Mar 262017
 

Whether or not Putin is behind it, a lot of Journalists have ended up dead in Russia.

List Of Russian Journalists Killed in During The Obama Administration

The dangers to journalists in Russia have been well-known since the early 1990s but concern over the number of unsolved killings soared after Anna Politkovskaya’s murder in Moscow on 7 October, 2006. Russia has become one of the most dangerous countries for journalists. Besides numerous cases of assault and battery as well as frequent threats against media representatives, there has been a string of suspicious deaths among prominent Russian reporters. Some of these incidents have attracted international attention since they involved leading critics of the Russian government. The failure of Russian law enforcement agencies to secure a court conviction in any of these cases has only deepened the mystery surrounding the murders.

Here’s all of the Russian Journalists who were killed during the Obama administration during which Hillary Clinton famously handed the Russians a ‘Reset Button‘.

2009

30 March – Sergei Protazanov, layout artist with Grazhdanskoye soglasie newspaper, Khimki nr. Moscow. Link to work questioned.

29 June – Vyacheslav Yaroshenko, chief editor of Corruption and Criminality newspaper in Volgograd died after a severe head injuries in June. He was allegedly struck in the temple by the unknown assailant, although the local police claims fall from the ladder as the reason for injury.

15 July – Natalia Estemirova, a human rights activist with Memorial, who worked with journalists from Novaya gazeta, especially Anna Politkovskaya, and occasionally published in the newspaper herself, having been a TV reporter pre-1999. After years of investigating murders and kidnapping in Chechnya, Estemirova was herself abducted that morning in Grozny and found shot to death by the roadside several hours later in neighbouring Ingushetia.

11 August – Malik Akhmedilov, deputy chief editor of the Avar language newspaper Khakikat (Truth), was found shot dead near the Dagestan capital Makhachkala.

25 October – Maksharip Aushev was shot dead in Nalchik, capital of Kabardino-Balkaria. When Magomed Yevloyev gave up running Ingushetia.ru, and his replacement (Rosa Malsagova) had to flee abroad to escape threats and harassment, Aushev ran the successor website Ingushetia.org. Link to past or present work unclear.

16 November – Olga Kotovskaya, Kaskad radio & TV company, Kaliningrad. Died in a fall from 14th storey-building under suspicious circumstances. Investigation under “Incitement to suicide”.

2010

20 January – Konstantin Popov died from a beating received a fortnight earlier by Russian police in a detoxification centre for the drunk and disorderly. A 26-year-old police sergeant was charged with his killing.

23 February – Journalist Ivan Stepanov was stabbed to death at his dacha. The murderers have been arrested and sentenced to 16 and 18 years of prison.

20 March – Maxim Zuyev was found murdered in a Kaliningrad flat he was renting. Seven years earlier he was interrogated by the city’s police for publishing an anonymous letter alleging corruption among high-ranking police officers in the enclave. The Investigative Committee has marked the case as “crime solved.

5 May – Shamil Aliyev, founder of two radio stations and a director of TV network was shot in his car by two unidentified attackers, who also killed his bodyguard and wounded his driver.

13 May – Said Magomedov, director of local television station, Sergokalinsky district, Dagestan. Shot dead when travelling with repairmen to restore sabotaged TV transmitter.

25 June – Dmitry Okkert, Moscow. A presenter with the Expert TV channel, Okkert was found stabbed to death in his own apartment. The director of the Expert media holding, Valery Fadeyev, does not believe that the brutal killing of his colleague was linked to his journalistic activities.

25 July – Bella Ksalova, Cherkessk. A correspondent for the Caucasian Knot website and news agency, Ksalova died in a hospital after being hit by a car near her home. The driver was sentenced to 3 1/4 years in penal colony.

1 August – Malika Betiyeva, Grozny-Shatoi highway. The deputy chief editor of Molodyozhnaya smena, and Chechnya correspondent of the “Dosh” (Word) magazine, died with four of her immediate family when a speeding jeep crashed into her car.

11 August – Magomed Sultanmagomedov, Makhachkala. The director of the Makhachkala TV station died in the hospital after his car was shot at from another vehicle. This was preceded by an attempted bombing on 18 November 2008.

23 October – Yevgeny Fedotov died in a hospital due to the head injuries received in a violent quarrel with his neighbour. The latter has been charged for manslaughter.

2011

15 December – Gadzhimurat Kamalov, Makhachkala. Investigative reporter – shot 6 times in a drive-by outside his newspaper’s offices.

2012

7 July – Alexander Khodzinsky, journalist in Tulun, was stabbed to death by a local businessman Gennady Zhigarev, former deputy. 5 December – Kazbek Gekkiev, journalist for local TV programmes in Kabardino-Balkaria, was shot dead on a Nalchik street, after getting threats from local wahhabi extremists.

2013

9 July – Akhmednabi Akhmednabiyev, deputy editor of the Novoe Delo was killed (after numerous death threats and previous assassination attempt in January 2013 by several gunshots while he was driving just 50 metres from his house on the outskirts of provincial capital Makhachkala.

2014

1 August – Journalist and human rights activist Timur Kuashev was abducted from his home and later found dead in Kabardino-Balkaria. Kuashev was previously stopped by local police a number of times and received death threats.

2016

March 31 – Journalist Dmitry Tsilikin was stabbed to death in his flat in Saint Petersburg. The suspected killer is neo-nazi Sergey Kosyrev. The murder is attributed to Tsilikin’s homosexual orientation.

2017

March 17 – Yevgeny Khamaganov died of unexplained causes in Ulan-Ude. Khamaganov was known for writing articles that criticized the federal government and was allegedly beaten by unknown assailants on March 10.

Obama more flexibility after the election

 

 

Mar 232017
 
While the US spin machine hurls accusations about Russian election meddling, it’s worth nothing the US is a seasoned pro at interfering in elections.

While The Mainstream Media Focuses On Russia, The Government's Own Data Shows U.S. Interfered In 81 Elections

Ask an average American who makes a habit of following government-mouthpiece corporate media about interference in national elections and you’ll likely elicit a nebulous response concerning Russian hackers and a plan to install Donald Trump in the White House — but you probably won’t hear a single syllable pertaining to United States government’s actual attempts to do the same.

On Monday, FBI Director James Comey confirmed for the first time publicly the bureau is officially investigating hotly contentious allegations of Russian meddling in the U.S. election — but, even if proven true, such geopolitical escapades better characterize the routine behavior of accuser than of accused.

“The F.B.I., as part of our counterintelligence effort, is investigating the Russian government’s efforts to interfere in the 2016 president election,” the director announced, adding the bureau would conduct a probe to discern whether Trump’s associates had contact with Russian officials.

Despite that the U.S. has hypocritically exerted influence over foreign elections in all corners of the globe — in fact, it has arrogantly done so a whopping 81 times between 1946 and 2000, alone — with just one-third of those operations undertaken overtly.


For months, mainstream media parroted murky accusations hurled by politicians — keen to point a finger of blame for the apparently stultifying victory of a former reality television host on someone — that The Russians had somehow surreptitiously undermined the election-centric foundation of American Democracy.

While that has yet to prove true, this new Red Scare constitutes a duplicitous attempt by the pot to call the kettle … an election meddler.

Researcher Dov Levin of Carnegie Mellon University’s Institute for Politics and Strategy — an expert on the topic at hand — discussed the lengthy but incomplete list of times the U.S. government has interfered in other nations’ elections with NPR’s Ari Shapiro.

Asked for examples where this tampering tangibly altered results, Levin stated,

“One example of that was our intervention in Serbia, Yugoslavia in the 2000 election there. Slobodan Milosevic was running for re-election, and we didn’t want him to stay in power there due to his tendency, you know, to disrupts the Balkans and his human rights violations.

“So we intervened in various ways for the opposition candidate, Vojislav Kostunica. And we gave funding to the opposition, and we gave them training and campaigning aide. And according to my estimate, that assistance was crucial in enabling the opposition to win.”

Levin reiterated the more blatant methods with which the U.S. asserts dominance — through the overt coups or all-out regime changes branding the nation a notorious interventionist — are not among the list of the 80-plus attempts to manipulate the electoral outcome.

As for the issue of pot versus kettle, Levin explained that — although Russia and other powerful nations indisputably employ similar tactics — the United States has been quite prodigious in its effort.

“Well, for my dataset, the United States is the most common user of this technique. Russia or the Soviet Union since 1945 has used it half as much. My estimate has been 36 cases between 1946 to 2000. We know also that the Chinese have used this technique and the Venezuelans when the late Hugo Chavez was still in power in Venezuela and other countries.”

As sanctimonious U.S. politicians cry foul about The Russians, it would behoove the new McCarthyites to reflect on the nation’s sticky imperialist fingerprints around the globe — like that time in 1996, when the United States undertook an extensive, secret operation to ensure the presidency of Boris Yeltsin.

That is, of course, former President Boris Yeltsin — of the Russian Federation.

 
By Claire Bernish

Mar 222017
 
Dozens of House Democrats have collectively paid $4 million since 2009 to Pakistani IT professionals now under criminal investigation who had access to House members’ email and computer files.

Five Pakistani Congressional Staffers In Criminal Probe

Five people employed by members of the House of Representatives remain under criminal investigation for unauthorized access to Congressional computers. Former DNC chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz employed at least one of those under investigation.

The criminal investigation into the five, which includes three brothers and a wife of one of the men, started late last year, as reported by Politico in February. The group is being investigated by US Capitol Police over allegations that they removed equipment from over 20 members’ offices, as well as having run a procurement scheme to buy equipment and then overcharge the House.

House Speaker Paul Ryan said last week Capitol Police are receiving additional help for the investigation. “I won’t speak to the nature of their investigation, but they’re getting the kind of technical assistance they need to do that, this is under an active criminal investigation, their capabilities are pretty strong but they’re also able to go and get the kind of help they need from other sources,” Ryan said.

The brothers, Abid, Jamal and Imran Awan, worked as shared employees for various members of the House, covering committees relating to intelligence, terrorism and cybersecurity, which included the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, the Committee on Homeland Security and the Subcommittee on Tactical Air and Land Forces of the Armed Services Committee.

Imran’s wife, Hina Alvi, and Rao Abbas, both of whom worked as House IT employees, are also under investigation.

Debbie Wasserman Schultz

The group were banned from accessing the computers as a result of the investigation but, as of earlier this month, Imran Awan remains as an “technology adviser” to former Democratic National Committee chair, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, who was forced to resign in July following revelations that she worked to further Hillary Clinton’s chances of winning the Democratic primary at the expense of Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders.

News of the brothers’ investigation has sparked speculation that it may be tied to the hack of the DNC servers, the contents of which were first released by Guccifer 2.0 and later published on WikiLeaks.

Russian actors have been accused of being behind the hack, which Democrats claim contributed to Clinton’s loss to Donald Trump. There have also been reports that the DNC hack came from an insider.

An email between DNC staffers in April 2016, which was released by WikiLeaks, references a staff member named Imran and how this person has access to the passwords for Wasserman Schultz’s iPad.

Garret Bonosky, deputy director of office of the DNC chair, tells Amy Kroll: “I have to get [this iPad] thing figured out. Need to make sure I have her username and password before I delete and reload the app.”

“I do not have access to her ipad password, but Imran does,” Kroll replies, later writing: “Just spoke to Imran, call me whenever GB and I’ll update you, don’t delete anything yet.”

Another email from the DNC hack, dated December 2016, references Imran once again. Wasserman Schultz’s assistant Rosalyn Kumar tells scheduler Anna Stolitzka: “[Nancy] Pelosi is doing [a] closed door meeting. No staff or anyone allowed. Kaitlyn come to Rayburn room and get her iPad for Imran.”

6-Figure Salaries

The brothers were paid high salaries for their work with various House members, above the median salary for Congressional staffers.

Imran, who started working for Wasserman Schultz in 2005, received $164,600 in 2016, with close to $20,000 of that coming from Wasserman Schultz.

Jamal, who started working as a staffer in 2014, was paid $157,350.12 in 2016.

Abid, who started working in 2005, was paid $160,943 in 2016.

Hina Alvi, who was employed as a staffer from February 2007, was paid 168,300 in 2016.

Rao Abbas was paid $85,049 in 2016.

The Daily Caller reports that Imran received $1.2 million in salary since 2010, while Abid and Alvi received over $1 million each.

House Democrats supporting the employees have suggested that the Pakistani nationality of the suspects may have inspired the investigation.

 
via

Mar 212017
 
New York Times front page: “Comey Confirms Inquiry on Russia and Trump Allies” but “Dismisses a Wiretapping Claim”

 
In the world of “Fake News” wording is everything.

NYTimes front page

 

NSA Director Admiral Rogers says there is no intelligence that votes were changed by Russian involvement in the 2016 elections.

 

The Words Of The New York Times Will Come Back To Haunt Them!

New York Times Wire Tapping
Source… 

Mar 052017
 
They started setting Trump up as soon as the primaries were over.

Democrats Fabricated "Russia Hacked The DNC" To Justify Spying On Trump

The FISA request to spy on Trump was originally filed in June 2016. The Wikileaks of the DNC hacked emails were released July 22, 2016. The entire “Russia hacked the DNC” story was created to justify DNC spying on Trump before the election.

Look at the timeline:

May 26, Trump reaches enough delegates to unofficially win Republican Presidential nomination.

June 2016, FISA request rejected against Trump.

July 22, 2016 Wikileaks releases the emails against the DNC.

August 2016, DNC claims the emails are Russian propaganda and some are fake with the goal of harming Hillary Clinton’s Presidency.

The media runs with this story, this creates suspicion against Trump to suggest that Russia is trying to influence the election.

October a month before the election, another FISA request is accepted. This time because of “probable cause” no evidence actually needing to be required.

This allows the current federal government to spy on a Presidential candidate a month before the election, one who is a part of the opposing political party ( while Obama himself is actively campaigning with Hillary and the DOJ is working to help Hillary pass her investigation with no issues ).

The plan the Democrats had for the election was to rig it for Hillary by using dirty tactics by the Mainstream Media to destroy Bernie’s chance and to make Trump look bad, and also to potentially spy on him to find negative stories to run in the month lead up to the election. They were probably hoping to leak audio clips of Trump having private conversations saying politically incorrect things, like how they had the hot mic tape of him saying “grab her by the pussy” and used that to find 15+ random women to claim that he sexually assaulted them a few weeks before the election.

A more comprehensive timeline put together by a user a Reddit:

Obama creates office of Chief Technology Officer – Aneesh Chopra ties to Tim Kaine/Terry McAuliffe (DNC Virginia strategy), Todd Park (Healthcare.gov fiasco), Megan Smith (VP Google X)

10 Oct 2012 – Directive 19 (Protect whistleblowers just before election – failsafe?)

==2013== New term. Uranium One, wiretapping (journalists/Merkel/France), slush fund projects, BLM, ISIS rebranded / Syria mobilization, Euromaidan (Ukraine)

2014 – Fancy Bear attacks Germany, Ukraine. (coincidence?)

19 Mar 2015 – Obama appoints David Recordon (Facebook) as White House IT director.

8 April 2015 – Fancy Bear (ISIS fakeout) attacks France. (coincidence?)

16 June 2015 – Trump enters presidential race.

?? June 2016 – FISA request – denied.

7 June 2016 – Final GOP primary.

14 June 2016 – Reported that DNC servers hacked (after “one year” – coincides with Trump entering race – setup begins). Research dossier on Trump stolen, Hillary campaign data untouched. Peskov denies Russian interference.

15 June 2016 – CrowdStrike (Russian expat Dmitri Alperovitch ties to Atlantic Council) blames Fancy Bear(coincidence?)

6 Jul 2016 – Senate bill to revoke Hillary security clearance.

11 Jul 2016 – House bill to revoke Hillary security clearance.

22 Jul 2016 – Wikileaks – Hillary.

7 Oct 2016 – Wikileaks – Podesta. Press release.

9 Oct 2016 – Trump campaign alleges Clinton ties to Russia.

12 Oct 2016 – Putin denies hacking.

15 Oct 2016 – FISA warrant issued.

19 Oct 2016 – Hillary calls Trump a puppet at final presidential debate. (Civilian – who is leaking her information?)

20 Oct 2016 – Esquire details hacking operation.

31 Oct 2016 – FBI: No direct link to Trump.

24 Nov 2016 – Scary Russian trolls! (CTR/Shareblue?)

10 Jan 2017 – Trump intelligence allegations dossier “leaked”. (Dates curious – reports follow damaging press – retaliation?)

11 Jan 2017 – Clapper denies dossier came from IC.

12 Jan 2017 – Obama modifies E.O. 12333. (Another fail-safe?)

Isn’t it amazing how quickly the Mainstream Media ran and accepted the Russian narrative? Almost like they were fed orders for it and didn’t care how no connection to Russia existed.

Previously:
Loretta Lynch’s Final Order Allows The NSA To Give Spying Data To Other Federal Agencies
Hillary Set Up The ‘Russian Hack’ Excuse During The Debates
In 2013 Obama Legalized The Use Of Propaganda On The US Public

 

Mar 012017
 
Russian diplomats keep dying unexpectedly
Seven Russian Officials Murdered or Found Dead Since US Election Day

Ivan Sekretarev / AP

Russian diplomats seem to be an endangered species, as seven officials have been found dead under mysterious or unexplained circumstances just since Election Day, and — although any link remains as yet unprovable — the deaths certainly provoke a number of questions.

1. Sergei Krivov:

First is the perplexing case of Sergei Krivov — disputably a consular duty commander at the Russian Consulate in Manhattan — died on November 8, Election Day, under perhaps the most problematic circumstances of any of the deaths listed.

Found unconscious and unresponsive on the floor inside the consulate, Krivov suffered blunt force trauma to the head — initially reported as received in a fall from the roof of the building — and passed away before emergency services could reach the scene.

Consular officials quickly backtracked that Krivov died after plunging over the building, instead insisting he’d suffered a heart attack — but the diplomat’s lack of paper trails and ambiguity from officials about his career position make the death appear to be far from ordinary.

“That position is no ordinary security guard,” reported BuzzFeed on Krivov’s ambiguous role at the consulate. “According to other public Russian-language descriptions of the duty commander position, Krivov would have been in charge of, among other things, ‘prevention of sabotage’ and suppression of ‘attempts of secret intrusion’ into the consulate.

“In other words, it was Krivov’s job to make sure US intelligence agencies didn’t have ears in the building.”

2. Andrey Karlov:

On December 19, Russian Ambassador to Turkey Andrey Karlov met his fate while giving a speech at an art exhibit in Ankara, when Mevlüt Mert Altıntaş — an off-duty Turkish riot police officer — fired several shots from behind, fatally wounding the diplomat and injuring several others.

Altıntaş proceeded to declare jihad and implored the terrified, small crowd of attendees and press, “Do not forget Aleppo, do not forget Syria!”

It was later revealed Altıntaş had used his law enforcement identification to enter the gallery; but at the time, Russian President Vladimir Putin railed against the attacker, thin security allowing him to enter the exhibit, “Russia Through Turks’ Eyes,” without issue, and the possible implications for resolving the conflict in Syria, stating,

“This murder is clearly a provocation aimed at undermining the improvement and normalization of Russian-Turkish relations, as well as undermining the peace process in Syria promoted by Russia, Turkey, Iran and other countries interested in settling the conflict in Syria.”

3. Petr Polshikov:

At some point on the same day — and prior to the brazen assassination of Karlov — Petr Polshikov, a senior diplomat in the Latin America division at the Russian foreign ministry, died in his Moscow apartment of a gunshot wound to the head. An announcement of the suspicious death did not become public until a few hours after Altıntaş shocked the world in Ankara.

Detailed information on Polshikov’s untimely demise remains difficult to obtain, but reports at the time alleged authorities found two bullet shells on the scene and a firearm under a sink in the bathroom.

4. Oleg Erovinkin:

Ex-KGB chief Oleg Erovinkin — believed to have assisted former British spy, Christopher Steele, with a lurid dossier alleging explicit acts by President Donald Trump — was found dead in his black Lexus on December 29.

Erovinkin had been close to Igor Sechin, a former deputy prime minister and now head of State-owned oil company, Rosneft, and had acted as a key liaison between Sechin and Putin.

Although validity of the contents of that dossier have been called into serious question, Erovinkin’s alleged involvement in compiling the information makes his death dubious by nature. An investigation is ongoing.

5. Andrey Malanin:

Despite living alone on a tightly-guarded street, Andrey Malanin — head of the consular section at Russia’s embassy in Athens — was “found on the floor of his bedroom by a member of the embassy’s staff with no evidence of a break-in, the official said on condition of anonymity,” Reuters reported January 9.

Authorities also told Reuters there were no indications Malanin had been murdered, but homicide officials are investigating the death due to his status as a diplomat.

6. Aleksandr Kadakin:

On January 26, Russian ambassador to India, 67-year-old Aleksandr Kadakin — who had served in the position since 2009 and spent over two decades as a diplomat — died in New Delhi, ostensively from heart failure.

Although it appeared the man’s death was unrelated to the others and had been natural, the timing in conjunction with Karlov, Polshikov, Erovinkin, and Malanin raised some eyebrows.

7. Vitaly Churkin:

Then, last week, Russian ambassador to the United Nations Vitaly Churkin died one day before his 65th birthday in New York City — reportedly of a heart failure.

According to the New York Times on February 20, “The Russian government said he died suddenly but did not specify a cause. The New York City police said there were no indications of foul play.”

However, Pravda reported, “According to ABS-CBN, a post-mortem examination of Churkin’s body showed the presence of poison in his kidneys. Allegedly, the diplomat had a late supper, at around midnight, hours before his death. Perpetrators could have added an unknown substance in his food.”

Churkin had been a vocal critic of hypocritical Western foreign policy, particularly concerning military actions in Syria.

An obituary in the Guardian stated Churkin “hated the moralising tone of his US, British and French counterparts on the UN security council who, he felt, were not only hypocritical but were playing to the global gallery and aiming to score rhetorical points instead of looking for compromises that could lead to the resolution of differences. This applied particularly to the war in Syria, about which western governments tabled resolutions that could lead, in the Russian view, to full-scale military intervention against the Syrian government and which they knew Churkin was bound to veto. Russia preferred to produce resolutions that criticised the Syrian army for using ‘disproportionate’ force and sought agreement on ceasefires. Churkin consulted the security council’s five permanent members on these resolutions, but chose not to provoke vetoes when he realised there was no consensus.”

What, if anything, this growing Russian diplomat body count actually means might never be fully known, but many suspect the deaths evince a methodical, covert war between the Deep State and Russia — particularly as hostilities continue mostly unabated — as a shift in power away from the ailing imperialist U.S. empire gathers speed.
 
 
By Claire Bernish

European Radiation Causes Concerns

 Information, Political  Comments Off on European Radiation Causes Concerns
Feb 242017
 
No One Can Figure Out What’s Behind a Mysterious Radiation Spike Across Europe

European Radiation Causes Concerns

A baffling bloom of radiation detected spreading throughout Europe earlier this year has stumped scientists and spawned sinister conspiracy theories.

The ‘cloud’ of Iodine-131 first appeared near the border of Norway and Russia a few weeks ago and was subsequently spotted by a number of nearby countries, including France and Finland.

Authorities say that it appeared to be an isolated incident as radiation levels returned to normal shortly thereafter.

That said, the cause of the event remains a mystery, which has led some to propose the troubling theory that the radiation came from a clandestine nuclear test by Russia.

Others have expressed concerns that the radiation may be come from some kind of nuclear incident that is being kept secret.

The enlisting of a specialized US Air Force jet designed to ‘sniff’ radiation levels has only fueled the conspiratorial speculation that something nefarious may have occurred.

However, experts are attempting to quell such concerns and explain that since Iodine-131 was the sole radioactive substance detected, the origin of the bloom was probably an inadvertent leak at a pharmaceutical plant.

Their reasoning is that Iodine-131 is used in some cancer medications produced in the region and a similar spike in 2011 was eventually traced back to such a facility.

And so, while mysterious radiation coming from the border of Russia is understandably worrisome in these chaotic times, it would appear the bloom is the merely the product of bad medicine making.

Small amounts of nuclear radiation spread across Europe last month, and no one can figure out why.

First detected over the Norway-Russia border in January, the radioactive Iodine-131 bloom was then found over several European countries, and while unsubstantiated rumors of nuclear testing by Russia have been cropping up, officials say it’s most likely linked to an unreported pharmaceutical mishap.

While the radiation spike happened in January, officials in Finland and France have only just gone public with information on the incident, announcing that after the spike was detected in Norway, it appeared in Finland, Poland, Czechia (Czech Republic), Germany, France and Spain, until the end of January.

When asked why Norway didn’t inform the public last month, when it was the first to detect the radiation in its northernmost county, Finnmark, Astrid Liland from the Norwegian Radiation Protection Authority told the Barents Observer:

“The measurements at Svanhovd in January were very, very low. So were the measurements made in neighbouring countries, like Finland. The levels raise no concern for humans or the environment. Therefore, we believe this had no news value.”

As France’s nuclear safety authority, the IRSN, announced last week, the actual amount of radioactive Iodine-131 in Europe’s ground-level atmosphere in January “raise no health concerns”, and has since returned to normal.

But what’s most disconcerting about the event isn’t the level of radiation that spread through Europe – it’s the fact that no one can say what actually happened.

European Radiation Stirs Concerns
What we do know is that Iodine-131 has a half-life of just eight days, so detecting it in the atmosphere is proof of a recent release.

“The release was probably of recent origin. Further than this, it is impossible to speculate,” Brian Gornall from Britain’s Society for Radiological Protection told Ben Sullivan at Motherboard.

Right now, the best bet is that the origin of the radioactive Iodine-131 is somewhere in Eastern Europe – something that conspiracy theorists have latched onto as evidence that Russia performed a nuclear test in the Arctic.

But there is no evidence of this taking place, and the fact that only Iodine-131 – and no other radioactive substances – were detected strongly suggests this is not the answer.

“It was rough weather in the period when the measurements were made, so we can’t trace the release back to a particular location. Measurements from several places in Europe might indicate it comes from Eastern Europe,” Liland told the Barents Observer.

Based on the particular isotope, experts are saying it’s far more likely that the radiation spike is the result of some kind of pharmaceutical factory leak, seeing as Iodine-131 is used widely in treating certain types of cancer.

“Since only Iodine-131 was measured, and no other radioactive substances, we think it originates from a pharmaceutical company producing radioactive drugs,” Liland told Motherboard. “Iodine-131 is used for treatment of cancer.”

And, oddly enough, the case for pharmaceuticals being behind the mess has a surprisingly similar parallel to back it up – an almost identical event occurred in 2011, when low levels of radioactive Iodine-131 were detected in several European countries for a few weeks.

At the time of the announcement, officials were also at a loss to explain the spike in Iodine-131, but quickly ruled out a link to nuclear power plants.

“If it came from a reactor we would find other elements in the air,” Didier Champion, then head of environment and intervention at the IRSN, told Reuters in 2011.

Interestingly, a paper came out just last week confirming that the source of the 2011 Iodine-131 leak was a faulty filter system at the Institute of Isotopes Ltd in Budapest, Hungary, which produces a wide variety of radioactive isotopes for medical treatment and research.

The investigation is still ongoing for the 2017 leak, with the US Air Force deploying its WC-135 nuclear explosion ‘sniffer’ aircraft to the UK last week to help narrow down the source.

Hopefully researchers can nail down what exactly happened here, so factory owners – if they are to blame this time around – can ensure these kinds of leaks don’t continue.

Because while both events posed no health risk to humans, it’s really not something any manufacturer should be risking.

Source…

 

Feb 222017
 
John McCain solicited now dead Russian Ambassador for donation to his presidential campaign in 2008

John McCain Asked Russia For Campaign Money During The 2008 Election
John McCain, who once called Russia a bigger threat than terrorism, asked Vitaly Churkin for campaign money during the 2008 election. He was turned down. Maybe THIS is why McCain hates Russia so much?

Isn’t it illegal to solicit campaign donations from foreign governments?

Found this while searching Wikileaks for Russian hacks (spoiler: there aren’t many).

Russian mission On Fundraising Letter from John McCain Election Campaign, 20 Oct 2008

Release date
October 20, 2008

Summary

20 Oct 2008 statement from the Russian Federation to the United states in relation to an alleged letter from the McCain campaign requesting a financial contribution from Russia:

“We have received a letter from Senator John McCain requesting financial contribution to his Presidential campaign.
In this connection we would like to reiterate that Russian officials, the Permanent Mission of the Russian Federation to the United Nations or the Russian Government do not finance political activity in foreign countries.”

Wikileaks staff have verified the authenticity of the document. Obviously the statement is designed to undermine the McCain campaign and is an extremely interesting Russian intervention into US domestic politics. It remains to be seen whether the play, which lacks subtlety, will backfire and generate support for McCain.

According to the document metadata (which can be manipulated, though rarely is), the document was created by “INT10”, underwent two revisions and was saved by “INT9” with a version of word is registered to organization “MID”. Although Wikileaks normally removes metadata, we have not done so in this instance since the document is intended to be public and may be a significant political play by Russian intelligence.

See John McCain fundraising appeal letter to Russian Ambassador Vitaly Churkin, Sep 29 2008‎ for the McCain letter.

Download

File | Torrent | Magnet

John McCain Asked Russia For Campaign Money During The 2008 Election

 
 
H/T Reddit

Declassified: How America Planned to Invade Italy To Save It from Russia

 Political  Comments Off on Declassified: How America Planned to Invade Italy To Save It from Russia
Feb 222017
 

How America Planned to Invade Italy To Save It from Russia
As accusations fly that Russia manipulated the 2016 American election to put Donald Trump in the White House, some Americans are remembering that the United States also fiddled with elections in numerous nations during the Cold War, including Chile, Iran and Central America.

One of the most notorious examples is Italy, where the CIA mounted an aggressive—and successful—campaign to limit Communist success in the 1948 election, including handing bags of money to conservative Italian political parties (a tradition hardly unknown in American politics). From 1948 to 1968, the CIA gave more than $65 million to Italian parties and labor unions.

But instead of cash, the United States could have sent in the Marines to give Italy the government that America thought it deserved. As late as 1960, America was still contemplating using military force if the Communists took power. Of course, the United States would always have responded militarily if the Soviet Army invaded Italy during the Cold War. But note the difference: American intervention would have been prompted not by Soviet tanks, but rather if the Communists took power through a coup—or by winning an election.

The details have emerged in a newly declassified Pentagon study released by the private watchdog organization, the National Security Archive.

In 1954, the Joint Chiefs of Staff urged that if a Communist government took power in Italy, “the United States, preferably in concert with its principal Allies, should be prepared to take the strongest possible action to prevent such an eventuality, such action possibly extending to the use of military power.”

That position didn’t suit President Dwight Eisenhower, whose World War II experiences as Supreme Allied Commander in Europe made him smarter than most about how to keep an alliance like NATO together. Eisenhower warned that he “could not imagine anything worse than the unilateral use by the United States of its forces to overthrow a Communist regime. This simply could not be done except in concert with our allies.”

Nonetheless, the National Security Council approved a paper that stated: “In the event the Communists achieve control of the Italian government by apparently legal means, the United States, in concert with its principal NATO allies, should take appropriate action, possibly extending to the use of military power, to assist Italian elements seeking to overthrow the Communist regime in Italy.”

Note the words “apparently legal means.” Perhaps the attitude among American leaders during the Cold War was that “Communist government” and “legal” were oxymorons, and that no Communist government could have genuine legitimacy (which had certainly been the case of the Eastern European regimes that rode into office on the backs of Soviet tanks in 1945). Nonetheless, the U.S. Sixth Fleet would have performed the ultimate act of electoral nullification, by using force against a Communist Party that—as did happen in the 1940s and 1950s—enjoyed strong popular support.

Even as late as August 1960, just months before John F. Kennedy took office, an NSC paper proposed that regardless of whether the Communists took power in Italy by illegal or legal means, the United States should be prepared to use military force—unilaterally if need be—to “assist whatever Italian elements are seeking to prevent or overthrow Communist domination.” This was fifteen years after the chaos and devastation of World War II. While Italy has never been known for stable governments, in 1960 it was not still the political and economic basket case under the rule of Allied military government.

In the end, “Eisenhower and Dulles were willing to intervene militarily only if the Communists forcibly seized power and then only in concert with other European nations,” concludes the study’s author, Ronald Landa. And that was wise: as Eisenhower himself realized, U.S. tanks rolling into Rome—or supporting right-wing Italians overthrowing their own government—would have been a propaganda godsend for the godless Communists in Moscow.

All of which has nothing to do with the question of whether Russia influenced the U.S. election. Except as a reminder that political manipulation has been performed by many nations.

READ THE DOCUMENTS

First page of the Landa study on Italy.

First page of the Landa study on Italy.

First page of the study’s Working Bibliography.

First page of the study’s Working Bibliography.

 
 
 
The original source of this article is The National Interest
Copyright © Michael Peck, The National Interest, 2017.

Feb 182017
 

In December when Michael Flynn talked with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak, Flynn said it was to discuss logistics of a call between President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin. Apparently they also discussed the sanctions imposed by outgoing President Barack Obama on Russia for their assumed and alleged “hacking” of the U.S. election in November.

By way of retaliation, based on the allegations of meddling in the election, Obama imposed sanctions that included kicking out 35 Russian officials and closing down two Russian-owned compounds in the U.S. President Putin said the next day that he had no intention of retaliating against Obama’s sanctions, but said he’d wait and deal with the Trump Administration.

Flynn, when recounting his discussion with the Russian Ambassador, obviously talked about Obama’s sanctions, but averred that he hadn’t. And technically, this was Flynn’s error – he lost the confidence of the President and the Vice President by not telling them that sanctions were in fact discussed. Even in his press conference this week President Trump said Flynn wouldn’t have been doing his job if he hadn’t discussed Obama’s sanctions. The sin was not in discussing the sanctions, the sin was in not telling his bosses that he had.

And this is where the political assassination of Michael Flynn occurred. According to the Washington Post, an intelligence source contacted them revealing, illegally, that the December 29th call between Flynn and Kislyak did include discussion of the Obama sanctions. It’s a felony to disclose intelligence data and information. And in order for an intelligence insider to leak something so inconsequential, it was obviously intended to cause political damage to the administration. There really can be no other viable explanation as to why someone in our intelligence apparatus would go public with such a disclosure.

Michael Flynn Did Not Violate The Logan Act

Many have attempted to claim that Flynn violated the Logan Act, since he was not yet functioning in his new appointment as the National Security Advisor. This is a red herring. The Logan Act dates to 1799, when a state legislator with no ties to any administration tried to assert himself as a personal negotiator for final peace with France. The anti-Jefferson Federalists did not like this private initiative, so they passed the Logan Act to make private ventures intent on negotiating personal treaties over international feuds a crime. A representative of an incoming or an outgoing administration is functioning in their official, or official-to-be, capacity, and are not acting a private citizens. Apparently Flynn was addressing Obama’s sanctions against Russia, not negotiating for them. And as President Trump said this week, Flynn would not have been doing his job properly if he didn’t broach the subject of Obama’s sanctions.

 
Source…

Jan 022017
 

Leaked John Kerry Audio Reveals Obama Intentionally Allowed The Rise Of ISIS

Absolutely stunning and something we always suspected – A leaked audio of Secretary Kerry reveals Obama intentionally allowed the rise of ISIS!

From Conservative Treehouse:

There are moments within investigative research when your jaw can stand agape as you recognize the scope of what you are reading or hearing.  A brutally down-played audio of Secretary John Kerry is just such an occasion.

♦ In August of 2014 President Obama (wearing a tan business suit) gave a press conference where he stated he “did not have a strategy” against ISIS. –Video Link

♦ Two months later, in October of 2014, Josh Earnest gave a press conference where he stated:  “Our ISIS strategy is dependent on something that does not yet exist” –Video Link

However, on September 30th 2016 the New York Times quietly released a leaked audio recording of Secretary John Kerry meeting with multiple factions associated within Syria.

When you listen to the audio recording it becomes immediately obvious what was going on when both of those 2014 statements were made by the White House.  In addition, you discover why this jaw-dropping 2016 leak/story was buried by the U.S. media and how it connects to over 5 years of perplexing U.S. mid-east policy.

This evidence within this single story would/should forever remove any credibility toward the U.S. foreign policy under President Obama.  It also destroys the credibility of a large number of well known republicans.  What the recording reveals is substantive:

First, only regime change, the removal of Bashir Assad, in Syria was the goal for President Obama. This is admitted and outlined by Secretary John Kerry.

Secondly, in order to accomplish this primary goal, the White House was willing to watch the rise of ISIS by placing their bet that ISIS’s success would force Syrian President Bashir Assad to acquiesce toward Obama’s terms and step down.

Thirdly, in order to facilitate the two objectives, Obama and Kerry intentionally gave arms to ISIS and even, arguably, attacked a Syrian government military convoy to stop a strategic attack upon the Islamic extremists killing 80 Syrian soldiers.

Pause for a moment and consider those three points carefully before continuing.  Because this audio (below), along with accompanying research now surfacing, not only exposes these three points as truth – but also provides the specific evidence toward them.

The problem in the Obama/Kerry’s secret strategy became clear when ISIS grew in sufficient strength to give the White House optimism for the scheme – however, instead of capitulation Assad then turned to Russia for help.

When Russia came to aid Bashir Assad the Syrian Government began being able to defeat ISIS and the Islamic Extremist elements within Syria.  For the hidden plan of Obama/Kerry (and also McCain, Graham, et al), Russia defeating ISIS, al-Qaeda and al-Nusra, upended their objective.

The revelations within this leaked audio are simply astounding. The 40-minute discussion took place on the sidelines of a United Nations General Assembly in New York. The meeting took place at the Dutch Mission to the United Nations on Sept. 22nd 2016:

[…]  Kerry’s off-record conversation was apparently with two dozen ‘Syrian civilians’, all from US backed opposition-linked NGO’s in education and medical groups supposedly working in ‘rebel-held’ (aka terrorist-held) areas in Syria.

This opposition conclave also included ‘rescue workers’ which can only be ambassadors from the White Helmets, a pseudo NGO which serves as Washington and London’s primary PR front in pursuit of a “No Fly Zone’ in Syria, and it’s being bankrolled by the US, UK, EU and other coalition states to the tune of well over $100 million (so far). (link)

Listen to the audio.

Key Kerry moments at 02:00, and again at approximately 18:30 forward.

The discussion from 18:30 through to 29:00 are exceptionally revealing and should be listened to by anyone who has wondered what was going on in Syria.  Kerry even makes mention of the “Responsibility to Protect, or R2P” principle:

Read more…

Audio:

 
This elevates Obama and all those complicit to war criminal status worthy of prosecution.

Could this apply?

18 U.S. Code § 2384 – Seditious conspiracy

    If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.

(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 807; Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, § 330016(2)(J), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2148.)

Along with Obama and Kerry, Representative Adam Kinzinger, Senator John McCain, and candidate Evan McMullin could be sent away for this too.

Previously:
What’s Really Going On In Syria? Are We Being Lied To?

 

US Interfered In Foreign Presidential Elections At Least 81 Times In 54 Years

 Political  Comments Off on US Interfered In Foreign Presidential Elections At Least 81 Times In 54 Years
Dec 292016
 
The US was found to have interfered in foreign elections at least 81 times between 1946 and 2000 – not counting US-backed military coups or regime change efforts.

US Interfered In Foreign Presidential Elections At Least 81 Times In 54 Years
Ever since Donald Trump managed to win the US Presidential Election last month, the US establishment – which largely backed Hillary Clinton – has pounced on any and all opportunities to accuse a foreign power, namely Russia, of having “interfered” in the US election. Though such accusations have been proven to be based solely on speculation and not hard evidence, that hasn’t stopped the US political elite for crying foul for an act, they say undermines democracy in the worst way possible. Yet, absent from all of this post-election hysteria, is any mention of the US’ own well-documented practice of interfering with the elections of numerous foreign nations under the pretext of protecting or furthering US “interests” abroad.

Dov Levin, a political scientist at Carnegie Mellon University, amassed a database of US election interference abroad, which shows just how common that practice has been throughout recent US history. According to Levin’s work, the US interfered in 81 foreign elections between 1946 and 2000. The definition of intervention used in the study was “a costly act which is designed to determine the election results [in favor of] one of the two sides.” However, other types of intervention in elections, such as US “assistance” in the electoral process via election monitoring etc, was not included. The incidents of intervention cited in the database were largely carried out in secret as only one-third of intervention efforts were carried out publicly. Methods included the dissemination of misinformation or propaganda, training one side in campaigning techniques, making threats against a particular candidate, threatening to withdraw foreign aid, and bank-rolling a particular candidate among others. In 59% of the cases examined, the candidate that had received US “assistance” emerged victorious, though Levin estimated that the average effect of “partisan electoral interventions” only swayed the vote by an average of 3%.

However, these incidents do not include those that have taken place over the past 16 years. Under Bush, election intervention was a common policy practiced jointly through regime change, as evidenced by Bush’s covert intervention in the Iraqi elections of 2005. In a 2006 interview, Hillary Clinton argued that allowing Palestine to hold elections was a mistake. “I do not think we should have pushed for an election in the Palestinian territories. I think that was a big mistake,” said Clinton. “And if we were going to push for an election, then we should have made sure that we did something to determine who was going to win.” The same such interference continued later under Obama, such as in the 2015 elections in Haiti.

It is also worth noting that the report does not include the numerous military coups and regime change efforts the US has led in the same time period. Notable military coups of the past century include those which took place in Guatemala, Iran, and Chile – all of which were bank-rolled and executed with US military assistance. Regime change efforts continue to today, particularly in Syria, as US imperialism seeks continue to dominate all other nations in the name of “protecting democracy.” Though President-Elect Trump has pledged to not continue this long-standing practice, it remains to be seen if he will be able to resist the “deep state” or if he will be forced to serve its interests like the Presidents before him.

 
Source…