrupted, and this is likely to bring destabilization. The use of a so-called first global pre-emptive strike may become tempting. In short, the risks do not decrease, but intensify.

The next obvious threat is the further escalation of ethnic, religious, and social conflicts. Such conflicts are dangerous not only as such, but also because they create zones of anarchy, lawlessness, and chaos around them, places that are comfortable for terrorists and criminals, where piracy, human trafficking, and drug trafficking flourish.

Incidentally, at the time, our colleagues tried to somehow manage these processes, use regional conflicts and design ‘color revolutions’ to suit their interests, but the genie escaped the bottle. It looks like the controlled chaos theory fathers themselves do not know what to do with it; there is disarray in their ranks.

We closely follow the discussions by both the ruling elite and the expert community. It is enough to look at the headlines of the Western press over the last year. The same people are called fighters for democracy, and then Islamists; first they write about revolutions and then call them riots and upheavals. The result is obvious: the further expansion of global chaos.

Colleagues, given the global situation, it is time to start agreeing on fundamental things. This is incredibly important and necessary; this is much better than going back to our own corners. The more we all face common problems, the more we find ourselves in the same boat, so to speak. And the logical way out is in cooperation between nations, societies, in finding collective answers to increasing challenges, and in joint risk management. Granted, some of our partners, for some reason, remember this only when it suits their interests.

Practical experience shows that joint answers to challenges are not always a panacea; and we need to understand this. Moreover, in most cases, they are hard to reach; it is not easy to overcome the differences in national interests, the subjectivity of different approaches, particularly when it comes to nations with different cultural and historical traditions. But nevertheless, we have examples when, having common goals and acting based on the same criteria, together we achieved real success.

Let me remind you about solving the problem of chemical weapons in Syria, and the substantive dialogue on the Iranian nuclear program, as well as our work on North Korean issues, which also has some positive results. Why can’t we use this experience in the future to solve local and global challenges?
What could be the legal, political, and economic basis for a new world order that would allow for stability and security, while encouraging healthy competition, not allowing the formation of new monopolies that hinder development? It is unlikely that someone could provide absolutely exhaustive, ready-made solutions right now. We will need extensive work with participation by a wide range of governments, global businesses, civil society, and such expert platforms as ours.

However, it is obvious that success and real results are only possible if key participants in international affairs can agree on harmonizing basic interests, on reasonable self-restraint, and set the example of positive and responsible leadership. We must clearly identify where unilateral actions end and we need to apply multilateral mechanisms, and as part of improving the effectiveness of international law, we must resolve the dilemma between the actions by international community to ensure security and human rights and the principle of national sovereignty and non-interference in the internal affairs of any state.

Those very collisions increasingly lead to arbitrary external interference in complex internal processes, and time and again, they provoke dangerous conflicts between leading global players. The issue of maintaining sovereignty becomes almost paramount in maintaining and strengthening global stability.

Clearly, discussing the criteria for the use of external force is extremely difficult; it is practically impossible to separate it from the interests of particular nations. However, it is far more dangerous when there are no agreements that are clear to everyone, when no clear conditions are set for necessary and legal interference.

I will add that international relations must be based on international law, which itself should rest on moral principles such as justice, equality and truth. Perhaps most important is respect for one’s partners and their interests. This is an obvious formula, but simply following it could radically change the global situation.

I am certain that if there is a will, we can restore the effectiveness of the international and regional institutions system. We do not even need to build anything anew, from the scratch; this is not a “greenfield,” especially since the institutions created after World War II are quite universal and can be given modern substance, adequate to manage the current situation.

This is true of improving the work of the UN, whose central role is irreplaceable, as well as the OSCE, which, over the course of 40 years, has proven to be a necessary mechanism for ensuring security and cooperation in the Euro-Atlantic region. I must say that even now, in trying to resolve the crisis in southeast Ukraine, the OSCE is playing a very positive role.

In light of the fundamental changes in the international environment, the increase in uncontrollability and various threats, we need a new global consensus of responsible forces. It’s not about some local deals or a division of spheres of influence in the spirit of classic diplomacy, or somebody’s complete global domination. I think that we need a new version of interdependence. We should not be afraid of it. On the contrary, this is a good instrument for harmonizing positions.

This is particularly relevant given the strengthening and growth of certain regions on the planet, which process objectively requires institutionalization of such new poles, creating powerful regional organizations and developing rules for their interaction. Cooperation between these centers would seriously add to the stability of global security, policy and economy.  But in order to establish such a dialogue, we need to proceed from the assumption that all regional centers and integration projects forming around them need to have equal rights to development, so that they can complement each other and nobody can force them into conflict or opposition artificially. Such destructive actions would break down ties between states, and the states themselves would be subjected to extreme hardship, or perhaps even total destruction.

I would like to remind you of the last year’s events. We have told our American and European partners that hasty backstage decisions, for example, on Ukraine’s association with the EU, are fraught with serious risks to the economy. We didn’t even say anything about politics; we spoke only about the economy, saying that such steps, made without any prior arrangements, touch on the interests of many other nations, including Russia as Ukraine’s main trade partner, and that a wide discussion of the issues is necessary. Incidentally, in this regard, I will remind you that, for example, the talks on Russia’s accession to the WTO lasted 19 years. This was very difficult work, and a certain consensus was reached.

Why am I bringing this up? Because in implementing Ukraine’s association project, our partners would come to us with their goods and services through the back gate, so to speak, and we did not agree to this, nobody asked us about this. We had discussions on all topics related to Ukraine’s association with the EU, persistent discussions, but I want to stress that this was done in an entirely civilized manner, indicating possible problems, showing the obvious reasoning and arguments. Nobody wanted to listen to us and nobody wanted to talk. They simply told us: this is none of your business, point, end of discussion. Instead of a comprehensive but – I stress – civilized dialogue, it all came down to a government overthrow; they plunged the country into chaos, into economic and social collapse, into a civil war with enormous casualties.

Why? When I ask my colleagues why, they no longer have an answer; nobody says anything. That’s it. Everyone’s at a loss, saying it just turned out that way. Those actions should not have been encouraged – it wouldn’t have worked. After all (I already spoke about this), former Ukrainian President Yanukovych signed everything, agreed with everything. Why do it? What was the point? What is this, a civilized way of solving problems? Apparently, those who constantly throw together new ‘color revolutions’ consider themselves ‘brilliant artists’ and simply cannot stop.

I am certain that the work of integrated associations, the cooperation of regional structures, should be built on a transparent, clear basis; the Eurasian Economic Union’s formation process is a good example of such transparency. The states that are parties to this project informed their partners of their plans in advance, specifying the parameters of our association, the principles of its work, which fully correspond with the World Trade Organization rules.

I will add that we would also have welcomed the start of a concrete dialogue between the Eurasian and European Union. Incidentally, they have almost completely refused us this as well, and it is also unclear why – what is so scary about it?

And, of course, with such joint work, we would think that we need to engage in dialogue (I spoke about this many times and heard agreement from many of our western partners, at least in Europe) on the need to create a common space for economic and humanitarian cooperation stretching all the way from the Atlantic to the Pacific Ocean.

Colleagues, Russia made its choice. Our priorities are further improving our democratic and open economy institutions, accelerated internal development, taking into account all the positive modern trends in the world, and consolidating society based on traditional values and patriotism.

We have an integration-oriented, positive, peaceful agenda; we are working actively with our colleagues in the Eurasian Economic Union, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, BRICS and other partners. This agenda is aimed at developing ties between governments, not dissociating. We are not planning to cobble together any blocs or get involved in an exchange of blows.

The allegations and statements that Russia is trying to establish some sort of empire, encroaching on the sovereignty of its neighbors, are groundless. Russia does not need any kind of special, exclusive place in the world – I want to emphasize this. While respecting the interests of others, we simply want for our own interests to be taken into account and for our position to be respected.

we are well aware that the world has entered an era of changes and global transformations, when we all need a particular degree of caution, the ability to avoid thoughtless steps. In the years after the Cold War, participants in global politics lost these qualities somewhat. Now, we need to remember them. Otherwise, hopes for a peaceful, stable development will be a dangerous illusion, while today’s turmoil will simply serve as a prelude to the collapse of world order.

Yes, of course, I have already said that building a more stable world order is a difficult task. We are talking about long and hard work. We were able to develop rules for interaction after World War II, and we were able to reach an agreement in Helsinki in the 1970s. Our common duty is to resolve this fundamental challenge at this new stage of development.

Thank you very much for your attention.

So it Begins.


Brzezinski Family Business – Cold War

Former US National Security Advisor to President Jimmy Carter Zbignew Brzezinski

Former US National Security Advisor to President Jimmy Carter Zbignew Brzezinski

© AP Photo/ Pablo Martinez Monsivais

20:27 28/08/2014

Daniel Zubov

As President Obama prepares for his address at the NATO Summit in Wales and for chairing the United Nations Security Council in September, the children of Zbignew Brzezinski, the aging anti-Russian strategist who advised President Obama during his first campaign, have been actively working to implement his Cold War schemes.

While Zbigniew has held no official role in President Obama’s administration, his son Mark, who served on President Clinton’s National Security Council as Advisor for Russia and Eurasian Affairs, has been Ambassador to Sweden since his confirmation on November, 11, 2011. From 1999 to 2001, he served as a director at the National Security Council, where he coordinated inter-agency policy formulation and advised the President and the National Security Advisor on issues relating to Russia, Eurasia, the Balkans and NATO.

Ambassador Mark Brzezinski has used his position to urge Sweden to join NATO, appearing at an Atlantic Council event in March to commend Sweden’s integration into NATO’s military forces, and pointing out to the Swedish media in April that the renewed Russian threat should justify increased defense budgets, as NATO or American support is not completely guaranteed.

Despite not being a full member, the Swedish military has participated in several coordinated NATO exercises this year. In March, fourteen hundred Swedish troops participated in Cold Response, a bi-annual drill hosted by Norway which simulates NATO responding to a hypothetical conflict between a government and separatists after a natural disaster.

In October 2013, Swedish troops participated alongside the NATO countries, Finland, and Ukraine in Operation Steadfast Jazz, to “train and test the NATO Response Force, a highly ready and technologically advanced multinational force made up of land, air, maritime and Special Forces components that the Alliance can deploy quickly wherever needed.”

In June, 2014, Swedish troops participated in two major exercises: Flaming Sword, based in Lithuania, and the 42nd annual BALTOPS drill, where 13 nations from around the Baltic and North Sea (plus the Republic of Georgia) practiced “air, surface, subsurface, and mine warfare,  where the participants conducted “advance information sharing, crucial to maintaining regional stability and maritime security in the region.”

Zbigniew Brzezinski’s other son, Ian, is currently a member of the Strategic Advisors Group of the Atlantic Council, a pro-NATO lobbying organization created in 1961. From 2006 – 2011 he worked with CIA and NSA-contractor Booz Allen Hamilton and from 2001 to 2005, served as President George W. Bush’s Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Europe and NATO Policy. From 1986 – 1987 he worked at the National Security Council, and from 1991-1993, he was on the Policy Planning staff of the Defense Department.

On August 14, 2014 Ian co-authored “NATO’s Crucial Summit” for CNN, where he openly advocated escalating the violence in the region, writing, “the alliance should be prepared to provide Ukraine lethal military assistance, including anti-tank weapons and surface to air missiles, and to deploy intelligence platforms to improve the situational awareness of Ukrainian security forces and military trainers. The alliance should also resume military exercises with Ukraine to help train its armed forces.”

The first time Ian had publicly sought to compel NATO to take a hostile stance towards Russia alongside Ukraine’s new government was in his March 24 Washington Post piece, entitled “Three ways NATO can bolster Ukraine’s security.” In addition to approving lethal weapon transfers and increasing training exercises, he suggested reminding Russians of their role in Afghanistan – perhaps forgetting the blowback from America’s decision to arm and train Islamist Mujahedeen soldiers.

Zbigniew’s last child, his daughter Mika, hosts a morning political gossip show on MSNBC with former right-wing Republican Congressman Joe Scarborough. When not speaking about her cozy relationship with administration officials, she has provided a platform for neo-conservative policy architect William Kristol to call for another war in Iraq, as she did on June 17. In May, Mika and Joe even presented the Republicans with the opportunity to fraudulently attack President Obama and Hillary Clinton over Benghazi.

Zbignew himself has been quite busy. In addition to teaching American Foreign Policy at Johns Hopkins University’s School of Advanced International Studies and Co-chairing the Center for Strategic and International Studies’ Advisory Board, this year Zbigniew himself has written several columns, appeared at a conference at Princeton’s Wilson Center entitled “Confronting Russian Chauvinism” and testified in January and July to Congress about events in Ukraine, where he spoke of Putin “exalt[ing] in his military seizure of Crimea while basking in an orgy of unleashed chauvinistic sentiments.”

On May 2nd, Zbigniew wrote a piece for Politico magazine entitled “What Obama Should Tell Americans About Ukraine,” where he suggests turning Ukraine into a permanent urban battlefield, writing, “the Ukrainians will fight only if they think they will eventually get some help from the West, particularly in supplies of the kind of weaponry that will be necessary to wage a successful urban defense.”

While Obama never gave the particular speech Mr. Brzezinski wrote, he did speak on the issue on July 29 when he announced the second round of sanctions against the Russian arms, energy, and banking sectors. However, the language President Obama uses to discuss sovereignty and territorial integrity has closely mirrored Zbigniew’s suggestions.

Zbignew, who served as President Carter’s National Security Advisor from 1977-1981, was raised by his anti-Russian father, Tadeusz Brzezinski (1896 – 1990), who fought the Soviet Red Army in the final Warsaw campaign of 1920 and later was Consul General in the German city of Leipzig in 1931-1935.

Zbigniew also married into a legendary family of anti-Russian politicians: his wife, Emilie Beneš, was the grand-daughter Czech politician Vojta Beneš (1878-1951), brother of former Czechoslovak Prime Minister Eduard Beneš (1884-1948). Beneš was Prime Minister of Czechoslovakia before WWII, in exile, and then after the war. Beneš was overthrown in 1948 after he tried to bring Czechoslovakia into America’s Marshall Plan, a project to consolidate anti-Soviet power in Europe.

The Brzezinski clan’s activity in the State Department, media, and pro-NATO lobbying organizations make it certain that their family tradition of Russophobia will play a key role in the way the American government plans and executes its aggressive policy towards Russia

Daniel Zubov for The Center for International Journalism and Research, Rossiya Segodnya


Russia Issues Grim Report On North American Magnetic Anomaly

Posted by EU Times on Jun 12th, 2014

Listen to this article. Powered by Odiogo.com

A grim report prepared by Commander-in-Chief of the Air Force Lieutenant-General Viktor Bondarev on the just completed scientific mission of North America carried out by 4 Tupolev Tu-95 strategic aircraft and 2 Ilyushin Il-78 aerial refueling tankers that “electronically swept” for “magnetic anomalies” from Alaska to California warns that a “catastrophic event” may be nearing for this region.

US officials, it should be noted, characterized this purely scientific mission as a “bombing run” that came within 50 miles of California, but which their Air Forces were able to repel by their launching of F-15 fighter jets.

This report, however, states that this scientific mission was necessitated by a “severe mysterious magnetic anomaly” detected by the Kosmos 2473 satellite on 3 June occurring in the Yellowstone region of the Western United States which resulted in what is called an “earthquake swarm.”

Most important to note about the 3 June Yellowstone “magnetic anomaly”, this report continues, are that satellite measurements show it being precipitated by the mysterious earthquake swarm hitting the Brooks Range mountains in Alaska, and which seismologists are still at a loss to explain.

The information relating to the linking of these two “events”, this report says, was further verified by the United States Geological Survey (USGS) magnetic anomaly maps and data for North America showing a strange magnetic “disturbance/ripple” emanating from Brooks Range and ending at Yellowstone on 3 June, both of these areas, it is important to note, being part of the Rocky Mountains that stretch more than 4,830 km (3,000 miles) from the northernmost part of British Columbia, in western Canada, to New Mexico, in the southwestern United States.

Of grave concern to Russian military authorities relating to these “events”, General Bondarev says in his report, was the “catastrophic effect” they had on the advanced “magnetoceptioninertial navigation systems employed by many US-NATO-Russian warplanes which use these highly sophisticated aircraft flight devices.

Though no Russia military aircraft were near the “disturbed magnetic zone” emanating our from Yellowstone on 3 June, this report says, two US military aircraft were at its “boundaries” in the Southern California region on 4 June while this “event” was still “active” causing them both to crash.

The two US fighter jets crashing on 4 June, this report continues, were identified as a US Navy F-A-183 that went down when the pilot was attempting to land aboard the carrier Carl Vinson, and a US Marine Harrier AV-8B jet that crashed into a residential community in Imperial, about 90 miles east of San Diego, both of them occurring within hours of each other.

This report notes that no civilian aircraft would have been affected by this “magnetic anomaly” as only the most advanced military aircraft employ these “geomagnetic-satellite” coordinated flight systems which enable them to “hug the terrain” not unlike the magnetic systems used by birds and insects to navigate.

Russian concerns relating to “magnetic anomalies”, it is important to note, are related to the rapidly shifting north magnetic pole which since 2005 has been moving at a rate of 40 kilometers (25 miles) a year from Arctic Canada toward Siberia.

Frightening independent research from last year (2013) further warns that this shift is still picking up speed and according to this researcher should reach Siberia in at least within 2 years. [See video HERE (banned in US)]

One of the effects of the rapidly shifting magnetic north pole being noticed the most, this report notes, are the airport runway systems being disrupted because of it, and as we can read one such 2011 example which occurred in the US:

“Tampa International Airport was forced to readjust its runways Thursday to account for the movement of the Earth’s magnetic fields, information that pilots rely upon to navigate planes. Thanks to the fluctuations in the force, the airport has closed its primary runway until Jan. 13 to change taxiway signs to account for the shift, the Federal Aviation Administration said.

The poles are generated by movements within the Earth’s inner and outer cores, though the exact process isn’t exactly understood. They’re also constantly in flux, moving a few degrees every year, but the changes are almost never of such a magnitude that runways require adjusting, said Paul Takemoto, a spokesman for the FAA.”

The most chilling aspects of General Bondarev’s report relating to these “events” are the equations he uses in postulating that what is now occurring in North America with these “mysterious magnetic anomalies” occurring over a large expanse of the Rocky Mountains, and when combined with the rapidly shifting magnetic north pole and growing evidence of global climate change, give “huge credibility” to what is called “The Expanding Earth Theory”.

The expanding Earth or growing Earth hypothesis asserts that the position and relative movement of continents is at least partially due to the volume of Earth increasing and stands in contrast to that of plate tectonics, but which new findings relating to “aether theories” and dark matter, General Bondarev summarizes, means “grave consideration” must be given to the words of University of California, Davis, cosmologist Dr. Andreas Albrecht who warned: “We’ve hit some really profound problems with cosmology Ð with dark matter and dark energy, that tells us we have to rethink fundamental physics and try something new.

Or in simple terms, this report ends, “We may be on the verge of a catastrophic North American “event” that could possibly change the world forever, we should be prepared.”

YELLOWSTONE ERUPTION OF MEGAVOLCANO

YELLOWSTONE ERUPTION OF MÉGAVOLCAN

Published June 9, 2014 | by Team Pleinsfeux

The American government  is working on a secret escape plan in case of a mega volcano eruption at Yellowstone ?

  • Conspiracy theorists claim that American citizens could be moved to Australia, Brazil and   Argentina.

  • The last eruption may have occurred there 70,000 years.

  • The volcano could be reclassified as “off”, despite the fact that researchers have recently found that it is 2.5 times larger than they thought.

On May 8, 2014

It has been suggested that millions of citizens of the United States could end up in Brazil, Australia or Argentina if the Yellowstone supervolcano eruption happened.

The news site “Praag” edited in South Africa, argues that the African National Congress would have been offered $ 10 billion a year for 10 years for the construction of temporary housing for Americans if rash, in this As part of the development of current emergency plans.

Bloggers and conspiracy theorists have spent weeks discussing these plans since the videos of animals fleeing the region have been revealed, although park rangers said they were actually frightened by tourists.

PREVIOUS KICKS

  1. According to U.S. Geological Survey, there were three major eruptions of Yellowstone supervolcano over the past million years.

  2. The first would have a league there are about 2.1 million years, while the second took place there 1.3 million years.

  3. The last major eruption took place there 640.000 years.

“It was a kind of spring day, and they were frisky. Contrary to online reports, this is an all-in-natural and not the end of the world phenomenon,” said the spokeswoman, Amy Bartlett.

If the largest volcano in the world was rash, most of the United States would be covered with ashes. However, researchers say there are no signs of an imminent eruption.

“The chance of that happening in our lives is extremely insignificant,” said Peter Cervelli, deputy director for science and technology at the Science Center of the volcanoes of the “United States Geological Survey,” California.

A recent study on the important supervolcano of Yellowstone National Park in the United States, researchers have recently found to be 2.5 times larger than they thought, could actually be dead very soon.

The researchers analyzed the water and gas, and believe that it could already be on its deathbed.

According to Ken Sims, of the University of Wyoming, air and water samples taken from the largest volcano in the world suggests that it might be dying.

The team examined the acidity in water samples and radon in the air as part of their study on the status of Yellowstone.

At Yellowstone, as with other volcanoes, some scientists theorize that the earth’s crust fractures and cracks in a concentric pattern, also known as fractures rings. At some point, these cracks reach the magma reservoir and release the pressure, and the volcano explodes. The enormous amount of released material causes the collapse of the volcano in a huge crater, a caldera.

They also analyzed how water and gas mix in the amount of land in order to improve methods of predicting eruptions and to identify the most volatile areas of the park.

Currently, the park is classified as dormant, as there would have been no eruption since 70,000 years.

If it becomes an extinct volcano, it will never erupt again.

In early November, a team of researchers from the University of Wyoming, led by Ken Sims, has distributed tarpaulins on the snowy ground near the white terraces, outside of “Mammoth Hot Springs” where pools are stacked like small mountains filled with crystal clear water.

“I got radium,” said Ken Sims, a professor of geology and geophysics of the “University of Wyoming and National Geographic Explorer.”

“We should take samples there. “

Ken Sims knelt beside a mound delicate formations and released their machines boxes backpack: There was a radon detector with lights and a recorder to tape measures, a detector pH to record acid levels.

Both should help me learn how water and gas interact.

“It looks like boiling,” said Ken Sims. “But in fact, it is steam or CO2. “

The area is of outstanding natural beauty: The Yellowstone caldera in Wyoming is the largest super-volcano in the world.

Ken Sims studied the rate at which water and gas mix ascending to the surface.

His research could eventually help scientists understand what causes eruptions of steam.

If they know how fast steam and water interact in the park, they could better predict when an area becomes more volatile.

Despite fears that the supervolcano may be off, the park is one of the research laboratories of the most famous in the world, attracting internationally renowned scientists to study everything from earthquakes to the origins of life, until the power of this volcano lies beneath the soil.

“Yellowstone is so superior in many ways, that sometimes you cry responses to what is happening elsewhere,” said Jacob Lowenstern, scientist in charge of the Yellowstone Volcano Observatory.

The unique park has a quagmire of molten rocks and crystals as the first national park in the country 40 miles (64 km.) Long molten rocks and crystals.

Instead of a cone with a hole, the caldera is an interconnected maze of gas and water covering nearly 60 miles (about 96 km.) In the northwestern corner of Wyoming with parts in Montana and Idaho.

More than 10,000 pots of mud, rivers and geysers boiling, act as valves to release pressure of nature, preventing the heated exploding monster.

And, they move.

“Mammoth Terraces” in the northern part of the park can grow vertically up to 3 meters per year and extend horizontally further.

The rise of the water dissolved calcium in the surface and the CO2 bubble is left behind and the white calcium carbonate.

The terraces rise until the vents become blocked and the gas pressure forces the opening of a weakness elsewhere.

“The intense heat of the Yellowstone volcano is driving the hydrothermal system,” said Henry Heasler, geologist of the park.

“It gets hot and rises, and the magma chamber, or reservoir, is at a relatively shallow depth. “

%d bloggers like this: