I’ll be brief, debunking celebritard pranks is a bit of a low bar for me, but seeing the Pfizer connection…

BONUS

Also:

https://www.biospace.com/article/pfizer-trial-meets-efficacy-endpoint-for-potential-alopecia-areata-therapy/

Thanks Jane Doe1776 !

When I was a young lad, we used to call this BTL – Below The Line advertising. Now excuse me for a little while, I need to use the bathroom.

To be continued?
Our work and existence, as media and people, is funded solely by our most generous readers and we want to keep this way.
Help SILVIEW.media survive and grow, please donate here, anything helps. Thank you!

! Articles can always be subject of later editing as a way of perfecting them

ORDER

Some of my best efforts to help with the current state of general confusion, I hope it works! And if it does, please remember to share it!

I don’t talk much about myself because I don’t want or need to leverage my persona / CV / bio to support anything I say. If my arguments don’t speak for themselves, my CV is useless and it won’t really speak for the facts.

However, this time it’s particularly relevant where this is coming from, because many years ago I was a fake news operative in the country that borders Ukraine to the south. In other words, I was a mainstream news journalist in Romania, a media mercenary, a low/middle echelon disinformation agent exactly like those exposed by Project Veritas.
This was long ago in my life’s timeline, but historically it was yesterday, around the same time Putin was raising to fame. 9/11 caught me at my desk in a radio station’s news dept. I shook hands with all Romanian presidents after Ceausescu, I partied with much of today’s political class there, attended international meetings etc. And today’s Ukraine and its deep state resembles quite a lot 1990’s / early 2k Romania.
This experience offered me not only great deep insights of the system, but also the ability to reverse-engineer news to the point where I can often see the real story behind a propaganda news piece, I can tell what the writer thought doing it, what his editor’s thoughts were and who financed it. Because I played all those positions and more.
I quit all that for an artistic career just the last second before getting completely sucked in for life, I left because I grew disgusted with myself and the people who saw me as their asset. Then I left the country completely.
I am sorry sorry for what I did, but I don’t apologize or excuse myself, instead I just did the work I thought fit to to redeem myself in my own eyes, to fix what I can in this world. Not because I’m a great altruist and I love you so much I lose sleep over it, but because I love myself and I don’t fare well as part of the problem in a slave farm.
This where this work comes from. As for my biases, I’ not a fan of and I have no loyalty to any group of people, the largest the worse, with the exception of music concert and festival audiences. I think all governments are terrorist organizations, all ideologies are dumb BS by their core definition and good people don’t dream of ruling over others or leading them.
And from where I stand, this is what I see:

FULL

A higher resolution downloadable version will be uploaded next days on our Odysee. Feel free to reupload it, I just hope you will link back to the source.

I strongly recommend watching it as I meant it and built it – in one séance, but if you can’t, for whatever reasons…

SPLIT BY CHAPTERS

later fallout

This meme keeps writing itself

(some of the)sources

I will add more soon, it’s a lot of them…

Now, this took a hell lot of effort and time, and I have another one in works that helps understanding how we got here. A prequel, if you wish. It could’ve been done by now, but my equipment is aging fast, its performances are slow and getting slower, while I am refused my normal existence and means to earn it, except for your voluntary donations. So any help is much needed and appreciated these days, many many thanks go to the generous souls that have made this possible so far! It meant something, we’ve already made a serious impact.


Modi: “Post World-Wars, the entire world worked on a New World Order. We need to do it again”

To be continued?
Our work and existence, as media and people, is funded solely by our most generous readers and we want to keep this way.
Help SILVIEW.media survive and grow, please donate here, anything helps. Thank you!

! Articles can always be subject of later editing as a way of perfecting them

Looks like Russia reads SILVIEW.media and took seriously our recommendation to up those rookie leaks, here they are playing a more serious hand this time. 

Funny how the people demanding to be followed are always behind me.
NEWSWEEK

Archives of documents provided by the Russian government HERE and HERE.

UPDATE:

SOURCE

In the “comments section”, first the Western establishment propaganda via Newsweek:

Hunter Biden Accused by Russia of Helping Finance Ukraine Biolabs

BY KATIE WERMUS ON 3/24/22

The Russian government on Thursday accused Hunter Biden‘s investment fund of helping bankroll the Pentagon‘s alleged biolabs in Ukraine.

Igor Kirillov, the head of Russia’s Radiation, Chemical and Biological Defence Troops, said the investment firm Biden is connected to, Rosemont Seneca, has been implicated in financing the biological program in Ukraine, Russian state-owned news agency Sputnik reported.

“Incoming materials have allowed us to trace the scheme of interaction between U.S. government bodies and Ukraine’s biolabs,” Kirillov said. He added that Rosemont Seneca attracted attention due to an alleged “close relationship” between the fund and key suppliers for “Pentagon biolaboratories around the world.” According to the Ministry of Defense’s information, the fund has at least $2.4 billion in investment capital, Sputnik reported.

However, the U.S. government has previously investigated Sputnik as a propaganda outlet. The U.S. Department of State said in its January report that the Kremlin uses the organization, along with the state-funded Russia Today outlet, to try and spread disinformation and propaganda to audiences outside of Russia in order to “influence the public opinion and foreign policy in favor of the Kremlin’s political goals.”

The Russian Defense Ministry released a diagram on Thursday titled “Coordination of Biological Laboratories and Scientific Research Centers of Ukraine and the U.S.,” according to a translation from the Daily Beast. The chart detailed how Ukraine Biolabs are allegedly connected to U.S. agencies and other companies, including President Joe Biden‘s son.

The agency said it has found information for 31 Pentagon-funded biolabs that allegedly conduct illegal research. The Russian Defense Ministry released pictures of what it claims to be a Ukrainian document with a list of the laboratories that are suspected of being connected to U.S. funding for biological activities, according to Sputnik.

“The scale of the program is impressive,” Kirillov said in the Sputnik report, adding that along with the Pentagon, the U.S. Agency for International Development, the Soros’ Open Society Foundations and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention were among those involved in the research.

Sputnik said U.S. officials and Western media initially denied that the biolabs existed but that a senior official in President Joe Biden’s administration later confirmed their presence. Meanwhile, Democratic Representative Tulsi Gabbard had previously said that the U.S. funds biolabs in Ukraine, not bioweapons labs.

Long before the invasion of Ukraine, Russian officials claimed that the U.S. had biolabs to study harmful weapons and diseases in the country. The Russian government started its claims again recently, which prompted White House press secretary Jen Psaki to say that the world needs to prepare for Russia to use these claims as a reason to use its own biological weapons in Ukraine.

Update 3/24/22, 4:25 p.m. ET: This article was updated with additional information.

Russia Accuses Hunter Biden Funding Biolabs
The Russian government has accused Hunter Biden of helping bankroll the Pentagon’s alleged biolabs in Ukraine, which it said are used to research deadly pathogens. Above, Hunter Biden speaks at the World Food Program USA’s Annual McGovern-Dole Leadership Award Ceremony at Organization of American States on April 12, 2016, in Washington, D.C.PAUL MORIGI/ GETTY IMAGES FOR WORLD FOOD PROGRAM USA/GETTY IMAGES

But then New-Zealand’s Daily Telegraph shows Newsweek how it’s done:

HUNTER BIDEN’S INVESTMENT FUND CONNECTED TO FINANCING OF PENTAGON-FUNDED BIOLABS IN UKRAINE: MOD

In recent weeks, the Russian Defence Ministry has peeled back layers of information about 30+ Pentagon-funded biolabs feared to be engaged in dangerous and illegal research into deadly pathogens in Ukraine. US officials and media initially denied that the labs existed, but a senior Biden administration official later confirmed their presence.

An investment firm connected to US President Joe Biden’s son Hunter Biden has been implicated in the financing of the Pentagon’s military biological programme in Ukraine, the head of Russia’s Radiation, Chemical and Biological Defence Troops has announced, citing fresh documents.

“Incoming materials have allowed us to trace the scheme of interaction between US government bodies and Ukraine’s biolabs. The involvement in the financing of these activities by structures close to the current US leadership, in particular the Rosemont Seneca investment fund managed by Hunter Biden, draws attention to itself,” RCBD Troops chief Igor Kirillov said in a briefing Thursday.

Read More: Hunter Biden biolab revelations – The beginning of the end for the West’s fake Ukraine narrative

According to the MoD’s information, the fund has at least $2.4 billion in investment capital. “At the same time, a close relationship has been established between the the fund and key contractors of the US military, including Metabiota, which alongside Black & Veatch is one of the main suppliers of equipment for Pentagon biolaboratories around the world,” Kirillov added.

The Los Alamos National Laboratory – birthplace of the US atomic bomb, has served as one of the chief curators of the US military biological programmes in Ukraine, Kirillov said.

Hunter Biden biolabs news
Russian Defence Ministry presentation detailing coordination between Ukraine-based labs and US agencies and companies, including Hunter Biden and George Soros (far left), the US State Department, USAID, Gilead Sciences, SkyMount Medical, Metabiota, Black&Veatch, CH2M Hill, the US Embassy in Ukraine (center) and the CDC, the National Laboratory at Los Alamos and the universities of Tennessee, Alaska, Florida, New Mexico and Virginia (right). Below, ties are shown to the Lugar Center in Georgia, the Ukrainian Ministry of Health and associated centers and institutes, and teh Ukrainian Defence Ministry’s epidemiological departments. © Photo : Russian Defence Ministry.

USAID, Soros Foundations, CDC Also Involved, MoD Says

“The scale of the programme is impressive. Along with the Pentagon, the US Agency for International Development (USAID), the Soros’ Open Society Foundations, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention are directly involved in its implementation,” the officer said. “Scientific supervision is carried out by leading research organizations, including the Los Alamos National Laboratory, which developed nuclear weapons for the Manhattan Project. All of this activity has been carried out under the direct control of the Pentagon.”

Kirillov accompanied his presentation with new Ukrainian-language documents detailing the operations of laboratories suspected of involvement in US-funded military biological activities, including a detailed listing of 31 laboratories across 14 settlements.

Hunter Biden news
List of laboratories. © Photo : Russian Defence Ministry.
Hunter Biden Ukraine news
List of laboratories. © Russian Defence Ministry.

“This document was signed by deputy state secretary of the cabinet of ministers of Ukraine Viktor Polishchuk. The legal basis for its signature was an agreement on cooperation to prevent the spread of technologies, pathogens and information which can be used to develop biological weapons. The registration card identifies the customer: the Defense Threat Reduction Agency, and also includes a list of bio facility sites,” the officer said.

The MoD also released a document from the office of the secretary of defense approving Project Concept UP-2, described as a ‘multi-pathogen mapping’ project which “includes molecular fingerprinting of pathogens endemic to Ukraine and strain transfer.”

The 2008 document was signed by Richard Douglas, who served as deputy assistant secretary of defense during the George W. Bush administration, and Arthur Hopkins, a deputy assistant to the Secretary of Defense for nuclear, chemical and biological defense programmes.

US Ukraine labs news
Document. © Photo : Russian Defence Ministry.

Ukrainian Troops Used as Guinea Pigs

Kirillov provided other new details on US military biological activities in Ukraine in his presentation, citing documents detailing the testing of unlicensed pharmaceutical products which did not pass licensing procedures in the US and Canada on Ukrainian military personnel under a programme known as ‘Deep Drug’.

“Documents confirm an attempt to test previously untested drugs on Ukrainian military personnel [under the] Deep Drug screening system for pharmaceuticals which have not passed the licensing procedure in the United States and Canada. The special cynicism of the US sponsors of the programme lies in the fact that the developer -Skymount Medical Group, offered to purchase the system on a commercial basis, even though employees of the Ukrainian defence ministry were used as volunteers” for its testing, Kirillov said.

US Defense Departmnet biolabs news
Document. © Photo : Russian Ministry of Defence.

Kirillov also that over 4,000 individuals were involved in research under the previously detailed Project UP-8, and that according to a Bulgarian media investigation, 20 Ukrainian servicemen died and 200 hospitalized during experiments in the Kharkov laboratory alone.

The officer suggested that such practices were nothing new, recalling that in 2010, authorities in Indonesia terminated biological research activity being conducted by the US Naval Medical Center in Jakarta over numerous violations and a refusal by US authorities to inform the Indonesian government about the results of their research.

Kirillov also revealed that Pentagon-affiliated pharmaceutical firm Gilead has been involved in the testing of its products in Ukraine and Georgia.

Hunter Biden news

Industrial-Scale Export of Biosamples

Russia’s Radiation, Chemical and Biological Defence Troops have established that the US and its allies have exported about 16,000 biosamples from Ukraine as part of their military biological activities in the country. “Such large-scale screening of the natural immunity of the population was likely carried out in order to select biological agents that are most dangerous for the population of a particular region,” Kirillov said.

The officer pointed to the taking of blood samples from 4,000 servicemen in Lvov, Kharkov, Odessa and Kiev for antibodies to hantaviruses under Project UP-8, and an additional 400 samples probing for antibodies to the Crimean-Congo fever virus. He added that in addition to tissue and blood serum samples, dangerous pathogens and their carriers were exported abroad from Ukraine. Over 10,000 samples were sent to the Lugar Center in Georgia alone, according to Kirillov, with labs in the UK and the Leffler Institute in Germany also serving as recipients, subjecting not only Ukraine but the entire region to dangers.

New COVID

Kirillov warned that the spread of pathogenic biomaterials in Ukraine could lead to a new pandemic, saying that in the Russian military’s view, “the current situation involving the spread of pathogenic biomaterials from Ukraine to European countries can cause death and create a hotbed of epidemiological instability the scale of which would be comparable to the COVID-19 pandemic.”

The officer pointed to the Pentagon’s record of causing health scares involving deadly pathogens, recalling that betwen 2005 and 2015, live anthrax spores were accidentally sent from the US Army Dugway Proving Ground to 194 addressees in ten different countries.
Anthrax Insects

Krillov also pointed to suspected US interest in the means of transmitting anthrax through insects. “The interest of US military biologists in the study of insect vectors in the locations of cattle burial grounds appears not have been accidental, with researchers analyzing the results of an outbreak of anthrax in Yamal in 2016, during which cases of transmission of the disease through flies and horseflies were recorded,” he said.

Ukraine biolab news

International Investigation Needed

The officer echoed concerns voiced by China’s foreign ministry earlier this month about the real purpose of the 336 labs scattered across 30 countries being operated with US funding and other forms of support, and suggested that in light of the new information which has been disclosed, an international investigation is in order.

Thursday’s revelations by the MoD follow a separate document dump last week containing frightening details on some of the research feared engaged in at US-funded laboratories scattered across Ukraine, such as work studying the transmission of diseases through bats, ‘Project Flu-Fly-Way’, studying how wild migratory birds might be used as vectors to transmit avian influenza, and others.

The Russian military started disclosing details on the scale and scope of the US-funded network of biolabs in Ukraine on 6 March, reporting, citing documents, that the Ukrainian health ministry had given the order to scrub incriminating evidence on research into deadly pathogens including anthrax, the plague, tularemia, cholera and other deadly diseases.

US officials and media dismissed the Russian allegations, releasing “fact check” pieces explaining that the “false claim of US biolabs in Ukraine [is] tied to [a] Russian disinformation campaign.” These same officials and outlets were forced to change their tune after US undersecretary of state Victoria Nuland confirmed that the biolabs existed, and that the US was “quite concerned” that Russian troops might take control of the facilities.

“The scale of the program is impressive. In addition to the military department, the US Agency for International Development, the George Soros Foundation, and the Center for Disease Control and Prevention are directly involved in its implementation. Scientific curation is carried out by leading research organisations, including the Los Alamos National Laboratory, which develops nuclear weapons as part of the Manhattan Project,” he said.

And this is how we’ve done so far:

THE BIOLABS, CHERNOBYL AND FUKUSHIMA HAVE SURPRISING THINGS IN COMMON AND THEY ARE HARDLY ACCIDENTAL

UKRAINE BIOLABS: OF COURSE FACT CHECKERS LIED ABOUT THIS TOO

HUNDREDS DEADLY BIOLABS WITH DISASTROUS SECURITY RECORDS, RAN BY CDC AND PHARMAFIA IN YOUR BACKYARD

US RAN GRUESOME BIOWEAPON RESEARCH IN OVER 25 COUNTRIES. WUHAN, TIP OF AN ICEBERG

EPILOGUE

Once we pull it out you better pick up on it quickly, I told you we’re in the business of dictating future MSM headlines. But without the sugar glazing. 🙂

To be continued?
Our work and existence, as media and people, is funded solely by our most generous readers and we want to keep this way.
Help SILVIEW.media survive and grow, please donate here, anything helps. Thank you!

! Articles can always be subject of later editing as a way of perfecting them

Imagine being a legit theory for years, then being downgraded to “conspiracy theory”, only to bounce back even stronger less than a year later

DESIGNER BUGS: HOW THE NEXT PANDEMIC MIGHT COME FROM A LAB

“Why we need to take the threat of bioengineered superbugs seriously.”

By R. Daniel Bressler and Chris Bakerlee  Dec 6, 2018, Vox

This story is part of a group of stories called

Finding the best ways to do good.

This week, diplomats from around the world are meeting in Geneva, Switzerland, as part of an annual gathering of state parties for the Biological Weapons Convention (BWC). The BWC has an important mandate: It prohibits the 182 countries that have signed on and ratified the convention from developing, producing, and stockpiling biological weapons.

The BWC, and the biosecurity community broadly, has historically been more focused on existing pathogens with clear potential to be used as biological weapons, such as anthrax and the agents causing botulism and Q fever. In addition, health security experts are worried about the “next big one” — the next global pandemic. Pandemic diseases are often zoonotic, meaning they jump from animals to humans. Zoonotic diseases like EbolaZika, SARS, and HIV are created when, say, the wrong pig meets up with the wrong bat — and then meets the wrong human.

The emergence of such diseases depends a great deal on spontaneous genetic mutations and circumstantial factors. So here’s a scary thought: Possible future pandemics may not depend on the chance meeting of different animal species and chance mutations, but may be deliberately designed instead. New tools from the field of synthetic biology could endow scientists with the frightening ability to design and manufacture maximally dangerous pathogens, leapfrogging natural selection.

The threat is very much on the minds of security officials. This past May, the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security (CHS) led an exercise involving former US senators and executive branch officials on how the country would respond to an international outbreak of an engineered pathogen. In this fictional scenario, a terrorist group constructed a virus that was both deadly and highly contagious. More than a year into the made-up pandemic, the worldwide death toll was soaring past 150 million, the Dow Jones had fallen by 90 percent, and there was a mass exodus from cities amid famine and unrest.

In biotech, the story of the past several decades has been one of exponential progress. Just 75 years ago, we were not even confident that DNA was the primary material governing genetic heredity. Today, we are able to readwrite, and edit genomes with increasing ease.

But biotechnologies are dual-use — they can be used for both good and ill. We fear that with even just current capabilities, an engineered pandemic could join the growing list of seismic changes made possible by biotechnological advances. Sufficiently capable actors could work to resurrect the deadliest pathogens of the past, like smallpox or Spanish flu, or modify existing pathogens such as bird flu to be more contagious and lethal. As genome engineering technologies become more powerful and ubiquitous, the tools necessary for making these modifications will become increasingly accessible.

This leads to the terrifying specter of independent actors intentionally (or unintentionally) engineering pathogens with the potential to inflict worse harm than history’s deadliest pandemics. No obvious physical or biological constraints preclude the construction of such potent biological weapons. According to biosecurity expert Piers Millett, “If you’re deliberately trying to create a pathogen that is deadly, spreads easily, and that we don’t have appropriate public health measures to mitigate, then that thing you create is amongst the most dangerous things on the planet.”

Mitigating this risk is shaping up to be one of the major challenges of the 21st century — not only because the stakes are high, but also because of the myriad obstacles standing between us and a solution.

The technologies that help us might also hurt us

Natural pandemics can be horrific and catch us completely off guard. For example, three years elapsed between the first officially documented US AIDS cases in 1981 and the identification of HIV as its cause. It took another three years to develop and approve the first drug treating HIV. While antiretroviral treatments now allow those living with HIV to manage the disease effectively (that is, if they can afford the treatment), we still lack a promising HIV vaccine.

Yet as ill-equipped as we may be to fight newly emergent natural pathogens, we are even less prepared to cope with engineered pathogens. In the coming decades, it may become possible to create pathogens that fall well outside the range of infectious agents modern medicine has learned to detect, treat, and contain.

Worse yet, malicious actors might build disease-causing microbes with features strategically tailored to thwart existing health security measures. So while advances in the field of synthetic biology will make it easier for us to invent therapeutics and other technologies that can defend us from pandemics, those very same advances may allow state and nonstate actors to design increasingly harmful pathogens.

For example, new gene-synthesis technologies loom large on the horizon, allowing for the automated production of longer DNA sequences from scratch. This will be a boon for basic and applied biomedical research — but it also will simplify the assembly of designer pathogens.

U.S. Army’s Dugway Proving Grounds, Laboratory For Testing Biological And Chemical Weapons
A technician at the Smartman Laboratory facility at the US Army’s Dugway Proving Ground on August 15, 2017, in Dugway, Utah. Workers at this facility handle some of the deadliest biological and chemical agents on earth.

Compared to other weapons of mass destruction, engineered pathogens are less resource-intensive. Although malicious actors would currently need university-grade laboratories and resources to create them, a bigger obstacle tends to be access to information. The limits of our knowledge of biology constrain the potential of any bioengineering effort. Some information, like how to work proficiently with a specific machine or cell type, can be acquired only through months or years of supervised training. Other information, like annotated pathogen genome sequences, may be easy to access through public databases, such as those maintained by the National Center for Biotechnology Information.

If information such as pathogen genome sequences or synthetic biology protocols is available online, this could make it much easier for malicious actors to build their own pathogens. But even if they’re not online, hackers can also steal sensitive information from the databases of biotechnology companies, universities, and government laboratories.

Preventing damage from engineered pathogens is complicated by the fact that it takes only one lapse, one resourceful terrorist group, or one rogue nation-state to wreak large-scale havoc. Even if the majority of scientists and countries follow proper protocols, a single unilateral actor could imperil human civilization.

And some wounds can be self-inflicted. Between 2004 and 2010, there were more than 700 incidents of loss or release of “select agents and toxins” (i.e., scary stuff) from US labs. In 11 instances, lab workers acquired bacterial or fungal infections. In one instance, a shipment of a harmful fungus was lost — and, according to the FBI, destroyed — in transit. In a world in which well-meaning but sometimes careless biologists are creating dangerous organisms in the lab, such accidental release events could prove even more frightening.

A global problem

Like naturally occurring pandemics, engineered pandemics will not respect national borders. A contagious pathogen released in one country will emigrate. Actions that protect against engineered pathogens are an example of a global public good: Since a deadly engineered pathogen would adversely affect countries around the world, doing something to prevent them is a service that benefits the whole world.

A fundamental challenge of global public goods is that they tend to be underprovided. With global public goods, individual countries prefer to free ride over unilaterally providing global public goods if they can get away with it.

This doesn’t mean that countries won’t do anything to provide global public goods; they just won’t do as much as they should. For example, a country such as the United States will consider the potential damage an engineered pathogen could wreak on its 325 million people, and it will take actions to prevent this from happening. However, the actions it takes won’t be as extensive as they would be if it were to consider the toll an engineered pathogen could take on the planet’s 7.6 billion people.

To address this dilemma, world leaders created the Biological Weapons Convention in the 1970s. The BWC has the important goal of constraining bioweapons development; in practice, it has been ineffective at verifying and enforcing compliance.

Unlike the BWC, the major nuclear and chemical weapons treaties have extensive formal verification mechanisms. The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), effective since 1970, verifies the compliance of signatories through the International Atomic Energy Agency, which has a staff of about 2,560. The Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC), effective since 1997, verifies compliance through the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, which won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2013. It has a staff of 500. By contrast, the Implementation Support Unit for the BWC, the convention’s sole administrative body, currently has just four employees.

And bioweapons have specific characteristics that make verification and enforcement difficult compared to chemical and nuclear weapons.

Consider nuclear technology. Nuclear power plants require low levels of uranium enrichment (typically around 5 percent), whereas nuclear weapons require highly enriched uranium (typically above 90 percent). Highly enriched uranium requires large industrial facilities with precise centrifuges. When granted access, it is comparatively easy for inspectors to determine when a facility is being used for the production of highly enriched uranium.

Partly for these reasons, no country has ever developed nuclear weapons while being a party to the NPT. Of the nine nuclear weapons nations, the US, USSR (whose weapons are now exclusively owned by Russia), UK, France, China, and likely Israel had nuclear weapons before the treaty was enforced. India (first test in 1974) and Pakistan (first test in 1998) never signed the NPT. North Korea withdrew from the treaty in 2003, three years before its first nuclear test in 2006.

In contrast, bioengineered organisms require fewer resources and smaller facilities to make, and it is harder to readily distinguish between organisms that are being developed for scientific purposes from those that are being developed with malicious intent.

Historically, the BWC does not have a good track record of preventing the possession of bioweapons. The Soviet Union maintained a large bioweapons program after it signed on to the BWC in 1975. The South African apartheid regime held bioweapons in the 1980s and ’90s while being a party to the BWC.

Fearing that invasive verification by the BWC could compromise sensitive intellectual property and hurt the competitiveness of its cutting-edge biotechnology sector, the US chose to withdraw from negotiations at the BWC’s Fifth Review Conference in 2001. The US later rejoined those negotiations, but serious measures to improve the BWC’s verification and enforcement mechanisms have not been implemented, and the agreement remains largely ineffective.

Despite this concern about the invasiveness of verification, there is a growing consensus that the BWC must become more effective. The 2015 Bipartisan Report of the Blue Ribbon Study Panel on Biodefense, chaired by Joe Lieberman, the 2000 Democratic vice presidential candidate, and Tom Ridge, the first secretary of homeland security under George W. Bush, called for the vice president and the secretary of state to chair a series of meetings with relevant Cabinet members and experts to come to an agreement on verification protocols that would satisfy US concerns while adequately enforcing compliance with the treaty. The study led to the introduction of the National Biodefense Strategy Act of 2016, which is still awaiting a vote.

In September 2018, the Trump administration released a National Biodefense Strategy, though this document contained little specific information on how the US would strengthen the BWC and didn’t mention Cabinet-level meetings chaired by the vice president, as was recommended by the blue ribbon panel.

US Marines And New York Fire Fighters Take Part In Chemical Incident Drill In Penn Station
Emergency personnel walk down the aisle of an Amtrak train during a biological preparedness drill being led by members of the Chemical Biological Incident Response Force (CBIRF), a unit in the United States Marine Corps, at Penn Station during the early morning hours on September 22, 2012, in New York City. 

Some have questioned the seriousness of the threat posed by bioweapons. For example, in his recent book, Harvard University professor Steven Pinker suggests that “Bioterrorism may be [a] phantom menace.” He claims that terrorists wouldn’t weaponize pandemic pathogens, since their goal is typically “not damage but theater.” Others have suggested that even if terrorists wanted to engineer a pathogen as a weapon, they’d lack the requisite biological knowledge and practical know-how to get the job done.

While it is true (and quite fortunate) that these factors reduce at least the present risk of a biological attack, it is cold comfort. In the coming decades, it will only become easier for nonstate actors to acquire and deploy powerful biotechnologies for ill. And beyond terrorists, state actors also pose serious risks.

For example, Japan launched devastating bioattacks against China during World War II. Japanese Unit 731 dropped bombs filled with swarms of plague-infested fleas on Chinese cities, likely killing hundreds of thousands of civilians. The unit’s commander, Shiro Ishii, found plague to be a potent weapon because it could present itself as a natural epidemic and kill large numbers of people through person-to-person transmission.

In addition, the US had a bioweapons program from 1943 to 1969 that, among other things, made propaganda videos bragging about testing biological weapons on human subjects. The Soviet Union’s covert bioweapons program that it maintained after signing on to the BWC had more employees at its peak in the 1980s than Facebook currently has.

We don’t know what we don’t know — but here’s what we can do

Many questions remain unanswered when it comes to the potentially catastrophic risks posed by engineered pathogens. For example, what is the full spectrum of microbes that cause human disease? And which types of microbes would most likely be used as bioweapons? Research centers such as the Center for Health Security at Hopkins, the Future of Humanity Institute, and the Nuclear Threat Initiative are working hard to answer such questions.

But just because we don’t have answers to all the questions — and don’t even know all the questions to begin with — doesn’t mean there aren’t things we can do to mitigate our risks.

Thinking and acting globally

For starters, we should develop a process to address advancements in biotechnology in the BWC. Currently, the BWC lacks a dedicated forum where the treaty implications of new developments in biotechnology can be discussed. Other international agreements like the CWC have dedicated scientific advisory boards to track and respond to new science and technological changes. The BWC has no such board.

There’s some movement on this issue — the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security hosted an event in Geneva earlier this week to discuss how the BWC can evolve to address rapid advances in biotechnology. Still, it is crucial to establish a permanent institutional capacity within the BWC to address biotechnological change.

This all connects to another priority: give the BWC’s Implementation Support Unit more resources. The four-person implementation support unit, the convention’s sole administrative body, has immense responsibilities that far exceed its current resources. These responsibilities include supporting and assisting nations as they implement the treaty, administering a database of assistance requests, facilitating communication between the parties, and much more.

But the resources remain minuscule, especially compared to other international treaties. The annual cost allocated to BWC meetings and its implementation support unit is less than 4.5 percent of the cost allocated to the CWC. This inadequate budget sends a grim signal about how seriously the world is currently taking the growing risks from bioweapons.

Another global priority should be finding ways to regulate dual-use gene synthesis technologies. To facilitate their research, biologists regularly order short, custom pieces of DNA from companies that specialize in their manufacture. In 2009, the International Gene Synthesis Consortium proposed guidelines for how gene synthesis companies should screen customers’ orders for potentially dangerous chunks of DNA, such as those found in harmful viruses or toxin genes. Most companies voluntarily follow these guidelines, and they represent 80 percent of the global market.

However, even companies currently applying recommended screening procedures only test whether ordered sequences match those of known pathogens. An engineered pathogen with a novel genome could potentially slip past this filter.

Presently, the gene synthesis market is expanding internationally and synthesis costs are falling. It is urgent that governments both independently and multilaterally act to mandate proper screening of sequences and customers. As Kevin Esvelt of MIT writes, “adequately screening all synthesized DNA could eliminate the most serious foreseeable hazards of biotech misuse by nonstate actors.”

Dealing with biorisk on the ground and in the lab

Beyond developing new global standards and practices, we need to adopt more flexible countermeasures to face off the threat of bioengineered pathogens. As noted in a recent CHS report, “One of the biggest challenges in outbreak response, particularly for emerging infectious diseases, is the availability of reliable diagnostic assays that can quickly and accurately determine infection status.”

Diagnostics based on cutting-edge genome sequencing methods could provide detailed information about all the viruses and bacteria present in a blood sample, including even completely novel pathogens. Meanwhile, as genome sequencing technology becomes less expensive, it could be more widely applied in clinics to provide unprecedented real-time insights into genetic diseases and cancer progression.

We also need to invest more in developing antivirals that hit a wider range of targets. Such broad-spectrum drugs may stand a better chance of slowing the proliferation of an engineered bug than treatments specific to single known pathogens.

And we should also develop “platform” technologies that allow rapid vaccine development. Currently, the process of designing, testing, and manufacturing a vaccine to prevent the spread of a new pathogen takes years. Ideally, we could immunize all at-risk individuals within months of identifying the pathogen. Accelerating vaccine development will require us to innovate new and likely unconventional technologies, such as vectored immunoprophylaxis or nucleic acid vaccines.

Even as we pursue and accelerate such research, we should also be mindful of the possibility of self-inflicted wounds. To avert a terrible accident, the international biomedical community should establish firmer cultural guardrails on the research into pathogens.

Currently, career advancement, financial gain, and raw curiosity motivate biologists at all levels to push the envelope, and we all stand to gain from their efforts. However, these same incentives can sometimes lead researchers to take substantial and perhaps unjustified risks, such as evolving dangerous strains of influenza to be more contagious or publishing instructions for cultivating a close cousin of the smallpox virus. It’s important for biologists to do their part to promote a culture in which this adventurous intellectual spirit is tempered by caution and humility.

Encouragingly, synthetic biology luminaries like Esvelt and George Church of Harvard University are doing just that, pioneering technological safeguards to mitigate accidental release risks and advocating policies and norms that would make 21st-century biology a less perilous pursuit. As the tools of synthetic biology spread to other disciplines, their example is one that others should follow.

Underlying the prescriptions above is the need to approach the problem with the sense of urgency it warrants. As our biotechnological capabilities grow, so too will the threat of engineered pathogens. An engineered pandemic won’t announce itself with a towering mushroom cloud, but the suffering of the individuals it touches will be no less real.

R. Daniel Bressler is a PhD candidate in the sustainable development program at Columbia University. His research is at the intersection of dual-use technologies, environmental change, and the capacity for collective action in the international system to deal with these issues. Find him on Twitter @DannyBressler1.

Chris Bakerlee is a PhD candidate in molecules, cells, and orgamisms at Harvard University, where he uses genetic engineering to study how evolution works. Find him on Twitter @cwbakerlee.

BONUS

SOURCE

Below are screenshots of the edits made by Vox.

Below are screenshots from Vox’s 2020 articles.

Vox was founded in April 2014 by Ezra Klein, Matt Yglesias, and Melissa Bell. Prior to founding Vox, Ezra Klein was a former Washington Post columnist where he worked as the head of Wonkblog, a public policy blog. Vox is run by Vox Media, a digital publishing network founded by Jerome Armstrong, Tyler Bleszinski, and Markos Moulitsas.

According to its website, Vox Media’s portfolio includes 13 other brands: Vox, New York Magazine, The Verge, The Cut, Eater, Vulture, The Strategist, Polygon, SB Nation, Intelligencer, Curbed, Grub Street, and Recode.” – Tech StartUps

“Think outside the Vox”

Silview.media

To be continued?
Our work and existence, as media and people, is funded solely by our most generous readers and we want to keep this way.
Help SILVIEW.media survive and grow, please donate here, anything helps. Thank you!

! Articles can always be subject of later editing as a way of perfecting them

My guts are smarter than my brains, but the brains are catching up. And they do it faster when James Corbett helps out

From the very beginning of the Ukraine conflict I maintained skepticism for the narrative from both sides, as you should, but I had difficulties deciding to which extent they are BS.

Putin was full in, I bet he wants full out now, in terms of public image

Basically, my main and only dilemma was:
Did Putin enter the Ukraine stage willingly, as an actor, following the globalist script, as he always does, or was he baited and trapped in to be sacrificed on the altar of the Fourth Industrial Revolution and the GloboPedoDiversity, and now he’s really threatened existentially and fighting for survival?

DARPA invests millions in emotion-predictive AIs. Which help with riot predictions

I brought up a bunch of reasons to explain how I got to this point and why I am more inclined to believe this is all a shitshow just like the empty hospitals during the hospital overrun of 2020, or Chinese people dropping dead on the streets of Beijing “becuz Covid maaaan”.

One of my first indicators was that the script is very obsolete, old-school kinetic take over for people who are still engaging with post-WW2 propaganda movies, such as most of elder audiences in Russia and a good chunk of the American ones. This corroborates with the backwards scrap arsenal Putin sent there, probably because it was more cheap and ecological to dump them in Ukraine than at home. If you think that’s where the military is right now, as we discuss graphene oxide and transhumanism, if you think it takes more than an afternoon for a power like Russia to take over a town like Mariupol, you’re at least 50 years behind the technological curve and that’s more than all the technological progress mankind has made in its entire prior history.

Second major red flag: Russia is underplaying every hand, from propaganda to military. I’ve never seen the much feared “Russian spies”, “Russian bots” and “Russian hackers” more inhibited in my life, same as RT and other means of influence they have. Their intel nukes can implode the establishment instantly, rest assured they were among the first to get Biden’s laptops content.

GHISLAINE’S FATHER PIMPED EPSTEIN AND WHORED FOR KGB. PUTIN’S INTELLIGENCE ARSENAL MORE DEVASTATING FOR ELITES THAN NUKES

Funny how the people demanding to be followed are always behind me.
NEWSWEEK

Even the biolabs thing looks like they rather want to discredit it providing those thin files of evidences as we, independent media, made a stronger case for them than they did. This is not lazy, this is borderline sabotage.

THE BIOLABS, CHERNOBYL AND FUKUSHIMA HAVE SURPRISING THINGS IN COMMON AND THEY ARE HARDLY ACCIDENTAL

Thirdly: Putin has been working on the edifice of the New Normal for decades, you don’t exit or get “exited” just like that from a lifetime legacy.

Putin to Schwab: “We go as far back as 1992”
Davos 2021 setting up the narrative for next year?

THIS 2012 AD FOR THE RUSSIAN VERSION OF THE GREAT RESET SOUNDED NUTS THEN BUT WILL GIVE YOU CHILLS NOW

Kissinger is Klaus Schwab’s Harvard teacher and Trump’s former advisor.
He taught Mao’s work at Harvard.

BETWEEN HYSTERICALS ABOUT RUSSIAN HACKERS, WEF MEMBERS GATHER UNDER RUSSIAN HELMS TO WORK ON THE CYBER GREAT RESET

Putin @ Davos 2021: “‘The world risks sliding into an “all against all” conflict’. Because Covid.

#4: The Ukraine camp is a huge “unholy alliance” fueled by Chabad Lubavitch money and influence.

NATO, NAZIS & AL-QAEDA IN THE SAME BOAT – WE’RE THERE

ABSOLUTE MUST SEE RESOURCES ON UKRAINE

No one is closer to Chabad than Putin, only Trump rivals.

‘Starting in 1999, Putin enlisted two of his closest confidants, the oligarchs Lev Leviev and Roman Abramovich, who would go on to become Chabad’s biggest patrons worldwide, to create the Federation of Jewish Communities of Russia under the leadership of Chabad rabbi Berel Lazar, who would come to be known as “Putin’s rabbi.”
A few years later, Trump would seek out Russian projects and capital by joining forces with a partnership called Bayrock-Sapir, led by Soviet emigres Tevfik Arif, Felix Sater and Tamir Sapir—who maintain close ties to Chabad. The company’s ventures would lead to multiple lawsuits alleging fraud and a criminal investigation of a condo project in Manhattan.’

POLITICO

So why wouldn’t the alliance encompass Putin too, as the bad cop in the movie where leftoids play the good cop?

Fifth, but not last, the Western response to the crisis aligns more with the Covid agenda, WEF agenda and Agenda2030 than with a peace plan. They’re using the same scripts with new faces, like a gender-swapped Hollywood remake of a classic movie.

Romanian communist dictator Nicolae Ceausescu came up with an even brighter idea: Alternately, one weekend was free for drivers who had even numbers on their registration plates, next weekend the uneven number took over. We actually hardly had any cars and car pollution, only industrial pollution. But he was exporting all reserves to raise money and pay out our debt to the Rothschilds. He achieved his goal with incredible sacrifices and hardships from the population, in the summer of 1989. They executed him on Christmas day same year, during the “anti-communist revolution”, in fact the first televised coup by the West (NATO and the likes of).

I could go on and make a long and detailed list, but this more than suffices to make the case.

It’s almost like Russia doesn’t want to win in Ukraine, but to linger there as long as possible, and maintain international tension without investing more than a few slaves and some scrapyard junk.

However, I was missing the weight that decisively inclines the balance either way, and I kept telling people I’m waiting for more intel before I make a definitive call.

Three weeks in, and the level of silliness in the media reports and Internet debates made my brains bleed through my eyes really badly. My skeptical inclinations inclined even more. Still no closure to the internal hesitations though.

SOME HIGHLIGHTS TO RECAP:

SCREENSHOT SOURCE

And then, just the other day, all of a sudden, Mr. James Corbett dropped the mic on this and definitively closed the internal debate for me.
I hope he will provide you with the same sense of closure and mental relief! Watch it entirely, please, no skipping, even if it seems to be off-topic in the beginning, this is masterfully built and eloquently laid out, as Corbett does, but if you try taking shortcuts you will only shortcut yourself. I don’t want to oversell it, but this will be one of the best-invested hours of your life, in 2022.

CLICK HERE FOR CORBETT’S SHOW NOTES AND RESOURCES!

As per usual, Corbett doesn’t need my help in in making a full, eloquent and clear case, but I will add here, over time, more information, resources and comments that corroborate and further our understanding of this psyop.

One single comment: The Young Global Leaders history is much older, the program has been built on the shoulders of other previous attempts to create a dictator incubator.

KLAUS SCHWAB’S YOUTH IS CALLED “YOUNG GLOBAL LEADERS”, READY FOR REGIME CHANGE IN UNALIGNED COUNTRIES

Talking about YGL…

Modi: “Post World-Wars, the entire world worked on a New World Order. We need to do it again”

BONUS RESOURCES:

Below I will add other resources that corroborate with this story or enrich our context and perspective on it.

Aleksandr Dugin – “Putin is Liberal Democrat, Globalist almost”
Good Cop / Bad Cop

In the video below, please replace “Covid” with “Ukraine” and tell me what’s the difference?

Covid is a psyop – Russian Colonel of Military Intelligence and Spetsnaz (Special Forces) , May 2020

CHINESE COMMUNISM IS AS JEWISH AS ITS RUSSIAN COUSIN (YOUTUBE BAN WINNER)

WAR ON PRIVILEGE WAS THE CORE THEME OF THE COMMUNIST PROPAGANDA IN MY HOME COUNTRY AND ALL SOVIET BLOCK

THREE WEEKS LATER…

The international peasantry are just collaterals to Biden’s “preventative informational warfare”.

Three U.S. intel officials admit the W.H. practices disinfo ‘to mess with Putin’s head’ – NBC
“Can we really let Putin BACK into the New World Order?”
How the Ukraine conflict fuels the communist NWO – John Birch Society

To be continued?
Our work and existence, as media and people, is funded solely by our most generous readers and we want to keep this way.
Help SILVIEW.media survive and grow, please donate here, anything helps. Thank you!

! Articles can always be subject of later editing as a way of perfecting them

ORDER

The notorious Lock Step Scenario, proposed by The Rockefeller Foundation in 2010, is just one chapter in a larger document titled “Scenarios for the Future of Technology and International Development”.
As the Covid narrative is being buried in the bomb craters in Ukraine, it felt like a matter of common sense to ask myself if we’re entering another chapter of the same book.

This scenario may seem, for now, not as consistent with what’s going on as Lock Step is. It will probably never be, because they learn, change and adapt faster than us.
However, I find it chillingly close to the mainstream narrative. Many of he predictions that are not confirmed yet seem very likely to occur in the near future, in my assessment. After all, we’re just starting transitioning out of Lock Step into something new.
It’s up to everyone’s awareness, experience and wit to identify analogies and decide how relevant this document is, I’m just gong to add one more dare:
My bet is that if you find the good tips about the present and near future developments in this reading, you will be ahead of the curve just like the people who picked up on the Lock Step scenario early 2020.

NOTE: Their narrative starts in 2010, the real world events started 2020. And there’s more reasons you should ignore the years in their timeline, that’s not supposed to be exact science, focus on the succession of events and their mechanisms, rather.

HACK ATTACK SCENARIO


An economically unstable and shock-prone
world in which governments weaken, criminals thrive,
and dangerous innovations emerge
Devastating shocks like September 11, the
Southeast Asian tsunami of 2004, and the
2010 Haiti earthquake had certainly primed
the world for sudden disasters. But no one
was prepared for a world in which large-scale
catastrophes would occur with such breathtaking
frequency. The years 2010 to 2020 were dubbed
the “doom decade” for good reason: the 2012
Olympic bombing, which killed 13,000, was
followed closely by an earthquake in Indonesia
killing 40,000, a tsunami that almost wiped
out Nicaragua, and the onset of the West China
Famine, caused by a once-in-a-millennium
drought linked to climate change.


Not surprisingly, this opening series of deadly
asynchronous catastrophes (there were more) put
enormous pressure on an already overstressed
global economy that had entered the decade
still in recession. Massive humanitarian relief
efforts cost vast sums of money, but the primary
sources—from aid agencies to developed-world
governments—had run out of funds to offer.
Most nation-states could no longer afford their
locked-in costs, let alone respond to increased
citizen demands for more security, more
healthcare coverage, more social programs and
services, and more infrastructure repair. In
2014, when mudslides in Lima buried thousands,
only minimal help trickled in, prompting the
Economist headline: “Is the Planet Finally
Bankrupt?”


These dire circumstances forced tough tradeoffs.
In 2015, the U.S. reallocated a large share of its
defense spending to domestic concerns, pulling
out of Afghanistan—where the resurgent Taliban
seized power once again. In Europe, Asia, South
America, and Africa, more and more nation-
states lost control of their public finances, along
with the capacity to help their citizens and
retain stability and order. Resource scarcities and
trade disputes, together with severe economic
and climate stresses, pushed many alliances
and partnerships to the breaking point; they
also sparked proxy wars and low-level conflict
in resource-rich parts of the developing
world. Nations raised trade barriers in order to
protect their domestic sectors against imports
and—in the face of global food and resource
shortages—to reduce exports of agricultural
produce and other commodities. By 2016, the
global coordination and interconnectedness
that had marked the post-Berlin Wall world was
tenuous at best.


With government power weakened, order rapidly
disintegrating, and safety nets evaporating,
violence and crime grew more rampant.
Countries with ethnic, religious, or class
divisions saw especially sharp spikes in hostility:
Naxalite separatists dramatically expanded
their guerrilla campaign in East India; Israeli-
Palestinian bloodshed escalated; and across Africa,
fights over resources erupted along ethnic or tribal lines.

Meanwhile, overtaxed
militaries and police forces could do little to stop
growing communities of criminals and terrorists
from gaining power. Technology-enabled gangs
and networked criminal enterprises exploited
both the weakness of states and the desperation
of individuals.

With increasing ease, these
“global guerillas” moved illicit products through
underground channels from poor producer
countries to markets in the developed world.
Using retired 727s and other rogue aircraft, they
crisscrossed the Atlantic, from South America
to Africa, transporting cocaine, weapons, and
operatives. Drug and gun money became a
common recruiting tool for the desperately poor.

Criminal networks also grew highly skilled
at counterfeiting licit goods through reverse
engineering. Many of these “rip-offs” and
copycats were of poor quality or downright
dangerous. In the context of weak health
systems, corruption, and inattention to
standards—either within countries or
from global bodies like the World Health
Organization—tainted vaccines entered the
public health systems of several African
countries.

“WE HAVE THIS LOVE AFFAIR
WITH STRONG CENTRAL STATES,
BUT THAT’S NOT THE ONLY
POSSIBILITY. TECHNOLOGY IS
GOING TO MAKE THIS EVEN MORE
REAL FOR AFRICA. THERE IS THE
SAME CELLPHONE PENETRATION
RATE IN SOMALIA AS IN RWANDA.
IN THAT RESPECT, SOMALIA
WORKS.”

– Aidan Eyakuze, Society for International
Development, Tanzania

In 2021, 600 children in Cote d’Ivoire
died from a bogus Hepatitis B vaccine, which
paled in comparison to the scandal sparked by
mass deaths from a tainted anti-malarial drug
years later. The deaths and resulting scandals
sharply affected public confidence in vaccine
delivery; parents not just in Africa but elsewhere
began to avoid vaccinating their children, and
it wasn’t long before infant and child mortality
rates rose to levels not seen since the 1970s.
Technology hackers were also hard at work.
Internet scams and pyramid schemes plagued
inboxes.

Meanwhile, more sophisticated
hackers attempted to take down corporations,
government systems, and banks via phishing
scams and database information heists, and their
many successes generated billions of dollars in
losses. Desperate to protect themselves and their
intellectual property, the few multinationals
still thriving enacted strong, increasingly
complex defensive measures. Patent applications
skyrocketed and patent thickets proliferated,
as companies fought to claim and control even
the tiniest innovations. Security measures and
screenings tightened.


This “wild west” environment had a profound
impact on innovation. The threat of being
hacked and the presence of so many thefts and
fakes lowered the incentives to create “me first”
rather than “me too” technologies. And so many
patent thickets made the cross-pollination of
ideas and research difficult at best. Blockbuster
pharmaceuticals quickly became artifacts of
the past, replaced by increased production
of generics. Breakthrough innovations still
happened in various industries, but they were
focused more on technologies that could not be
easily replicated or re-engineered. And once
created, they were vigorously guarded by their
inventors—or even by their nations. In 2022, a
biofuel breakthrough in Brazil was protected as a
national treasure and used as a bargaining chip
in trade with other countries.


Verifying the authenticity of anything was
increasingly difficult. The heroic efforts
of several companies and NGOs to create
recognized seals of safety and approval proved
ineffective when even those seals were hacked.
The positive effects of the mobile and internet
revolutions were tempered by their increasing
fragility as scamming and viruses proliferated,
preventing these networks from achieving the
reliability required to become the backbone
of developing economies—or a source of
trustworthy information for anybody.


Interestingly, not all of the “hacking” was bad.
Genetically modified crops (GMOs) and do-it
yourself (DIY) biotech became backyard and
garage activities, producing important advances.
In 2017, a network of renegade African scientists
who had returned to their home countries after
working in Western multinationals unveiled
the first of a range of new GMOs that boosted
agricultural productivity on the continent.


But despite such efforts, the global have/have
not gap grew wider than ever. The very rich still
had the financial means to protect themselves;
gated communities sprung up from New York
to Lagos, providing safe havens surrounded by
slums. In 2025, it was de rigueur to build not
a house but a high-walled fortress, guarded by
armed personnel. The wealthy also capitalized on
the loose regulatory environment to experiment
with advanced medical treatments and other
under-the-radar activities.


Those who couldn’t buy their way out of
chaos—which was most people—retreated
to whatever “safety” they could find. With
opportunity frozen and global mobility at a
near standstill—no place wanted more people,
especially more poor people—it was often a
retreat to the familiar: family ties, religious
beliefs, or even national allegiance. Trust
was afforded to those who guaranteed safety
and survival—whether it was a warlord, an
evangelical preacher, or a mother. In some
places, the collapse of state capacity led to a
resurgence of feudalism. In other areas, people
managed to create more resilient communities
operating as isolated micro versions of formerly
large-scale systems. The weakening of national
governments also enabled grassroots movements
to form and grow, creating rays of hope amid
the bleakness.

By 2030, the distinction between
“developed” and “developing” nations no longer
seemed particularly descriptive or relevant. •

ALSO READ:

2ND BATCH OF FAUCI E-MAILS: INVITE TO ROCKEFELLER’S TRILATERAL COMMISSION

ROCKEFELLERS ONCE SAID: READY YOUR TINFOIL HATS FOR MIND CONTROL. AND THEY SHOWED US A DOOR TO THE MAGNETIC JABS

[EXCLUSIVE] FINAL EVIDENCE COVID-19 IS A ‘SIMEX’ – PLANNED SIMULATION EXERCISE BY WHO AND WORLD BANK

To be continued?
Our work and existence, as media and people, is funded solely by our most generous readers and we want to keep this way.
Help SILVIEW.media survive and grow, please donate here, anything helps. Thank you!

! Articles can always be subject of later editing as a way of perfecting them

ORDER

Dr. Malone was so damn right when he said we’re barely scratching the surface on the biolabs topic.
And so was I when I insisted you should pay special attention to the research on insects that’s been going on not only in the US funded labs in Ukraine and Georgia, but all over the world, including US soil.

UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA WELCOMES YOU TO YOUR WORST NIGHTMARE YOU HAVEN’T EVEN FATHOMED YET

THE CHERNOBYL & FUKUSHIMA RESEARVH INITIATIVE BY DTRA, THE US AGENCY FUNDING THE UKRAINE BIOLABS

SUMMARY OF THE INITIATIVE AND ITS RESEARCH

                                           (for a PDF version of this text click here)

The Chernobyl Research Initiative began formal research activities in Ukraine in 2000, Belarus in 2005, and Fukushima, Japan, in July, 2011. To date, the group has conducted more than 35 research expeditions to Chernobyl and 16 expeditions to Fukushima.

USC’s Chernobyl Research Initiative was the first and currently is the only research group to utilize a multidisciplinary approach to address the health and environmental outcomes of radiation effects in free-living natural populations. This has permitted the investigation of both acute (short term) and chronic (long term and multi-generational) exposures.

The Chernobyl Research Initiative is also currently the only research team studying plants and animals in both Chernobyl and Fukushima.

Key funding sources have included the Samuel Freeman Charitable Trust, the CNRS (France), the National Science Foundation, and the National Geographic Society. Subsequently, additional funding sources have included the Civilian Research Development Foundation (CRDF), the National Institutes of Health (NIH), Qiagen GmbH, the Fulbright Foundation, the University of South Carolina Office of Research and the College of Arts and Sciences, the Academy of Finland, and gifts from private citizens.

To date, more than 90 scientific publications have resulted from this initiative, most in the past 10 years (see link above for publications). This research has been highlighted in many newspaper reports and television programs including the New York Times, The Economist, Harpers, the BBC, CNN, CBS’s 60 Minutes, and Miles O’Brian of PBS News Hour (see links above for media coverage).

The team has pioneered the use of ecological, genetic and dosimetric technologies in order to unravel the health and environmental consequences of chronic low-dose exposure resulting from the Chernobyl and Fukushima disasters. These have included massively replicated ecological censuses of natural populations of birds, mammals and insects to investigate population and demographic effects; DNA sequencing and genotoxicity testing to assess short and long term genetic damage to individuals living in the wild; and the use of miniature dosimeters attached to wild animals and field measurements of whole body burdens of radioisotopes in birds and mammals to obtain accurate estimates of realized external and internal radiation doses to animals living under natural conditions. Recently, the group has expanded to include epidemiological and genetic studies of human populations (especially children) living in Chernobyl-affected regions of Ukraine.

Key results include the discovery of tumors, cataracts and damaged sperm in birds from high radiation areas of Chernobyl, and impacts on biodiversity in Fukushima. Exciting new results include the discovery that some species of birds may have developed resistance to the effects of radiation and effects on neurological development in small mammals in both Chernobyl and Fukushima.

These two disasters differ in the time since the events, and the amount and diversity of radionuclides that were released, although the predominant source of radiation is cesium-137 in both locations.

DTRA in Fukushima – Operation Tomodachi by the agency funding Ukrainian biolabs

We are seeking funding to support the following ongoing and planned future research activities of the Chernobyl + Fukushima Research Initiative:

1)Continued monitoring of Fukushima populations of birds, small mammals, and insects in order to test for changes in population sizes (abundances) and numbers of species (biodiversity) through time.

2)Continued monitoring of barn swallows and rodents (mice and voles) populations for cancers, survival, reproduction, and genetic damage in Fukushima and Chernobyl (in collaboration with the CNRS, France, Rikkyo University, Tokyo, the Wild Bird Society of Japan, the National Institute of Forestry, Japan, and the University of Jyvaskyla, Finland).

3)Initiate a new project to study effects of radiation on tree growth and soil microbial activity in Fukushima (in collaboration with Chubu University, Nagoya, Japan).

4)Initiate a new project to investigate effects of radiation growth, fertility, and genetic damage in cows living in highly radioactive regions of Fukushima (in collaboration with the Fukushima Cattle Ranchers Association).

5)Initiate a new project to examine mutation rates in humans using whole genome DNA sequencing. Initially this project will focus on families living in contaminated regions of Ukraine. The project is in collaboration with the Montreal Neurological Institute and Hospital at McGill University, the Center of Radiological Research at Columbia University, and the Institute for Radiation Medicine in Kiev, Ukraine.

6)Continued development of new methods for measurement of dose and genetic damage in wild populations of animals.

7)Coordination of an international consortium of independent scientists to provide unbiased evidenced-based information concerning the health and environmental risks related to nuclear accidents. This group will compile, evaluate, and interpret the current scientific and medical literature and develop a literature suitable for public distribution via the print and internet media, as well as public presentations in Japan and internationally.

Highlights from research published by the Chernobyl Research Initiative include the following:

•Population sizes and numbers of species (i.e. biodiversity) of birds, mammals, insects, and spiders are significantly lower in areas of high contamination in Chernobyl.

•For many birds and small mammals, life spans are shorter and fertility is depressed, in areas of high contamination.

•In Fukushima, only birds, butterflies, and cicadas showed significant declines during the first summer following the accident. Other groups were not negatively affected.  Now, five years later, effects on birds have increased.

•There is considerable variability among species in their sensitivity to radionuclides. Many species are not affected, and a few species even appear to increase in numbers in areas of high contamination in both Chernobyl and Fukushima, presumably in response to competitive release (i.e. more available food and shelter) and fewer predators.

•Many species show evidence of genetic damage stemming from acute exposures and the differences observed between Fukushima and Chernobyl suggests some species may show the consequences of mutation accumulation over multiple generations.

•Some individuals and species show no evidence of genetic damage in relation to radiation exposure and some even show evidence of evolutionary adaptation to the effects of radiation through increased antioxidant activity, which may provide protection against ionizing radiation.

•The bird species that are most likely to show declines in numbers in response to radiation are those that historically have shown increased mutation rates for other reasons possibly related to DNA repair ability or reduced defenses against oxidative stress.

•Deleterious effects of radiation exposure seen in natural populations in Chernobyl include increased rates of cataracts, tumors, growth abnormalities, deformed sperm, and albinism. 

Maps of Contaminated regions of Fukushima (left), Ukraine, Belarus and Russia (right), and Europe (below). Fukushima map courtesy of Shane Welch; other maps courtesy of the European Union.

•Neurological development is impacted as evidenced by depressed brain size in both birds and rodents and consequent effects on cognitive ability and survival have been demonstrated in birds.

•Tree growth and microbial decomposition in the soil are also depressed in areas of high radiation. 

•In Fukushima, the first signs of developmental abnormalities have been observed in birds in 2013, although significant genetic damage has not yet been documented for birds or rodents.

DTRA Chief: “We provided safe and secure storage for deadly pathogens in former USSR countries” 2009

Do I need to spell it out?
They are using these grounds for experiments.
Did they end up being experiment grounds by accident?
People in Chernobyl have been evacuated, but fauna and flora are hardly impacted by radiation.
Radiation does not discriminate by species.
You know who does that?
Viruses and bacteria.

DTRA 2008: “We design and test weapon systems and pathogens”
Notice anything interesting in this 2018 DTRA presentation?

DARPA IS A PENTAGON AGENCY WOKING FOR AGRICULTURE WITH GENETICALLY MODIFIED INSECTS THAT CAN POTENTIALLY BE WEAPONIZED. THEY SAY.

DARPA Presents Its “Insect Allies” Genetic Modification Program “for Agriculture”
“DARPA’s GMO insects program can be weaponized” – US scientists sounded the alarm years ago

WASHINGTON — DARPA, the Pentagon’s high-tech office, is working with the government of Ukraine to develop capabilities to help Kiev in its hybrid warfare challenge.

DARPA director Steven Walker, who recently took over that job after five years as the agency’s deputy, told reporters that he had personally visited the country in 2016 for talks with Ukrainian military, intel and industry leaders.

“We did have a good visit to the Ukraine,” Walker said Thursday at a breakfast hosted by the Defense Writer’s Group. “Yes, we have followed up with them, and through the U.S. European Command, we have started several projects with the Ukraine, mostly in the information space.”

“Not providing them weapons or anything like that, but looking at how to help them with information,” Walker added, before declining to go into further detail.

Ukraine has become a testing ground for hybrid warfare techniques from Russia and Russian-backed militant groups ever Russia’s invasion of Ukrainian territory in 2014, including disinformation campaigns. While that has allowed Moscow to test out new capabilities and techniques, it also provides an opportunity to develop counter techniques — which may benefit the U.S. and its allies in the long term.

“I think we’ve got to get better, as a country, in information warfare and how we approach info warfare,” Walker said. “I think there are capabilities there that we need to improve upon, and DAPRA is working in some of those areas.”

This is not the first tie between DARPA and Kiev. The Ukrainian government has hired Tony Tether, who led DARPA for the entirety of the George. W. Bush administration, to help lead a reorganization of their science and technology efforts, something Tether in a LinkedIn post said was necessary in part because so much of Ukraine’s S&T facilities were in the territory seized by Russia.

The former DARPA head has also consulted for the Ukroboronprom group, Ukraine’s largest defense contractor, and just a few weeks ago was added to the group’s supervisory board in a move that Ukrainian president Petro Poroshenko called a “symbol of effective cooperation between Ukrainian and American partners.”

Tether is expected to try and recreate some of what make DARPA so successful in Ukraine, but Walker notes that many countries have tried to do that — and failed, in large part due to a cultural fear of giving workers the freedom to fail they need.

“When I talk to others about DARPA and why it works, many other cultures say ‘this couldn’t happen,’” Walker noted.

More broadly, Walker said part of what he wants to see at DARPA during his tenure is looking at increasing counterinsurgency capabilities.

“I think as more populations across the world move to larger and larger cities, we need to understand the three dimensionality of cites and how to operate in those very crowded, very three-dimensional spaces,” Walker said, noting DARPA is working on ways to sense and map underground tunnels and infrastructure.

Updated 3/1/18 at 1:45 PM EST to reflect the fact that after publication, DARPA confirmed that Walker visited Ukraine in 2016.

About Aaron Mehta

Aaron Mehta was deputy editor and senior Pentagon correspondent for Defense News, covering policy, strategy and acquisition at the highest levels of the Defense Department and its international partners.

DARPA Is Making Insects That Can Deliver Bioweapons, Scientists Claim

BY HANNAH OSBORNE ON 10/4/18 AT 2:00 PM EDT

gettyimages-139677923
The U.S. government’s Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) has been accused of trying to create a new class of biological weapons that would be delivered via virus-infected insects. Aphids are one of the insects being used in the DARPA program.ISTOCK

The U.S. government’s Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) has been accused of trying to create a new class of biological weapons that would be delivered via virus-infected insects.

The Insect Allies program was announced by DARPA in 2016. It is a research project that aims to protect the U.S. agricultural food supply by delivering protective genes to plants via insects, which are responsible for the transmission of most plant viruses. Scientists believe loading the bugs up with viruses that would offer plants protective benefits could be one way of ensuring food security in the event of a major threat.

In an editorial published in the journal Science, a group of researchers led by Richard Guy Reeves, from the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Biology in Germany, says Insect Allies isn’t exactly what it says it is. Instead, they claim DARPA is potentially developing insects as a means of delivering a “new class of biological weapon.”

How Does Insect Allies Work?

There are many threats that could impact upon food security. This includes environmental disasters, natural pathogens and intentional attacks. Crop failure, for whichever of these reasons, has the potential to have devastating consequences—wheat and maize, for example, are relied upon by hundreds of millions across the globe for their basic nutritional needs.

ConceptArtInsectAlliesOctober32016v4FINAL619-316
Scientists with the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) are looking at introducing genetically modified viruses that can edit chromosomes directly, like using insects to transmit genetically modified material into plants.DARPA

Genetically altering a species to make it more resilient comes with problems. Introducing alterations directly into a species’ chromosome is slow, as the alteration must be passed down through generations before it takes hold.

Instead, scientists with DARPA are looking at introducing genetically modified viruses that can edit chromosomes directly in fields—these are known as horizontal environmental genetic alteration agents (HEGAAs).

The DARPA program is using the principles of HEGAAs but, unlike traditional methods of dispersal—like spraying fields with them—it wants to spread them through insects. At the moment, maize and tomato plants are being used in experiments and the insects being used for dispersal are leafhoppers, aphids and whiteflies.

“Insect Allies aims to develop scalable, readily deployable, and generalizable countermeasures against potential natural and engineered threats to mature crops,” Blake Bextine, DARPA Program Manager for Insect Allies, told Newsweek. “The program is devising technologies to engineer and deliver these targeted therapies on relevant timescales—that is, within a single growing season. To do so, Insect Allies researchers are building on natural, efficient, and highly specific plant virus and insect vector delivery systems to transfer modified, protective genes to plants.”

Why Biological Weapons?

Reeves and his colleagues offer a number of assertions about why Insect Allies could end up being a means of bioweapon dispersal. Firstly, they question the very nature of the project—the use of insects. Why, they say, are insects so integral? What is the problem with spraying HEGAAs?

The team says Insect Allies “appears very limited in its capacity to enhance U.S. agriculture or respond to national emergencies…. As a result, the program may be widely perceived as an effort to develop biological agents for hostile purposes and their means of delivery.”

Potentially, the viruses being introduced could do harm instead of good. The insects could be used to disperse agents that would prevent seeds from growing. “HEGAA weapons could be extremely transmissible to susceptible crop species, particularly where insects were used as the means of delivery,” they write. “Chromosomal editing would be targetable to particular crop varieties dependent on their genome sequence (presumably those varieties not grown by the deploying parties).”

gettyimages-935444786
Maize, one of the crops being tested by Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), is relied upon by millions of people for basic nutrition. Scientists believe loading the bugs up with viruses that would offer plants protective benefits could be one way of ensuring food security in the event of a major threat.ISTOCK

The development of an insect-based system, according to the authors, points to “an intention to develop a means of delivery of HEGAAs for offensive purposes.” The technology, they say, could quickly be simplified and used to develop a whole new class of biological weapons. “In our view, the program is primarily a bad idea because obvious simplifications of the work plan with already-existing technology can generate predictable and fast-acting weapons, along with their means of delivery, capable of threatening virtually any crop species,” they wrote.

The team calls for more transparency from DARPA as the Insect Allies progresses. However, it also says the potential to weaponize this technology is already out there. They say weapons programs are driven by the perceived activities of competitors—maybe the Insect Allies program is a response to intelligence about another nation’s capabilities.

Furthermore, “the mere announcement of the Insect Allies Program, with its presented justifications, may motivate other countries to develop their own capabilities in this arena—indeed, it may have already done so…. Reversal of funding for this DARPA project…would not in itself close the particular Pandora’s box that HEGAAs or their insect dispersal may represent.”

RELATED STORIES

DARPA Making Weaponized Insects?

DARPA denies the assertions made by Reeves and his colleagues. “DARPA is producing neither biological weapons nor the means for their delivery,” a spokesman told Newsweek. “We do accept and agree with concerns about potential dual use of technology, an issue that comes up with virtually every new powerful technology.” He said these concerns are the reason Insect Allies has been structured in the way it is—supposedly as a transparent and university-led research project that encourages communication. “We also have numerous, layered safeguards in place to maintain biosecurity and ensure the systems we’re developing function only as intended,” the DARPA spokesperson added.

Bextine reiterated this point. Researchers working with DARPA are allowed to publish their results and work with different agencies. The experiments they carry out are done so in biosecure greenhouses. “At no point in the program is DARPA funding open release of Insect Allies systems,” Bextine said.

He said he disagrees with the conclusion of the editorial in Science, saying technology and research that deals with food security and gene editing “have a higher bar than most for transparency”—and Insect Allies, he says, meets these high standards.

Responding to the queries relating to delivery—why spraying technology cannot be used—Bextine said these are just not up to the challenge, especially when it comes to responding at a large scale to the most severe threats.

“Many existing methods for protecting crops are inefficient, expensive, imprecise, or destructive to plants, may require significant infrastructure, and often provide only limited efficacy,” he said. “Sprayed treatments are impractical for introducing genetic modifications on a large scale and potentially infeasible if the spraying technology does not access the necessary tissues with specificity. Meanwhile, traditional selective breeding methods for introducing protective traits into plants require years to propagate, nowhere near the speed required to prevent a fast-moving threat from developing into a crisis.”

He added that DARPA would never receive funding for the next generation of aerial spraying technology. The development of this new technology is dependent on industry and other research funders. “Instead, we reach for fundamentally new ways of delivering more precise, efficacious treatments through systems that can be readily adapted to confront a range of potential threats.

“Emerging biotechnologies—and especially the cutting-edge research being performed on Insect Allies—are pushing science into new territories. DARPA is proud to be taking a proactive role in working with stakeholders to inform a new framework for considering how the benefits of these technologies can be most safely realized.”

US military plan to spread viruses using insects could create ‘new class of biological weapon’, scientists warn

Agency says it is trying to genetically modify crops, but experts think this goal is ‘simply not plausible’

The Independent, 05 October 2018 11:16

US military plan to spread viruses using insects could create ‘new class of biological weapon’, scientists warn

Insects could be turned into “a new class of biological weapon” using new US military plans, experts have warned.

The Insect Allies programme aims to use bugs to disperse genetically modified (GM) viruses to crops.

Such action will have profound consequences and could pose a major threat to global biosecurity, according to a team that includes specialist scientists and lawyers.

However, the Defence Advanced Research Projects Agency (Darpa), which is responsible for developing military technologies in the US, says it is merely trying to alter crops growing in fields by using viruses to transmit genetic changes to plants.

In theory, this rapid engineering would allow farmers to adapt to changing conditions, for example by inserting drought-resistance genes into corn instead of planting pre-engineered seeds.

But this seemingly inoffensive goal has been slammed by the scientists, who say the plan is simply dangerous and that insects loaded with synthetic viruses will be difficult to control.

They also say that despite being in operation since 2016 and distributing $27m in funds to scientists, Darpa has failed to properly justify the existence of such a programme.

Research programme with potential for dual use: scientists fear that the Insect Ally programme by the US could encourage other states to increase their own research activities in the field of biological warfare (MPG/D.Duneka)
Research programme with potential for dual use: scientists fear that the Insect Ally programme by the US could encourage other states to increase their own research activities in the field of biological warfare (MPG/D.Duneka) (MPG/ D. Duneka)

“Given that Darpa is a military agency, we find it surprising that the obvious and concerning dual-use aspects of this research have received so little attention,” Felix Beck, a lawyer at the University of Freiburg, told The Independent.

Dr Guy Reeves, an expert in GM insects at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Biology, said that there has been hardly any debate about the technology and the programme remains largely unknown “even in expert circles”.

He added that despite the stated aims of the programme, it would be far more straightforward using the technology as a biological weapon than for the routine agricultural use suggested by Darpa.

“It is very much easier to kill or sterilise a plant using gene editing than it is to make it herbicide or insect-resistant,” explains Reeves.

Experiments are reportedly already underway using insects such as aphids and whiteflies to treat corn and tomato plants.

Mr Beck said he and fellow experts were not suggesting that the US military wanted to create biological weapons, but that the proposed agricultural uses are “simply not plausible for a number of reasons”.

Firstly, they note that if farmers wanted to use genetically modified viruses to improve their crops, there is no reason not to use conventional spraying equipment.

They also noted that despite Darpa stating that no insects used should survive longer than two weeks, if such safeguards were not in place “the spread could in principle be unlimited”.

Mr Beck added: “The quite obvious question of whether the viruses selected for development should or should not be capable of plant-to-plant transmission – and plant-to-insect-to-plant transmission – was not addressed in the Darpa work plan at all”.

Air Force fails to acknowledge mysterious meteor that crashed to Earth near US military base

Making their case in the journal Science, the team noted that if Insect Allies’ research cannot be justified, it could be perceived as breaching the UN’s Biological Weapons Convention.

“Because of the broad ban of the Biological Weapons Convention, any biological research of concern must be plausibly justified as serving peaceful purposes,” explained Professor Silja Voeneky, a specialist in international law at Freiburg University.

“The Insect Allies Program could be seen to violate the Biological Weapons Convention, if the motivations presented by Darpa are not plausible.

“This is particularly true considering this kind of technology could easily be used for biological warfare.”

To prevent any suspicion and to avoid encouraging other nations to develop their own technologies in this area, the authors of the study have called for more transparency from Darpa if it intends to pursue such programmes.

A spokesperson from Darpa defended the programme, explaining that using insects to apply these gene altering treatments could provide advantages over sprays.

“Most importantly in this context, sprayed treatments are impractical for introducing protective traits on a large scale and potentially infeasible if the spraying technology cannot access the necessary plant tissues with specificity, which is a known problem,” they said.

“If Insect Allies succeeds, it will offer a highly specific, efficient, safe, and readily deployed means of introducing transient protective traits into only the plants intended, with minimal infrastructure required.”

LMFAO

Ukroboronprom Appoints Former DARPA Head as Supervisory Board Member

Ukroboronprom Appoints Former DARPA Head as Supervisory Board Member

Anthony Tether, Former Head of US DARPA was appointed as member of UOP Supervisory Board (Image: Ukroboronprom)

Ukraine’s state run Ukroboronprom has appointed former head of US Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), Anthony Tether as member of UOP Supervisory Board.

Anthony Tether has been in charge of Ukroboronprom long-term development for over a year and a half. He assists in implementing UOP development strategy, implementation of reforms, corporatization, and international audit. The former head of DARPA contributed to strengthening Ukroboronprom’s export potential and investment development. Under his chairmanship, the State General Advanced Research and Development Agency (GARDA, the prototype of the American DARPA) was created, the company said in a statement Thursday.

“As a member of the Supervisory Board, Anthony Tether will help Ukroboronprom to implement the reform strategy and international audit,” said Roman Romanov, Ukroboronprom Director General.

Earlier, Mykhaylo Zhurovs’kyy – the rector of the National Technical University of Ukraine “Kyiv Polytechnic Institute named after I. Sikorsky” – was elected as Chairman of the Supervisory Board. Lieutenant General Yaroslav Skal’ko, former commander-in-chief of the Ukrainian Air Force, was elected as Vice-Chairman.

On January 31, the Ukroboronprom Supervisory Board – after a long-term meeting -took key decisions on the activities of the Concern. During the meeting, UOP management report was heard; strategic directions for UOP development, corporatization process of UOP enterprises-participants, the international audit, the system of effective anti-corruption measures, creation of an advisory body and other issues were discussed.

Ukraine to Create DARPA-like Defence Research Agency

Ukraine to Create DARPA-like Defence Research Agency

Ukriane will soon set up its General Advanced Research & Development Agency (GARDA), modeled along the American Defence Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) at Igor the Sikorsky Kyiv Polytechnic Institute (KPI).

This was stated by UKROBORONPROM Director General Pavlo Bukin during his speech at the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, during the parliamentary hearings “National Innovation System: State and Legislative Development”.

“It was decided to create an agency of advanced technologies based on the DARPA model, to implement technologies in the defense industry. Mykhaylo Zhurovs’kyy – the rector of the National Technical University of Ukraine “Kyiv Polytechnic Institute named after I. Sikorsky” – agreed that the agency will be based at this very university. I am sure this decision will contribute to the greatest effect”, stressed Pavlo Bukin.

At the same time, he mentioned that the issue of innovative technologies development is connected with the necessity of legislative changes that would improve the mechanisms of financing such projects.

“The legal framework for innovation in Ukraine is sufficiently developed, but some aspects need to be improved, as they hamper financing. When it comes to research institutes and design bureaus – their resources are limited. It is necessary to legislatively create a mechanism for innovation activity financing and preferential taxation, “- said UKROBORONPROM Director General Pavlo Bukin from the rostrum of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine.

He named UGV “Phantom-2” development among UOP innovations. “This platform allows to destroy the enemy’s manpower and to transport the goods, and it has already passed the test abroad, and it can be considered to be a result of the activities of the State Concern and its design engineering bureaus,” said Pavlo Bukin.

Ukroboronprom head: Ukraine’s military industrial complex during hybrid warfare

By Roman Romanov, Dec 11, 2017
Roman Romanov is the director general of Ukrainian defense company Ukroboronprom.

Three years ago, Ukraine was facing an unexpected challenge – Russia’s military aggression. The annexation of Crimea and the first battles in Donbass were a total shock to the Ukrainian armed forces and the domestic defense industry. At that time, defense and law enforcement agencies were uncapable of performing their tasks; weapons and military equipment were not ready for operational use; and the military-industrial complex could not meet the needs of the Army.

Unfortunately, over the past 25 years, Ukrainian defense enterprises received no orders from the state – more than half of the plants were practically closed. The main types of the military equipment manufactured required Russian components.

Outlook 2018: Perspectives from global thought leaders

In 2014, we completely stopped our cooperation with the Russian defense industry, and Ukroboronprom received the task to provide the Army with necessary weapons and military equipment in the shortest possible time.

First of all, we formed a new team of Ukroboronprom managers, who managed to quickly make qualitative changes and introduce the best business and management practices. We replaced about half of the directors of Ukroboronprom enterprises, mainly those who failed to adapt their way of thinking to new realities; we initiated repair and overhaul of the military equipment – Ukroboronprom enterprises organized 55 mobile maintenance crews, restoring military equipment directly in the anti-terrorist operation zone.

Furthermore, we arranged the import of critical components and organized the repair and manufacture of modernized military equipment samples. Ukroboronprom heads for strategic partnership with Western countries and NATO-Ukraine defense-technical cooperation.

In 2015, Ukroboronprom began implementing a new strategic task – the State Defense Order. Ukroboronprom enterprises launched serial production of new military equipment samples. The Army began to receive sniper rifles, mortars, modernized tanks and new armored personnel carriers manufactured in Ukraine.

The next urgent task was set: to overcome the dependence on imported components from the Russian Federation. To solve this problem, we launched a large-scale import substitution program to attract domestic reserves and set up cooperation within the country with enterprises of any form of ownership.

Ukroboronprom representatives visited all regions of Ukraine, held meetings with governors and discussed the issues of attracting the region’s industry to cooperation with Ukroboronprom.

As a result, enterprises from all regions of Ukraine began to join the import-substitution program implementation. As of today, 414 small, medium and large enterprises of Ukraine and 200,000 specialists joined the process. In fact, Ukroboronprom has attracted the whole country to working on strengthening the Ukrainian Army and the development of the country’s economy.

Furthermore, we renewed the workforce, attracted scientific and educational potential of the country: memorandums of cooperation were signed with 48 Ukrainian universities. Today, we train young specialists: 8,000-plus students had their practical training at Ukroboronprom enterprises and almost 600 of them are already working at our plants.

Memorandums of cooperation were signed with 30 institutes of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine. Attracting talented Ukrainian scientists and young specialists resulted in 535 promising developments upon the anvil and 80 projects that are already being implemented at Ukroboronprom enterprises.

We set ourselves to the task of expanding partnerships and implementing NATO standards for all stages of armament life cycles. The work on the introduction of the AQAP 2000 series standards at Ukroboronprom enterprises is launched. The ISO 9001 system already operates at 73 percent for Ukroboronprom enterprises.

Ukroboronprom specialists actively participate in multinational projects of the NATO concept Smart Defence, as well as in the meetings of the NATO-Ukraine Joint Working Group on Defence-Technical Cooperation.

In 2016, the development of the Ukroboronprom reform strategy was launched. The state concern Ukroboronprom held a meeting of a specially established tendering committee, involving the specialist of the Independent Defence Anti-Corruption Committee of Transparency International Ukraine, to help select the international consulting company using a “competitive dialogue” procedure. Thus, the concern started the process of conducting an international audit. We launched the next stage of Ukroboronprom’s reform. Implementation of such a large-scale process – as international audit and transformation of Ukroboronprom’s enterprises into joint stock companies – will last for about two years.

As a result of military operations in the anti-terrorist operation area, 900-plus technical solutions were introduced and implemented by Ukroboronprom engineers in the armored vehicles operated by the Army, having significantly improved tactical and operational characteristics of the military equipment and taking into account hybrid war experience.

Today, the latest developments of our specialists are being used and tested in the anti-terrorist operation zone. A good example is the unmanned complex Spectator, developed by the specialists of state concern Ukroboronprom, together with scientists of the National Technical University of Ukraine “Igor Sikorsky Kyiv Polytechnic Institute.” In May 2015, a contract for production was signed. And in January 2016, the first batch was transferred to Ukraine’s armed forces. This high-tech product has been successfully used in combat conditions for more than a year. The prototype of the new tactical UAV, Horlytsya, developed by the Ukrainian enterprises, successfully performed its first flight.

Hybrid war in the east of Ukraine forced us – taking into account combat experience – to develop unmanned equipment for performing various tasks on the battlefield without putting our soldiers’ lives at risk.

Ukroboronprom withstood the challenge of the war and in three years transferred about 16,000 units of weapons and military equipment to the military. Thanks to the work of the entire defense industry of Ukraine, our armed forces – from combat-ineffective units in 2014 – turned into a well-armed Army.

DARPA wants to alter human skin biomes to fight deadliest enemy: mosquitos

Researchers developing long-lasting topical cream that alters skin’s “microbiome” so troops can ward off disease-carrying insects.

Breaking Defense, March 07, 2022

Mosquitos potentially carry a range of deadly diseases, from malaria to yellow fever. (Photo by James Gathany/CDC. Public Domain.)

WASHINGTON: The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency may have been created to develop cutting-edge technology to help the US take on the Soviet Union in the Cold War, but now it’s taking on another deadly enemy: mosquitos.

DARPA’s latest idea, now entering its second phase, is to get down to the molecular level to make a topical cream that would actually alter the “microbiome” of human skin to make it less appetizing to the disease-carrying insects.

“The ReVector program aims to precisely, safely, and efficiently reduce mosquito attraction and biting, and, subsequently, to help maintain the health of military personnel operating in disease-endemic regions,” the agency said in a release last month.

While tiny compared to the USSR and totally lacking artillery, the mosquito is the deadliest animal on the planet, responsible for spreading malaria, which kills more than 400,000 people every year, in addition to other deadly diseases. Throughout human history militaries have struggled with mosquito-borne maladies, from the million-plus cases that waylayed soldiers during the Civil War to the over 80,000 cases among US servicemembers in Vietnam.

Even though a vast majority of those survived, the disease disrupted the forces’ ability to fight, at times in critical moments. Army researchers currently estimate malaria infections are responsible for up to 21,000 lost work hours and between $1.2 and $4.4 million per year in evacuation and medical costs.

The treatment for malaria has progressed significantly in recent decades, but the ReVector program aims to stop the disease before it can get into the human body at all. The program’s first phase involved the development of technology to “modify human skin microbes” and the “volatile molecules” it produces, and testing the effect of those modifications on mosquitos.

“In Phase 2, the team plans to advance testing in animal models and move complex microbiome communities,” ReVector program manager Linda Chrisley said in the release.

The release explained that “ultimately, ReVector seeks to develop topical formulations that could be applied shortly before a mission with minimal equipment or training, and last for at least two weeks without reapplication, offering improved, sustained protection against disease vectors.”

DARPA is working with Stanford University researchers on the project, and the agency notes the research is reviewed by the US Food and Drug Administration and “if necessary” the Environmental Protection Agency “to ensure that technologies are effective and do not pose a threat to humans or the environment.”

PENTAGON UNIT A1266 STUDIES INSECTS AS BIOTERRORISM AGENTS ON RUSSIA’S DOORSTEPS:

Pentagon Biolabs – Russia has been long complaining about them – 2018 Investigative Documentary

Entomological Warfare?

DARPA has been working for several years on genetic editing of mosquitoes. Through its “Insect Allies” program, DARPA has been working, using CRISPR gene-editing and gene drive technologies, on manipulating the Aedes Aegypti mosquito. The US Department of Defense has spent at least $100 million in the controversial technology known as “gene drives” making the US military a top funder and developer of the gene-modifying technology. “Gene drives are a powerful and dangerous new technology and potential biological weapons could have disastrous impacts on peace, food security and the environment, especially if misused,” said Jim Thomas, co-director of ETC Group, an environment safety group. “The fact that gene drive development is now being primarily funded and structured by the US military raises alarming questions about this entire field.”

Entomological warfare is a type of biological warfare that uses insects to transmit diseases. The Pentagon, using DARPA research, has allegedly performed such entomological tests secretly in the Republic of Georgia and Russia. Is the DARPA development, together with Gates’ foundation and Oxitec, of the gene edited mosquitoes a covert program in entomological warfare?

The Pentagon presently has top security bio laboratories in 25 countries across the world funded by the Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) under a $ 2.1 billion military program– Cooperative Biological Engagement Program (CBEP). They are in former Soviet Union countries such as Georgia and Ukraine, the Middle East, South East Asia and Africa. Among their projects, Phlebotomine sand fly species were collected under the heading, “Surveillance Work on Acute Febrile Illness,” in which all (female) sand flies were tested to determine their infectivity rate. A third project, also including sand flies collection, studied the characteristics of their salivary glands. This is weaponization research.

The controversial person picked by the Biden Administration to become the first Cabinet-level science advisor, Eric Lander, came from the MIT-Harvard Broad Institute. Lander is a specialist in gene drive and gene editing technologies and played a major role in the flawed US Human Genome Project. This is not the kind of science we need to be supporting. It is rather part of what is obviously a larger eugenics agenda and Bill Gates is again playing a key role.
SOURCE

BONUS:

US military to develop genetically modified plants to use as spies

New synthetic biology programme makes use of natural capabilities to gather intelligence

The Independent, 23 November 2017 16:55

The highly attuned sensory abilities of plants could be employed to gather intelligence for the military
The highly attuned sensory abilities of plants could be employed to gather intelligence for the military (Getty Images/iStockphoto)

The US military wants to deploy plants as “the next generation of intelligence gatherers”.

Genetically modified plants could be employed as self-sustaining sensors to gather information in settings unsuitable for more traditional technologies.

The Defence Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), which is responsible for the development of emerging technologies in the US military, has called for scientists to submit ideas for how to harness the power of plants.

In the past, DARPA has produced information-gathering technologies such as the satellites and seismographs employed to ensure Soviet compliance with the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty.

But in this new initiative, termed the Advanced Plant Technologies (APT) programme, the agency is looking to the natural world for help.

“Plants are highly attuned to their environments and naturally manifest physiological responses to basic stimuli such as light and temperature, but also in some cases to touch, chemicals, pests and pathogens,” said Dr Blake Bextine, the manager of the ATP programme.

“Emerging molecular and modelling techniques may make it possible to reprogramme these detection and reporting capabilities for a wide range of stimuli, which would not only open up new intelligence streams, but also reduce the personnel risks and costs associated with traditional sensors,” said Dr Bextine.

The idea is that plants’ natural capabilities can be co-opted to detect relevant chemicals, harmful microorganisms, radiation and electromagnetic signals.

Modifying the genomes of plants would enable the military to control the types of sensing they are doing, and also trigger certain responses that can be monitored remotely using existing hardware.

Technology already exists to monitor plants from the ground, air and even from space.

“Advanced Plant Technologies is a synthetic biology programme at heart,” said Dr Bextine.

“As with DARPA’s other work in that space, our goal is to develop an efficient, iterative system for designing, building, and testing models so that we end up with a readily adaptable platform capability that can be applied to a wide range of scenarios.”

Past experiments with plants that have been modified in this manner have resulted in organisms that have difficulty settling in the natural environment, where they would be deployed.

The additional strain placed on the modified plants by their new duties makes it difficult for them to survive and compete with surrounding plants. This will be a key area that the new programme seeks to address.

The “proposers day” is being held on 12 December in Arlington, Virginia. It will lay out the objectives of DARPA’s programme and take submissions for research projects that are relevant to the initiative.

Gene Edited Catastrophe in Brazil

New Eastern Outlook, 02.10.2019 Author: F. William Engdahl

A British-American gene-editing company has released millions of genetically modified mosquitoes containing a dominant lethal gene, each week for 27 months in the Bahia, Brazil region in a test to see if the gene-edited mosquitoes would mate with local mosquitoes carrying Zika, malaria or other mosquito-borne diseases. A new study documents the alarming fact that following an initial reduction of the target population of mosquitoes, after some months the “population which had been greatly suppressed rebounded to nearly pre-release levels.” Scientists to date have no idea what dangers are presented by the new mutations. This once more highlights the dangers of uncontrolled gene-editing of species.

According to a new published study in Nature Reports journal, genetically engineered mosquitoes produced by the biotech company, Oxitec, now part of the US company Intrexon, have escaped human control after trials in Brazil and are now spreading in the environment.

On paper the theory was brilliant. Strains of “yellow fever” male mosquitoes taken from Cuba and Mexico were altered using gene-editing to make it impossible for their offspring to survive. Oxitec then began a systematic release of tens of millions of the manipulated mosquitoes over more than two years in the the city of Jacobina in the region of Bahia in Brazil. The Oxitec theory was the altered mosquitoes would mate with normal females of the same type which carry infectious diseases like dengue fever, and kill them off in the process.

Unanticipated Outcome…’

A team of scientists from Yale University and several scientific institutes in Brazil monitored the progress of the experiment. What they found is alarming in the extreme. After an initial period in which the target mosquito population markedly declined, after about 18 months the mosquito population recovered to pre-release levels. Not only that, the paper notes that some of the mosquitos likely have “hybrid vigor,” in which a hybrid of the natural with the gene-edited has created “a more robust population than the pre-release population” which may be more resistant to insecticides, in short, resistant “super mosquitoes.”

The scientists note that, “Genetic sampling from the target population six, 12, and 27–30 months after releases commenced provides clear evidence that portions of the transgenic strain genome have been incorporated into the target population. Evidently, rare viable hybrid offspring between the release strain and the Jacobina population are sufficiently robust to be able to reproduce in nature…” They continue, “Thus, Jacobina Ae. aegypti are now a mix of three populations. It is unclear how this may affect disease transmission or affect other efforts to control these dangerous vectors.” They estimate that between 10% and 60% of the Bahia natural Ae. Aegypti mosquitoes now had some gene-edited OX513A genome. They conclude that “The three populations forming the tri-hybrid population now in Jacobina (Cuba/Mexico/Brazil) are genetically quite distinct, very likely resulting in a more robust population than the pre-release population due to hybrid vigor.”

This was not supposed to happen. Professor of ecology and evolutionary biology, Jeffrey Powell, senior author of the study, remarked on the findings: “The claim was that genes from the release strain would not get into the general population because offspring would die. That obviously was not what happened.” Powell went on to note, “But it is the unanticipated outcome that is concerning.”

A Gates Foundation Project

The Brazil study deals a major alarm signal on the uncontrolled release of gene-edited species into nature. It calls to mind the horror plot of Michael Crichton’s 1969 science fiction novel, Andromeda Strain. Only it is no novel.

The Oxitec mosquitoes were developed using a highly controversial form of gene-editing known as gene drive. Gene Drive, which is also being heavily funded by the Pentagon’s DARPA, combined with CRISPR gene-editing, aims to force a genetic modification to spread through an entire population, whether of mosquitoes or potentially humans, in just a few generations.

The scientist who first suggested developing gene drives in gene-editing, Harvard biologist Kevin Esvelt, has publicly warned that development of gene editing in conjunction with gene drive technologies has alarming potential to go awry. He notes how often CRISPR messes up and the likelihood of protective mutations arising, making even benign gene drives aggressive. He stresses, “Just a few engineered organisms could irrevocably alter an ecosystem.” Esvelt’s computer gene drive simulations calculated that a resulting edited gene “can spread to 99 percent of a population in as few as 10 generations, and persist for more than 200 generations.” This is very much what has now been demonstrated in the mosquito experiment in Brazil.

Notable is the fact that the Oxitec Brazil mosquito experiment was funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. In June, 2018 Oxitec announced a joint venture with the Gates Foundation, “to develop a new strain of Oxitec’s self-limiting Friendly™ Mosquitoes to combat a mosquito species that spreads malaria in the Western Hemisphere.” The Brazil results show the experiment is a catastrophic failure as the new strain is anything but self-limiting.

The Gates Foundation and Bill Gates have been backing development of the radical gene-editing technology and gene drive technology for more than a decade. Gates, a long-time advocate of eugenics, population control and of GMO, is a strong gene-editing promoter. In an article in the May/June 2018 magazine of the New York Council on Foreign Relations, Foreign Affairs, Gates hails gene editing technologies, explicitly CRISPR. In the article Gates argues that CRISPR and other gene-editing techniques should be used globally to meet growing demand for food and to improve disease prevention, particularly for malaria. In his article he adds, “there is reason to be optimistic that creating gene drives in malaria-spreading mosquitoes will not do much, if any, harm to the environment.

Every bit as alarming as the failure of the Brazil gene-editing mosquito experiment is the fact that this technology is being spread with virtually no prior health or safety testing by truly independent government institutions. To date the US Government relies only on industry safety assurances. The EU, while formally responsible to treat gene-edited species similarly to GMO plants, is reportedly trying to loosen the regulations. China, a major research center for gene-editing, has extremely lax controls. Recently a Chinese scientist announced an experiment in human gene-editing allegedly to make newborn twins resistant to HIV. Other experiments are proliferating around the world with gene-edited animals and even salmon. The precautionary principle has been thrown to the winds when it comes to the new gene-editing revolution, not a reassuring situation.

Currently Oxitec, which denies that the Brazil results show failure, is now trying to get regulatory approval from the US Environmental Protection Agency to conduct a similar experiment with the same gene-edited species in Texas and Florida. One of the people involved in the attempt, Texan Roy Bailey, is a Washington lobbyist and close friend of Randal Kirk, the billionaire CEO of Intrexon, owner of Oxitec. Bailey is also a major Trump fundraiser. Let’s hope that regulatory prudence and not politics decide the outcome

F. William Engdahl is strategic risk consultant and lecturer, he holds a degree in politics from Princeton University and is a best-selling author on oil and geopolitics, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook.”

MORE RESOURCES

Genetically modified mosquitoes could be released in Florida and Texas beginning this summer
https://theconversation.com/genetically-modified-mosquitoes-could-be-released-in-florida-and-texas-beginning-this-summer-silver-bullet-or-jumping-the-gun-139710

Gates Foundation Oxitec Grant
https://www.gatesfoundation.org/How-We-Work/Quick-Links/Grants-Database/Grants/2018/06/OPP1181812

Gates Foundation and Oxitec Fight Malaria with Genetically-Modified Mosquitoes
https://www.labiotech.eu/industrial/gates-foundation-oxitec-malaria-mosquito/

Gates Foundation Awards $4.1 Million for Mosquito Engineering
https://philanthropynewsdigest.org/news/gates-foundation-awards-4.1-million-for-mosquito-engineering

Mosquitoes are the new syringe? Seattle lab nibbles at malaria vaccine
https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/science/mosquitoes-are-the-new-syringe-seattle-lab-nibbles-at-malaria-vaccine/

Researchers Turn Mosquitoes Into Flying Vaccinators
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2010/03/researchers-turn-mosquitoes-flying-vaccinators

US Army & Gates Study Immunization Via Mosquito Bite With Radiation-attenuated Sporozoites (IMRAS)
https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01994525

Who is the biggest killer on the planet?
http://www.hardydiagnostics.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/The-Most-Deadly-Animals.pdf

EPA suspends enforcement of environmental laws amid coronavirus
https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/489753-epa-suspends-enforcement-of-environmental-laws-amid-coronavirus

So yeah, nothing to worry here, just “health labs” and SPAs …

Thanks Fukushima Exposed for the great and timely contribution that decisively helped me complete this investigation!

To be continued?
Our work and existence, as media and people, is funded solely by our most generous readers and we want to keep this way.
Help SILVIEW.media survive and grow, please donate here, anything helps. Thank you!

! Articles can always be subject of later editing as a way of perfecting them

I saved the funniest parts for last.

Hundreds of Al-Qaeda militants arrive in Ukraine from Syria

The Al-Qaeda militants arrived just days after Russian intelligence warned that Washington was providing them with training for the fight in Ukraine

The Cradle – March 08 2022

https://media.thecradle.co/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/42729.jpg

(Photo credit: REUTERS/Khalil Ashawi)

Around 450 militants from the Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) armed group, a re-branded Jabhat al-Nusra (the Syrian branch of Al-Qaeda), arrived in Ukraine on 8 March to fight against the Russian army.

The militants reportedly left Idlib governorate in northern Syria only three days ago, entering Ukraine after passing through Turkey.

The militants consist of both Arab and foreign nationals, as HTS, ISIS, and other militias in Syria allow foreigners to join their ranks.

The newly arrived fighters in Ukraine reportedly consist of approximately 300 Syrians, with the rest a mix of Belgian, French, Chechen, Chinese, Tunisian, British, and Moroccan nationals.

Family members of the militants reported to Sputnik News that high-ranking HTS fighters are coordinating with senior leaders of the Turkistan Islamic Party group, Ansar al-Tawhid, and Hurras al-Din groups, to facilitate the passage of fighters from Idlib to Turkey and then on to Ukraine.

The sources explained further that many of those who have gone to Ukraine are veterans of the US-backed war against the Syrian government and were offered this new task as a means of resolving disputes between the soldiers and the HTS leadership.

The income for Syrian fighters is reported to be around $1,200-$1,500. The income for foreign nationals is not yet known.

Foreign mercenaries from around the globe have joined in on the side of Ukraine as President Volodymyr Zelensky pleads for global assistance in the wake of the Russian military operation.

Russian intelligence services warned on 4 March that the US was sending extremist militants from Idlib governorate to Ukraine to fight against Russia. Moscow has accused Washington of training these extremist militants at the US Al-Tanf military base in southeastern Syria.

This latest escalation of the Russian-Ukrainian conflict comes as wheat and oil prices surge and stocks are straitened due to the conflict.

The two sides have been negotiating in Belarus to address points that could potentially lead to a ceasefire agreement.

450 Arab and foreign extremists from Idlib arrive in Ukraine

Almost 450 extremists from various nationalities arrive to Idlib to fight against Russian troops, after leaving Syria and passing through Turkey.

  • Sources confirm that most of the foreign extremists that left Syria for Ukraine are Hayat Tahrir al-Sham veteran fighters

Close to 450 extremist Arab and foreign nationals have arrived in Ukraine from Idlib to fight against Russia’s forces, less than only three days after they left Syria, passing through Turkey.

Relatives of extremists that have arrived in Ukraine told Sputnik that senior fighters from terrorist group Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (the rebranded version of Jabhat Al-Nusra, i.e Al-Qaeda) have held a number of meetings with senior leaders in the Turkistan Islamic Party group and Ansar Al-Tawhid and Hurras al-Din groups, and agreed on allowing a number of all their fighters to enter Ukraine through Turkish soil.

The sources added that most of these foreign fighters are veterans of the Syrian war, had been causing issues in Idlib, and were given this opportunity to fight against Russia as a compromise by which they would receive a new start and with an acceptable income.

Hayat Tahrir Al-Sham also gave these fighters assurances that their families would be allowed to join them later.

Around 300 of these fighters are Syrian nationals that are originally from the Idlib and Aleppo countrysides, while the 150 others are Belgian, French, Chinese, Moroccan, Tunisian, Chechen and British nationals.

As for the financial compensation, the sources said the fighters that hail from Syria will receive around $1200-$1500, but had no knowledge what the foreign nationals were going to be paid.

Ukraine’s President, Volodymyr Zelensky, has previously stated that 16,000 foreign mercenaries will fight for the country.

Russia’s President Vladimir Putin had warned Germany’s Chancellor Olaf Scholz during a meeting last Friday of the growing number of foreign mercenaries operating in Ukraine, including those coming from Albania and Croatia and namely militants and Jihadists coming from Kosovo in order to put their experience from military operations in Syria to use.

2015 Putin explains why we have Al-Qaeda in Ukraine in 2022

Syrian activist on Ukraine: ‘We share a similar suffering’

by Deutsche Welle, March 5, 2022

Syrian opposition activists say they know what it’s like to go up against the Russian military. Some experts think things may have turned out differently in Ukraine if the West had stood up to the Kremlin over Syria.

    

Syrien Russland Libanon Ukraine Konflikt

“I very much feel for the people of Ukraine,” says Huda Khayti, the head of a women’s center in Idlib. “It’s terrible to see how ruthless Russia is also in Ukraine. Vladimir Putin does what he wants, nobody has ever set limits on him. We Syrians know what we’re talking about,” she explains.

She’s not originally from Idlib, but like hundreds of thousands of Syrians, she became an internally displaced and had to flee several times to survive.

Khayti has often seen just how cruel the bombing raids from Putin’s military can be. Back in 2018, she had to leave East Ghouta, near Damascus, because Russia, alongside Syrian ruler Bashar al-Assad, was bombing the area to the ground.

“I come from Douma and survived a poison gas attack by the Syrian regime. I know what it’s like to live under a hail of bombs or to be cooped up like I did in East Ghouta,” she says.

In the spring of 2018 she finally came to Idlib province. All opposition and rebel groups alike then moved into the province, which is now controlled by the Islamist group Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), which is close to al-Qaeda.

Allegations of war crimes

Supported by the Russian military, the Syrian Air Force has repeatedly attacked the province. Human Rights Watch (HRW) has ruled that Syrian and Russian civil and military officials are involved in war crimes because of their command responsibilities.

The scale of the destruction in Syria would not have been possible without the Russian President’s military support for al-Assad. In 2015, it actually looked like he might be losing the war, but that same year, Moscow intervened at the request of the regime in Damascus. Unlike the invasion of Ukraine, Russia’s intervention was therefore not in breach of international law.

Nevertheless, rules governing war were consistently violated: together with its allies in Iran, Russia and the Syrian government attacked hospitals, schools and markets in order to recapture areas from al-Assad’s opponents.

Syria: Will Germany indict Bashar Assad for war crimes?

The use of barrel bombs, cluster munitions and vacuum bombs, which violate international law, has been thoroughly documented.

A UN report released in 2020 investigated various atrocities in Syria and concluded that Russia’s military was directly implicated in war crimes by indiscriminately bombing civilian areas. But neither al-Assad nor Putin have faced serious consequences.

Russia’s veto at the UN Security Council

As a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council, Moscow has blocked at least 16 resolutions on Syria. This has prevented crimes committed by the Syrian regime from being referred to the International Criminal Court in The Hague.

“All the events in Syria should have raised the question of how far it is possible for a permanent member of the UN Security Council to be able to decide over a war it is itself involved in,” says Bente Scheller, director the Middle East and North Africa Department of the Heinrich Böll Foundation. According to Scheller, this setup is outdated and a different format is needed. But so far, all attempts to restructure the UN Security Council have failed.

Has the West looked the other way in Syria? “No,” says Scheller, explaining that it didn’t ignore these crimes — but also couldn’t get itself to act. When Western countries eventually decided to intervene militarily in Syria, it was more about fighting the “Islamic State” (IS) terrorist group than protecting the population.

Cluster bombs and propaganda

Could we have learned from Syria? “Yes,” believes Khayti. “Due to the inaction of the international community in Syria, Putin was given the green light to take brutal action elsewhere.”

Putin’s army has already bombed civilian facilities in Ukraine. According to HRW, cluster bombs have also been used there, just as they were in Syria.

Ukrainian cities come under increasing attack

Whether propaganda wars, the use of brutal mercenary groups or war crimes, “Putin was able to try out his weapons and warfare technology in Syria,” says Scheller. “These are all precursors from which he was able to draw the lesson: He has nothing to fear from the West.”

Even if crises and wars are not always comparable, says Khayti, “I wonder whether an attack of this kind on Ukraine would have been possible if the world had previously taken a more determined stand against Russia’s interference in the Syrian war.”

Hope that tide will turn against Russia

She is relieved that the Russian government is now being met more harshly, at least with regard to Ukraine. “I wish that the Ukrainians would be spared years of suffering,” says Khayti.

Many Syrians would like a direct channel to the Ukrainians, she explains, to tell them, for example, how best to protect themselves. Some would even like to fight alongside the Ukrainians against the Russian military, she says. “We share a similar suffering. We know better than anyone else in the world what Ukraine is going through right now.”

But there also is a stale aftertaste for Khayti. “There have not been such harsh sanctions in so many years of war in Syria,” says the women’s rights activist. She also points to the sometimes different treatment of refugees in Europe. “There seems to be something like first-class and second-class refugees.”

She hopes that the fate of Syrian refugees will also be taken very seriously: there are still people drowning in the Mediterranean, or freezing to death at European borders or stuck in makeshift camps in Greece for years.

Still, there are hopes in Idlib that the tide could turn against Russia’s government in both Ukraine and Syria.

Foreign fighters are dangerous—for the groups they join

May 24, 2019, Slate Magazine

The release of John Walker Lindh, the “American Taliban,” from prison after 17 years has raised concerns that he will return to terrorism, sparked anger at what some see as the early release of a traitor, and generated reflections on the seemingly endless war in Afghanistan. Lost in the discussion, however, is an important yet often-missed issue: Foreign fighters like Lindh often bring little value to the jihadi groups they join.

After his capture in Afghanistan in 2001, Lindh proved an early ripple in what became a foreign fighter wave. Subsequent wars in Iraq and Somalia drew more foreign recruits from the United States and Europe, while the process went on steroids when the Syrian civil war broke out in 2011 and over 40,000 foreigners traveled there to fight. Of these, almost 6,000 were from Europe, compared with around 700 between 1990 and 2010 for jihads like Afghanistan, Bosnia, Chechnya, and Iraq combined. The number of American figures is far smaller—a study from George Washington University’s Program on Extremism found that by 2018 fewer than 100 Americans had successfully traveled to Syria to fight—but even that figure is large compared with previous jihads.

On the surface, Western foreign fighters would seem desirable for jihadi groups. Those who leave their homes to travel to a faraway war zone are likely to be particularly committed to the cause and willing to do anything to help the group. Terrorism expert Mohammad Hafez found that foreigners represented a disproportionate share of suicide bombers attacking U.S. forces in Iraq. In addition, foreign fighters lack local ties. As such, they are not concerned about retaliation against their own families and communities and are often involved in the worst atrocities both because of their zealotry and because groups like the Islamic State use them to repress and intimidate local communities.

Finally, foreigners are valuable if the group wants to conduct terrorism in their home countries. They have passports, know the language, can form and work with local radical groups, and in general have a comfort and familiarity with the West that a non-Western operative would lack. According to terrorism scholar Thomas Hegghammer, the presence of a veteran of a foreign jihad increases both the success rate and the lethality of a terrorist attack in a western country. Finally, the foreigners also validate the group they join. Al-Qaida and the Islamic State group boasted that they were leaders of the global Muslim community, and the presence of Muslims from around the world helped substantiate that grandiose claim.

Yet for all these benefits, foreign fighters—especially the Western ones—come with many drawbacks. Their zealotry does not make up for their lack of military training or experience. At times, as in Afghanistan before 9/11, when Lindh joined the Taliban, groups had a range of training camps to correct for this problem, but this is extensive infrastructure is largely a thing of the past. In most war zones training is hurried, with combat itself leading to a survival-of-the-fittest winnowing.

Zelensky sparks outrage introducing Greek Azov Battalion recruits in address to Greek Parliament

Foreign fighter mortality rates are high, often well over 20 percent. The class of recruits that included Omar Hammami, an early American volunteer for Somalia’s al-Shabab, is suggestive. In his autobiography, Hammami noted that out of the five volunteers for one of his groups, one was captured and three were killed (Hammami, the fifth, would also later be killed). The foreigners’ zealotry in combat and eagerness for martyrdom is one reason for the high casualty count, but their foreign looks and ways also made them more likely to be arrested or killed.

Not surprisingly, the foreigners are easily disillusioned. Hammami recalled he had to dismiss his initial fantasies about divine intervention, inspired by the works of jihadi propagandists: “I had to come to terms with the fact that the angels don’t come down and save the day for every battle.” Recruits also chafed at the boredom and tedium common to soldiers in any war. When asked to stand down when the al-Shabab sought a break in the fighting, Hammami and others considered trying to find another place to fight. One of his fellow jihadis quipped, “The true blessing is not make it to Jihaad … the true blessing is staying in Jihaad.”

The foreigners also cause problems for the jihadi groups themselves because their extreme views (and often superficial knowledge of Islam) alienate locals. At times, this would take the form of lecturing locals on proper behavior, but it might also result in beatings and even killing for supposed infractions. An al-Qaida in Iraq after action report blamed foreigners for their “disdain for differences in opinions, arguments and exposing faults.” Even when they are better behaved, their very presence conflicts with the nationalism and anti-foreign sentiment that often motivates local fighters.

The foreign presence also shapes the war in ways that hinder jihadi groups’ ultimate success. Foreign fighters often reject borders within Muslim lands as colonial creations meant to divide the faithful, and they have transnational connections and networks that brought them to the war zone. Foreign fighters often spark or legitimate war against the jihadi group. In Chechnya, where locals enjoyed hard-won autonomy from Russia after a bitter war that ended in 1996, foreigners played an instrumental role in shattering this peace and expanding the fight into the neighboring Russian region of Dagestan in 1999. A hitherto little-known politician named Vladimir Putin seized on the Dagestan attack to renew the war in Chechnya and used the presence of foreigners among Chechen fighters to justify a harsh Russian response that eventually put Chechnya back under Moscow’s thumb. Bashir al-Assad would similarly exploit the presence of foreign jihadis on Syrian soil to paint the opposition as a terrorist group and himself as a defender of civilization.

Even when it comes to terrorism in the West, those who travel to foreign battlefields and then return, are often less effective than commonly realized. In the pre-9/11 era, most governments paid little attention to foreign fighters, and they could go to Afghanistan or other countries to train and fight with little interference. After 9/11, however, governments focused far more on this danger, and foreign fighters were far more likely to be arrested on their return. Their transit, activities in the war zone, and social media presence made them more detectable than those who simply stayed home to do attacks. In the United States, no foreign fighter has successfully committed a terrorist attack since 9/11—a remarkable success story.

Some jihadi groups are now placing limits on the role of foreigners. Al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula, one of the group’s most successful affiliates, is careful not to deploy foreigners to sensitive areas where they might alienate locals. Many groups, however, are still desperate for manpower, and their self-image makes them reluctant to reject Western Muslims who claim to follow their credo.

Foreign fighters like Lindh are thus a mixed blessing. Although they help terrorist groups fight their wars, they also gain those groups new enemies and cause problems with the locals, both of which make long-term jihadi success less likely. For the United States and allied governments, vigilance is necessary to prevent the foreign fighters from becoming a dangerous terrorism risk, but local allies are often eager to cooperate with the Western governments against these dangerous imports for their own reasons.

Liberals use it, Jews finance it, trumpers get associated with it – Inside the Azov neo-nazi militia

How The CIA Built The “New Al-Qaeda” In Ukraine, The White Supremacy Trap

TLAV –  

How The CIA Built The “New Al-Qaeda” In Ukraine, The White Supremacy Trap & The Vaccine Time Bomb

MORE ON THE CANDIAN LIBERAL NAZI HAVEN SOON IN A SEPARATE REPORT. TRAILER BELOW
Three U.S. intel officials admit the W.H. practices disinfo ‘to mess with Putin’s head’ – NBC

Ukraine And The New Al Qaeda

Posted on  Author Whitney Webb

The eruption of war between Russia and Ukraine appears to have given the CIA the pretext to launch a long-planned insurgency in the country, one poised to spread far beyond Ukraine’s borders with major implications for Biden’s “War on Domestic Terror”

Hillary Clinton hails mujahideen for driving out Russia, explains how by dropping enough weapons in Ukraine, an Afghanistan-like condition can be achieved

Many social media users reminded Clinton that arming insurgents with modern weapons and giving them millions of dollars did not work out very well for the USA either.

1 March, 2022 , OpIndia

Hillary Clinton hails 'Afghanistan model' for driving Russia out
Clinton explains how by dropping enough weapons and money in the hands of insurgents, like Afghanistan, Russia can be defeated

On March 1, American politician and diplomat Hillary Clinton took a jibe at Russia and hailed how armed insurgents in Afghanistan had driven out Russia from Afghanistan in the 1980s. During a talk show on the news channel, MSNBC Hillary pointed out Russia had invaded Afghanistan in 1980, and they had a lot of help in terms of weapons and advice from the people in the war zone, including some of the advisors who were recruited to fight Russia.

“Russia invaded Afghanistan back in 1980, and although no country went in, they certainly had a lot of countries supplying arms and advice and even some advisors to those who were recruited to fight Russia,” She said.

Clinton further added that things did not go well for the Russians at that time as “a very motivated and then funded and armed insurgency basically drove the Russians out of Afghanistan”. She said though the situation in the Russia-Ukraine conflict is different, if Ukraine is supplied with sufficient armaments, they can fight Russia and take back control of the land.

Clinton also pointed out how Russia brought a lot of airpower to Syria, but it took a long time to defeat the terrorist organizations. She said, “Now let’s be clear that Russia has overwhelming military force, but of course, they did in Afghanistan as well. They also brought a lot of airpower to Syria. It took years to finally defeat Syria in terms of insurgencies and democratic forces as well and others who battled the Russians, Syrians and Iranians.”

She added the US should keep providing Ukraine with weapons to continue fighting Russia. She said, “So I think we have to watch this carefully. We have to provide sufficient military armaments for the Ukraine military and volunteers, and we have to keep tightening the screws.”

Many social media users reminded Clinton that arming insurgents with modern weapons and giving them millions of dollars did not work out very well for the USA either.

What Hillary Clinton forgot to mention was, it was the weapons and funding provided by the West, especially the USA, that created the Islamic terrorist organisations like Al Qaeda and Taliban that eventually turned Afghanistan into a radical wasteland and killed and displaced millions of innocent people.

The Soviet-Afghanistan war and how USA helped create the Al Qaeda and Taliban

In December 1979, the Soviets forces invaded Afghanistan to support the then-Communist government against the Muslim guerrillas in the Afghan war that ran from 1978 to 1992. In April 1978, the left-wing military force under the leadership of Nur Mohammad Taraki overthrown Afghanistan’s centrist government, headed by Pres. Mohammad Daud Khan. The People’s (Khalq) Party and the Banner (Parcham) Party were the two Marxist-Leninist groups that took control of the nation. They formed the People’s Democratic Party of Afghanistan to run the government and formed close ties with the Soviet Union.

The then-Afghanistan government used forced tactics to suppress the domestic opposition. The devout Muslims and anti-communist population started rising against the government, leading to insurgencies among both urban and tribal groups that were collectively known as the mujahideen. The uprising prompted the Soviet Union to invade the Country. Around 30,000 troops entered Afghanistan, which resulted in toppling the then-communist government.

The United States and other countries backed mujahideen groups and helped them spread the insurgencies across Afghanistan. The support rebellion groups got from the US and other nations practically neutralized Russian Soviet forces across the Country. Notably, the airpower that Russia brought in the war was brought down by the rebellions by using shoulder-fired antiaircraft missiles supplied by the US. Pakistan played a vital role in supplying weapons to rebel groups in Afghanistan too.

In 1988, the Soviet Union signed an accord with the United States, Pakistan and Afghanistan to withdraw the troops. The withdrawal of the troops was completed on February 15, 1989, almost ten years after Soviet troops entered Afghanistan.

Mujahideens – The rebels that turned into Taliban and Al-Qaeda

Though Hillary conveniently praised the “highly motivated insurgents” of Afghanistan, commonly known as the mujahideen, to force Russia (then-Soviet Union) out of Afghanistan, she forgot to mention that those groups were the same that formed terrorist organizations like the Taliban and Al-Qaeda. The same Taliban that is now controlling Afghanistan forced US troops out of the country after a 20-year war. Al-Qaeda, another terrorist group formed out of the mujahideen, was responsible for the 9/11 attack in which thousands of Americans lost their lives. 

Over the years, Afghanistan has become a dysfunctional state where deaths and misery rules and human lives have no value.

More necessary 2015 flashbacks

The funny part:

Ukraine joins EU sanctions against ISIS, al-Qaeda

09.11.2021 – UkrInform

Ukraine joins EU sanctions against ISIS, al-Qaeda

Ukraine has supported the EU’s restrictive measures against ISIS, al-Qaeda, as well as persons and groups associated with them, and has undertaken to align its policies with the EU’s decision.

That’s according to the Declaration by the High Representative on behalf of the EU, the full text of which has been published on the website of the European Council, Ukrinform reports.

“On 18 October 2021, the Council adopted Decision (CFSP) 2021/1825. The Council Decision extends the existing restrictive measures until 31 October 2022. The Candidate Countries the Republic of North Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia and Albania, and the EFTA countries Iceland and Liechtenstein, members of the European Economic Area, as well as Ukraine, the Republic of Moldova, Armenia and Georgia align themselves with this Council Decision,” the declaration reads.

According to the document, these countries will ensure that their national policies conform to these Council Decisions. The European Union takes note of this commitment and welcomes it.

The funniest part:

The boat seems to be largely owned and commended by Jewish oligarchs.
See below

More background information:

Absolute must see resources on Ukraine:

Why Does No One Care That Neo-Nazis Are Gaining Power In Ukraine?

Forward Magazine (Israel), December 31, 2018

I can’t count the number of times I’ve been told Ukraine doesn’t really have a problem with its far-right. It’s all Kremlin propaganda; you’re personally helping Putin by talking about it; other countries have far-right problems too, so why single out Ukraine? I’ve heard it all.

But I expect hear even more lines like this in the New Year, all because I’m going to point out the obvious: Ukraine really does have a far-right problem, and it’s not a fiction of Kremlin propaganda. And it’s well past time to talk about it.

Ukraine’s far-right is like a hydra, with ugly heads that pop up far too frequently. Just within the last few weeks, an American-born cabinet minister thanked a group of violent neo-Nazi “activists” for their services, a soldier was photographed wearing a Nazi death’s head patch right behind President Petro Poroshenko and almost 1,500 neo-Nazis and friends threw a two-day Hitler-salute-fest.

Violent far-right groups have been around in Ukraine for years, albeit in marginal numbers. But over the last year they’ve grown not just in significance but in aggressiveness.

I know because I’ve been on the receiving end myself.

At a march in November to commemorate people who’ve fallen victim to transphobic violence, I watched as a march of barely 50 participants was shut down by some 200 far-right extremists. I felt their wrath myself as two of them assaulted me in separate incidents afterwards.

I’m far from the first person who’s fallen victim to Ukrainian far-right groups, nor anywhere near the most serious. Their members have attacked Roma camps multiple times, even killing a Roma man earlier this year. They’ve stormed local city council meetings to intimidate elected officials. They’ve marched by the thousands through the streets to commemorate WWII-era nationalist formations who took part in ethnic cleansing. They’ve acted as vigilantes with little to no negative reaction from state authorities.

…checking out Instagram photos from last night, and Goatmoon’s guitarist has an….interesting tattoo. pic.twitter.com/6fFIG4OgJQ

— Michael Colborne (@ColborneMichael) December 16, 2018

Members of Ukraine’s far-right also offer themselves up as thugs for hire – sometimes with deadly consequences. This summer, anti-corruption activist Kateryna Handziuk was the victim of a horrifying acid attack. In July, several extremists – who apparently were paid by corrupt local police to carry out the attack – doused her with sulfuric acid, burning her over 40 percent of her body. She died from her injuries in November.

Ukraine’s notorious Azov movement keeps growing. Since it was created in 2014 to fight Russian-led forces in the east, it made news by accepting openly neo-Nazi members into its rank. Now the Azov Battalion has become an official Ukrainian National Guard regiment. In 2016 the group formed a political party, which, they claim, now has tens of thousands of members. Earlier this year they unveiled a paramilitary force that doubles as a street gang.

Even as their party polls barely a percent, Azov is trying – as one of their higher-ups has told me personally – to build a far-right “state within the state,” running everything from nationalist study groups and mixed martial arts training to free gyms for youth and programs for the elderly. They’re also trying to turn Kiev into a capital of the global far-right, inviting neo-Nazis and white supremacists from around the world to visit.

Whatever group they’re part of, Ukraine’s far-right is increasingly nonchalant about the use of violence. When I was covering the march in Kiev on November 18, one of them walked up to me and sprayed me with a quart-sized bottle of pepper spray. Another then sucker-punched me in the face just yards away from onlooking police – hard enough to smash my glasses and cut me up.

Yes, I’m still mad about what happened to me. But I’m even more mad about a peaceful assembly of barely fifty people being cancelled because some violent hooligans decided it should be.

And what makes me angriest of all is that many prominent people in Ukraine and beyond that keep wanting to tell you that the far-right isn’t that big a problem.

But it’s time to talk about why extremists in this country are able to attack people in broad daylight as police stand by. It’s time to talk about why some of them are receiving state funds and taking part in official police patrols in some cities. It’s time to talk about why a group that denies it has neo-Nazi leanings can help host a two-day neo-Nazi music festival with barely a peep from anyone. It’s time to talk about why Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko, up for re-election in March, is happy to flirt with hardline nationalist rhetoric and hasn’t bothered to condemn incidents like last month’s attack on a peaceful protest.

And more. Fans are freely posting this stuff publicly in the days after the festival. pic.twitter.com/EbcxD0d9md

— Michael Colborne (@ColborneMichael) December 18, 2018

It’s time to talk about why so many mainstream figures in Ukraine and abroad don’t seem too bothered by any of this. Yes, every country has its extremists, but not every country has public figures that (repeatedly) defend the actions of violent vigilante groups like the notorious C14 – or, like Ukraine’s American-born health minister Ulana Suprun, sully a (deserved) positive reputation by hobnobbing for photos with the group’s leaders on social media).

And no, I haven’t forgotten that Ukraine is still mired in a Russian-orchestrated war on part of its territory, and that Moscow likes to use Ukrainian nationalists in its propaganda – part of its longstanding practice of painting all Ukrainians, nationalists or not, as “Nazis” (not true), or as supporters of Nazi-era collaborationist movements that were active in some parts of Ukraine (also not true). I also don’t doubt that the Kremlin itself funds or supports some of the far-right agitation here so that it can use them for its own purposes.

That’s why I know what I’m going to hear next. I’ll probably be told that I’m part of Putin’s hybrid war (really?), that I work for the Kremlin (um, no), or that I’m doing the Kremlin’s work (also no). But I didn’t invent Ukraine’s far-right, and I certainly haven’t helped them gain the prominence they’ve got heading in 2019.

The problem is real. It’s time for Ukraine to talk about it and take it on.

Michael Colborne is a Canadian journalist who covers central and eastern Europe and is writing a series of articles about Ukraine’s far-right. 

Max Blumenthal, 2018: Israel Is Arming Ukraine’s Blatantly Neo-Nazi Militia the Azov Battalion

Rights Groups Demand Israel Stop Arming neo-Nazis in Ukraine

Human rights activists petition the court to cease Israeli arms exports to Ukraine since some of these weapons reach neo-Nazi elements in Ukraine’s security forces

by Haaretz, Jul. 9, 2018

A group of more than 40 human rights activists have filed a petition with the High Court of Justice, demanding the cessation of Israeli arms exports to Ukraine.

They argue that these weapons serve forces that openly espouse a neo-Nazi ideology and cite evidence that the right-wing Azov militia, whose members are part of Ukraine’s armed forces, and are supported by the country’s ministry of internal affairs, is using these weapons.

An earlier appeal to the Defense Ministry was met with no response.

The ministry’s considerations in granting export licenses for armaments are not disclosed to the public, but it appears that the appearance of Israeli weapons in the hands of avowed neo-Nazis should be a consideration used in opposing the granting of such a license.

Nevertheless, this is not the first time in which the defense establishment is arming forces that embrace a national socialist ideology.

In the past, Israel has armed anti-Semitic regimes, such as the generals’ regime in Argentina, which murdered thousands of Jews in camps while its soldiers stood in watchtowers guarding the abducted prisoners with their Uzi submachine guns.

According to a freedom of information petition to Israel’s defense ministry from last January (Hebrew: read in full here), Israel also armed Bolivia’s military regimes, knowing that Nazi war criminal Klaus Barbie was part of the regime. Legal documents used to convict the head of the junta also showed that Barbie’s death squads used Israeli Uzis.

In the case of Ukraine forces using Israeli weapons are openly stating their support for racist and anti-Semitic ideas, in various publications.

The Azov militia was established in Ukraine following the Russian invasion of the Crimean peninsula in 2014. The militia’s emblems are well-known national socialist ones. Its members use the Nazi salute and carry swastikas and SS insignias.

Moreover, some of them openly admit they have neo-Nazi sentiments and that they are Holocaust deniers. One militia member said in an interview that he was fighting Russia since Putin was a Jew. An Azov sergeant said that he was a national socialist, although he was not in favor of genocide, and as long as minorities in Ukraine did not demand special rights he would have no problem with them.

Tweet by Ukrainian militia leader meeting with Israelis

The militia’s founder, Andriy Biletsky, who is now a member of Ukraine’s parliament, formerly headed a neo-Nazi group called Patriot of Ukraine, now defunct. Its members comprise the founding core of Azov.

“Our nation’s historic mission at this critical juncture is to lead the final march of the white race towards its survival” Biletsky has said. “This is a march against sub-humans who are led by the Semite race.” According to reports by human rights groups militia members are suspected of war crimes, torture and sexual violence.

In tandem with the rising power of Azov, which has more than 3,000 members, there is a rise in anti-Semitic incidents and attacks against Ukraine’s minorities. Neo-Nazi groups have attacked Jews and Jewish memorial sites across Ukraine, as well as journalists, Roma and members of the LGBT community.

One member of parliament declared, in response to a question about the country’s “Jewish problem”, that “in the government there is non-Ukrainian bloodthis must be addressed.” Last May right-wing groups marched through Odessa, their leaders claiming that the city belongs to Ukrainians, not Jews, and that they would get rid of the latter.

All this is happening as the Ukrainian administration is trying to deny the country’s role in the Holocaust, just as is happening in Poland (now with the support of the Netanyahu government).

These attempts include rewriting the history of World War II and the glorification of Ukraine’s soldiers, using legislation and various publications, as well as concocting stories about Jews who were allies of national Ukrainian forces during the war, whereas in fact Jews had to hide their identity.

In 2015, the Holocaust Museum in Washington denounced Ukrainian legislation which was intended to prevent criticism of collaboration with the Nazis.

The Simon Wiesenthal Center and the World Jewish Congress condemned the decision to name central boulevards in Kiev after Nazi collaborators. If that weren’t enough, last April there was a march honoring Ukrainian Waffen SS units which massacred thousands of Jews during World War II. In June, Ukraine’s chief military prosecutor Anatoli Matios said in an interview that Jews want “to drown Slavs in blood.”

Since the spring of 2015 members of the Azov militia have been part of the regular security forces in Ukraine, a part of the National Guard which is under the country’s ministry of internal affairs. The militia encourages members and supporters to enlist in the army. However, the militia maintains itself as a separate organization.

In December of 2016 Ukraine’s internal affairs minister Arsen Avakov, considered Azov’s patron and a candidate for prime minister, met a Knesset delegation headed by MK David Amsalem, on an official visit to Ukraine.

Avakov has also met Arye Dery, the minister of interior. Avakov appointed Vadym Troyan, a senior Azov commander, as the head of Kiev’s police force. Another militia founder was given a different senior police post. These ties were formed when Avakov was a regional governor, cooperating with the neo-Nazi forces of the Patriot of Ukraine, the forerunner of Azov.

Last January the U.S. Congress prohibited any support for the Ukrainian militia. Since Israel’s defense ministry does not divulge any information on arms exports, particularly not to Ukraine, for fear of Russian wrath, it’s difficult to assess the extent of the ties with Kiev, but these are certainly in place.

The petition, submitted by attorney Itay Mack, contains abundant evidence showing the arming of the Ukrainian regime and its Azov forces.

Thus, for example, Ukrainian soldiers have been seen carrying Israeli-made Tavor rifles in military parades in Kiev. In February 2016 it was revealed that Elbit Systems will be part of a group investing in Ukraine’s defense establishment.

In April 2016 the chief of Ukraine’s air force met a representative of an Israeli defense company to discuss the upgrading of communications systems in that country’s warplanes and helicopters. The Ukrainian company “Fort” got Israel’s approval for making Tavor, Negev and Galil rifles.

In the city of Dnepropetrovsk in eastern Ukraine there is a military training school. Its website indicates that training there is provided former IDF officers and that its instructors were trained by Israelis.

The website has a photo of shooting practice with a Tavor rifle. It notes that the school trains units of the National Guard, whose members include Azov militiamen.

In May 2017 Ukraine’s Prime Minister Volodymyr Groysman visited Israel and met with Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman to discuss the arming of Ukraine’s military forces.

In December of that year a man claiming to be a former IDF officer was interviewed by Ukrainian media, saying that he had taken part in battles in eastern Ukraine, where he was instructing soldiers. The Azov website also shows militia members using Tavor rifles.

All of this is unambiguous proof that Israel is exporting weapons to Ukraine, knowing that they reach right-wing militias, some members of which are avowed neo-Nazis who enjoy the support of the authorities.

The ministry of defense, as is its wont, refuses to address this issue, responding only in generalities without detailing the considerations underlying its decisions approving arms exports. It seems that in this case the public deserves a more detailed response, as do Ukrainian Jews the Israeli government supposedly claims to protect.

Even if these weapons are currently directed at Russians, one should take into account the reasonable possibility that in the future they will be used to achieve other goals, perhaps aimed at minority groups in the country. It will then be too late to halt the collaboration of the Israeli establishment with the murder of Jews and others. This will be one more chapter in the dismal history of using Israeli firearms in acts such as these.

Ukraine attacks journalists who reported Israeli weapons flow to its neo-Nazi militia

BEN NORTON·JULY 10, 2018

Ukraine’s embassy in Israel attacked Grayzone editor Max Blumenthal by name, along with The Real News and Electronic Intifada, spreading false accusations after they reported on Ukrainian neo-Nazis using Israeli weapons.

Ukraine’s embassy in Israel has attacked Grayzone editor Max Blumenthal by name and indirectly implicated this writer, Grayzone contributor Ben Norton, for reporting on Israel’s arming of Ukrainian neo-Nazis.

While the Ukrainian government has falsely accused us of spreading “fake news,” it has ironically spread fake news itself, incorrectly alleging that Blumenthal has been writing under the pseudonym “John Brown” — based on a “quick search on the internet.”

The Ukrainian government has also denied that Israel has armed Ukraine’s neo-Nazi militia the Azov battalion, even after Azov posted a video on its own YouTube channel showing it using unmistakably Israeli weapons.

On June 10, the Ukrainian embassy in Israel published an open letter to Aluf Benn, the editor-in-chief of the major Israeli newspaper Haaretz. Kiev condemned Haaretz for publishing a June 9 news report titled “Rights Groups Demand Israel Stop Arming neo-Nazis in Ukraine.”

The Haaretz article was written by John Brown, a pen name used by an Israeli writer. The piece reported that more than 40 human rights activists filed a petition with Israel’s High Court of Justice calling for an end to Israeli weapons exports to Ukraine.

The article is very similar to a report published on July 4 at The Electronic Intifada. That explosive exposé by journalist Asa Winstanley documented how far-right extremists from the neo-Nazi militia the Azov Battalion have been using Israeli Tavor rifles in the field.

Although the John Brown article in Haaretz repeated many of the same facts cited by Winstanley, Brown had also tweeted on July 3 — before the Electronic Intifada piece was published — that he had been working on a piece about the selling of Israeli weapons to neo-Nazis.

Blumenthal has reported on the plague of neo-fascism and Nazism in post-Maidan Ukraine for years; however, he did not write either of these stories.

Despite a total lack of evidence, Kiev decided to implicate Blumenthal in an intricate conspiracy, by pointing to an interview he conducted with me on June 6 at The Real News Network, in which we discussed how both Israel and the United States have armed neo-Nazis in Ukraine. (This was part of a two-part interview with Blumenthal; the other was on his video report on the US Congress inviting Ukrainian fascist Andriy Parubiy to speak.)

The fact is, John Brown and Max Blumenthal are not the same person. Yet this inscrutable nuance escaped the Ukrainian government, which immediately jumped to conclusions and accused Blumenthal of being the secret writer.

How did Ukraine come to this outlandish conclusion? According to its ambassador to Israel, Hennadii Nadolenko, it conducted a “quick search on the internet.”

In his letter to the Haaretz editor-in-chief, Amb. Nadolenko pointed to the report in the Electronic Intifada (by Winstanley, not Blumenthal), as well as Blumenthal’s interview with me at The Real News.

With his non-existent evidence in hand, Nadolenko concluded, “This suggests that Max Blumenthal is hiding behind the pseudonym of John Brown, attributed to the authorship of the mentioned article republished by ‘Haaretz.’”

The Ukrainian embassy tweeted a copy of the letter, which it characterized as a refutation of so-called “fake news.” Kiev also published it on the official Ukrainian embassy website.

This farcical attempt at connecting-the-dots surprised both Brown and Blumenthal.

For starters, the idea that Haaretz would even let Blumenthal submit such a piece is quite comical, given that the liberal Zionist Israeli newspaper has published dozens of articles maliciously smearing Blumenthal, and has printed lie-filled screeds attacking me as well.

Moreover, the Ukrainian embassy’s insistence that “since 2014 there was no weapon supply to Ukraine from Israel, and in particular to Azov battalion, as well as no plans for such cooperation in the foreseeable future” is simply bizarre.

As Asa Winstanley noted in his report at the Electronic Intifada, the Azov battalion itself published a video on its official YouTube channel showing a member using two Israeli Tavor rifles. This is a uniquely Israeli weapon that, with its distinctively thick stock, cannot be confused for any model from any other country.

The language in the Ukrainian embassy’s letter deserves careful examination, as it is in the twisting of language where Kiev attempted to conceal the shocking reality.

Ukraine insisted that “there was no weapon supply to Ukraine from Israel.” But as Winstanley pointed out, “The weapons are assembled in Ukraine, but made under licences from Israel Weapons Industries, approved by the Israeli defence ministry.”

Winstanley added, “Israel’s interior minister Aryeh Deri met with Ukrainian interior minister Arsen Avakov last year — Avakov is well known to be the government funder and patron of the neo-Nazi militia Azov.”

“The Ukrainian govt claims that I’m hiding behind the pseudonym ‘John Brown’ to expose how Israel is arming its neo-Nazi Azov Battalion,” Blumenthal tweeted.

“They’re correct that I’m a John Brown fan, but I do all my work exposing the Nazis in their ranks under my own name.”

Is Israel trying to hide arms exports to neo-Nazi militias in Ukraine?

By The Seventh Eye, June 19, 2019

Human rights activists are hoping to use the courts to expose Israeli arms exports and security know-how to neo-Nazi militias fighting in Ukraine.

A soldier of the Azov Battalion mans a heavy machine gun on a patrol near Mariupol, Ukraine. (Carl Ridderstråle/CC BY-SA 4.0)

Photo: A soldier of the Azov Battalion mans a heavy machine gun on a patrol near Mariupol, Ukraine. (Carl Ridderstråle/CC BY-SA 4.0)

Is Israel knowingly selling weapons to neo-Nazi militias in Ukraine? A group of Israeli human rights activists filed a petition to the Tel Aviv District Court last June to demand the government halt weapons exports to the country, where armed groups have been engaged in fighting for the past five years.

In response, the state has asked that the court slap a gag order on legal proceedings surrounding the alleged sale of weapons and military knowledge to neo-Nazis fighting in Ukraine, and has requested the court tohold its hearing behind closed doors and present its arguments in an ex parte hearing.

The petition, submitted by attorney Eitay Mack on behalf of 42 activists, demands that the Tel Aviv District Court instruct the Defense Ministry official charged with overseeing security exports to rescind, either tentatively or permanently, the licenses granted for exporting weapons to Ukraine. The activists argue that these weapons serve forces that openly support a neo-Nazi ideology and cite evidence that the far-right Azov Battalion, whose members belong to Ukraine’s armed forces, are using these weapons.

The Azov Battalion was established in Ukraine following the 2014 Russian invasion of the Crimean peninsula. It uses well-known National Socialists symbols, while its members use the Nazi salute and carry swastikas and SS insignias.

“It is well known that the State of Israel has a special commitment to the global struggle against neo-Nazis and anti-Semitism,” the petition states. “Even if there is any interest in continuing Israeli security exports to Ukraine, the petitioners believe that the State of Israel cannot take the risk that Israeli weapons and training will be used by neo-Nazi and anti-Semitic soldiers.”

The state’s response included affidavits by top Defense Ministry officials, and rejected the petition out of hand, saying the judicial system has no say in matters of security exports. “The decisions regarding security export policy clearly fall under the powers of the executive branch, which are made on the basis of considerations that have to do with national security, foreign relations and international obligations while safeguarding the vital interests of the state,” attorney Sarah Bello from the Tel Aviv District Attorney’s Office wrote in the response.

But what are the vital interests of the state for which it decided to grant arms export licenses that may or may not end up in the hands of neo-Nazi militias? Both the Defense Ministry and Foreign Ministry have requested that the court hearing vis-à-vis these interests — or anything else relating to the petition — remain behind closed doors. The state says the reasons for doing so are “clear,” yet it does not go into detail as to why, noting that the court had previously accepted the request for closed-door hearings on matters relating to security exports.

The state further argued that “the State of Israel’s security export policy is subject to constant scrutiny and periodic assessments by the senior echelons of the Defense Ministry and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, in coordination with other relevant bodies.”

In response to the state’s request, the petitioners said that they “oppose a request that hides more than it reveals.” They argued that previous proceedings on the issue of defense exports were held in open court, even if the verdict remained confidential. The petitioners also argued that information that the state wishes to conceal in the gag order is published in the media anyway, and that the state itself repeats said information in non-confidential legal documents.

A soldier with the Azov Battalion seen holding an Israeli-made Tavor rifle. (Screenshot)

A soldier with the Azov Battalion seen holding an Israeli-made Tavor rifle.

The petitioners describe a redacted protocol that the state included in its request for a closed-door hearing. According to them, the lines that had been blotted out were “public statements written by the petitioners’ counsel in a petition open to the public, and as stated, the petitioners have repeated them on every possible media platform.”

The state clarified its reason for a closed-door hearing in a response to the petitioners’ response, saying that the petitioners’ arguments will also be prohibited from being aired in public, saying that a public hearing will lead to media exposure that does not fall under the full control of the state.

“The state’s position that prohibiting publication is required also vis-a-vis the petitioners’ arguments as part of the hearing is, inter alia, a result of the lessons of the past in which the arguments made by the petitioners’ counsel were heard in an open-door hearing, and without the respondents being able to openly respond. These were published in the media, which mischaracterized and distorted the state’s position.”

Fitness now more nazi than arming nazis and using them as mercenaries to push textbook fascism on the whole world

According to the state, the petitioners’ refusal to present their arguments in court — during which they would not be allowed to be exposed to the arguments of the other side — is evidence that their “real desire… has to do with the media.” The response did not include any evidence to show that the Israeli media frequently deals with legal proceedings against arms exports and security know-how from Israel to foreign groups who commit war crimes, hold neo-Nazi ideologies, or serve dictatorships.

The Tel Aviv District Court will hear the petition next week on June 26.

This article was first published in Hebrew on The Seventh Eye. Read it here.

The Seventh Eye

“The Seventh Eye is Israel’s only independent media watchdog. Established in 1996, today it publishes daily media reviews, articles, op-eds, and investigative reporting aimed at exposing unacceptable journalistic practices, foreign interests in Israeli media, censorship and self-censorship, discrimination, and racism. The site’s writers follow and document progress in the Israeli media world, from a resurgence of journalists’ unions to exposing hidden ‘advertorial’ content, all with an aim of encouraging independent, fair and unbiased journalism.”

‘Why do you support Nazis in Ukraine,’ Moscow asks Israeli envoy

i24NEWS, February 25, 2022

Protesters outside the Russian Embassy in Tel Aviv, Israel carry placards depicting Vladimir Putin as Nazi leader Hitler on February 24, 2022.
Tomer Neuberg/Flash90Protesters outside the Russian Embassy in Tel Aviv, Israel carry placards depicting Vladimir Putin as Nazi leader Hitler on February 24, 2022.

Moscow repeatedly claimed that its invasion was aimed at ‘denazification’ of the country

Russia on Friday summoned Israel’s Ambassador to Moscow Alexander Ben Zvi to clarify Israel’s position regarding the invasion of Ukraine.

Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Mikhail Bogdanov asked Mr Ben Zvi why Israel was expressing support for the “Nazis” in Ukraine, a day after Russian President Vladimir Putin said the “special military operation” would seek the “denazification” of its neighbor.

Moscow repeatedly claimed that its invasion was aimed at “denazification” of the country, whose President Volodymyr Zelensky is Jewish.

In a statement, the Russian Foreign Ministry said that Bogdanov “expressed the hope” that Israel would show understanding towards the reasons for the Moscow military campaign.

Earlier in the day, Prime Minister Naftali Bennett, in a phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, “offered Israel’s assistance with any humanitarian aid needed.”

In his first remarks after the assault on Ukraine began, Israeli Foreign Minister Yair Lapid condemned Russia’s invasion as “a serious violation of the international order,” but also stressed Israel’s “deep, long-lasting and good relations with Russia and with Ukraine.”

SOURCE

COVID, HITLER, BLM, THE GREAT RESET – MANY BRANDS, ONE CARTEL. AUSCHWITZ PERFECTED AND GLOBALIZED

MORE INFO

ANOTHER ANGLE WITH SOME SOLID POINTS AND FACTS:

Ukrainians fleeing to Israel will transform overnight into settlers and colonisers

Middle East Monitor, 10 March 2022

Israel cannot be allowed to instrumentalise the Russia-Ukraine conflict in order to consolidate its ‘demographic superiority’ in historic Palestine

Passengers disembark from an airplane carrying Jewish immigrants fleeing the war in Ukraine, upon arrival at Israel’s Ben Gurion Airport in Lod, near Tel Aviv, on 6 March 2022 (AFP)

Before the smoke could lift and the dead of World War I could be buried, the pogroms began. 

Jews, wedged in a civil war that swept the Russian empire from 1918, were targeted in no less than 1,000 pogroms. They were blamed for World War I and the Russian Revolution of 1917. They were accused of hoarding food and wealth. They were harassed and beaten in their homes, sexually assaulted on the streets, and on hundreds of occasions, lined up and done away with.

By 1921, historians estimate that more than 100,000 Ukrainian Jews were killed. The pogroms against Ukraine’s Jewish population had several consequences for Europe and world Jewry.

In his new book, In the Midst of Civilised Europe: The Pogroms of 1918-1921 and Onset of the Holocaust, published by Metropolitan Books, Chicago-based historian Jeffrey Veidlinger argues that the feverish violence inflicted upon Jews in Ukraine during the early 1920s set a precedent for the brutality of the years that followed.

The long history of Jewish persecution in Europe notwithstanding, the brazen violence against Jews in the pogroms after World War I was a bellwether for the Holocaust to come two decades later under Nazi Germany. In other words, the state-sanctioned mass murders under Adolf Hitler were primed by several smaller massacres at the hands of ordinary people and the armies fighting the Bolsheviks.

The pogroms against Ukrainian Jews, however, had another knock-on effect. 

A Jewish homeland

They nourished the urgency of creating a Jewish homeland, which had become an immense probability following the British takeover of Palestine from the Ottomans during World War I.

Ukrainian refugees in Israel, the same people who only just escaped war, hunger and foreign occupation today, will transform overnight into settlers and colonisers

The Balfour Declaration of 1917, Sumaya Awad and Annie Levin write in Palestine: A Socialist Introduction (Haymarket Books), was “the first official recognition of the Zionist settlements”. British support for a Jewish homeland precipitated the transfer of thousands of Jewish migrants to British-occupied Palestine.

Between 1921 and 1923, some 40,000 Ukrainian Jews made their way to Palestine as settlers and colonisers. 

The arrival of Jewish refugees perpetuated tensions with native Palestinians, who saw their land being ripped out from under their feet. It catalysed a series of skirmishes between the two communities, none better known than the Jaffa riot of 1921, in which 48 Palestinians and 47 Jews were killed. 

Zionism, like other settler-colonial projects, was predicated on the dehumanisation of indigenous Palestinians. To the Jews who had fled Ukraine and elsewhere, Palestine was theirs, and therefore empty – and where it was populated by Palestinians, it was bereft of civilisation.

Veidlinger writes that Ukrainian Jews erroneously drew parallels between Palestinian resistance to the colonisation of their homes and the persecution they experienced back in Europe.

“Despite the numerous differences between the riot in Palestine and the pogroms of Ukraine – not the least of which was the high Arab death toll, which signalled a lethal brawl more than a pogrom – the notion that the violence in the Holy Land was just another pogrom established a myth that came to define the right-wing of the Zionist movement,” Veidlinger argues. 

With the onset of Nazi Germany in the 1930s and then World War II, Jewish migration to Palestine became ever more “urgent”, even as other countries, such as the US, restricted Jewish immigration.

The Nazis killed an estimated 17 million people, including Jews, Russians, Poles, Roma, gay people, people with disabilities, among others. And even though, according to the Israeli daily Haaretz, Zionists had cooperated with German Nazis, the Holocaust became the most important attestation of Israel’s legitimacy. 

“The Nazis had killed six million Jews, and the Zionist leadership, with [David] Ben-Gurion at its head, saw a unique opportunity to exploit Jewish suffering for the purpose of gaining world sympathy for the establishment of a Jewish homeland,” wrote Australian journalist Anthony Lowenstein.

Jewish Ukrainian refugees 2.0

Within days of the Russian invasion of Ukraine in late February 2022, little more than a century after the pogroms in Ukraine, the Israeli government invited Ukrainian Jews to make aliyah, or to fulfil their migration to the Holy Land.

The West is right to hold Moscow to account for its crimes, but what about Israel?

They called it “Operation Israeli Guarantees” (Arvut Yisrael), based on Israel’s Law of Return, which guarantees Jews from any part of the world immediate citizenship based on their religion.

As was the case during World War II, it isn’t just Jews who are facing the calamity of war in eastern Europe. All of Ukraine’s 44 million people are facing an existential threat, as Russian forces invade via ground troops and terrifying air strikes.

Within 12 days, more than two million Ukrainians became refugees. “We call on the Jews of Ukraine to immigrate to Israel – your home,” said Israel’s Ministry of Aliyah and Integration. Likewise, Prime Minister Naftali Bennett described the state of Israel as “a refuge for Jews in distress”.

“This is our mission. We will meet this sacred mission this time as well,” Bennett said.

On cue, the World Zionist Organization’s settlement division said it would be building temporary homes for those who chose to make the journey. Likewise, Pnina Tamano-Shata, Israeli’s immigration and absorption minister, said the fate of Jews in Israel and Jews in the diaspora were “intertwined”.

 Palestinians lift placards during a rally demanding international support for Palestinians against Israel similarly to that shown for Ukrainians against Russia, at the Rafah refugee camp in the southern Gaza Strip, on March 7, 2022.
Palestinian children in Gaza lift placards demanding international support for Palestinians against Israel, similar to that shown for Ukrainians against Russia, on 7 March 2022 (AFP)

“When the government decision passes, the members of the settlement division are prepared for its immediate execution,” said Yishai Merling, chairman of the WZO’s settlement division.

He added: “The ongoing fighting in Ukraine and the uncertainty require the State of Israel to prepare in accordance with the absorption of immigrants from Ukraine. Israel needs to take responsibility for the Jewish communities living there. This is what Israel did in the past, and this is what the Jewish state should do today.”

From refugees to settlers

At last count, at least 467 Ukrainian Jews had made the journey to Israel, as their compatriots had done a century ago.

These Ukrainian Jews, escaping war and chaos in Ukraine, will now be given shelter, food and protection, and asked to live on land taken from Palestinians

Estimates vary, but according to several sources, there are around 40,000 people in Ukraine who consider themselves Jewish, including President Volodymyr Zelensky. There may be four times as many with Jewish ancestry and, therefore, eligible for aliyah.

Israeli Interior Minister Ayelet Shaked said this week that around 100,000 Ukrainian Jews could make their way to the country and become citizens.

Ukrainian Jews, escaping war and chaos in Ukraine, will now be given shelter, food and protection, and asked to live on land taken from Palestinians. Some will eventually live on recently stolen land, known as illegal settlements in the occupied Palestinian territories, in violation of international law.

According to the WZO’s settlement division, the new arrivals will be placed in settlements in the occupied Golan Heights, the Negev, Arava, the Valley of Springs, and the Jordan Valley.

Already, families have moved into Nazareth Illit (now Nof Hagalil), on land stolen from the nearby town of Nazareth in the 1950s, as part of a larger attempt to “Judaise” and suppress Palestinian development and growth in the region. At the time, the area was made up predominantly of Palestinians.

A Russian shop is pictured in the Israeli northern town of Nof Hagalil, which will welcome refugees fleeing the war in Ukraine, on March 6, 2022
A Russian shop is pictured in the Israeli northern town of Nof Hagalil, which will welcome refugees fleeing the war in Ukraine, on 6 March 2022 (AFP)

Others will potentially move into previously stolen land built on the villages ethnically cleansed when Israel was created in historic Palestine in 1948. Around 750,000 Palestinians were expelled in 1948 to make way for the state of Israel.

And like their predecessors who arrived a century ago, they will come to imbibe the Zionist belief that the land was empty; that the Palestinians expelled in 1948, around five million of whom are still languishing in refugee camps, or who are living in different parts of the world and unable to return to their homes, or who are living as prisoners in blockaded Gaza, are threats to their existence as Jews.

No humanitarian gesture

In other words, the same people who only just escaped war, hunger and foreign occupation today will transform overnight into settlers and colonisers. They will simply slot into Israel’s system of institutionalised segregation and discrimination, known as apartheid.

Make no mistake: ordinary Ukrainians are paying the price in a war between two frail empires struggling for dominance and relevance. 

But even in this moment of global emergency, in which immediate actions must be taken to save civilian lives in Ukraine, there is absolutely no reason that Palestinians should also be made to bear the costs of this conflict.

Absorbing Jews from around the world is not a humanitarian gesture by Israel; it is a strategic policy. It reinforces Israel as a Jewish homeland.

Israel cannot be allowed to instrumentalise the Russia-Ukraine conflict to populate Palestinian land with more Jews, in order to consolidate what Lana Tatour, professor of settler-colonialism and human rights at the University of New South Wales in Sydney, describes as “demographic superiority”.

But then, a century on, who are we even fooling?

Israel has survived and thrived as a settler-colonial state, and built its legitimacy and credibility as a liberal democracy despite its racist policies, because Britain, France and the US in particular have never recognised Palestinians as relevant, or human, in the first place. 

Syrian President Al-Assad: The “Zionist Jew” Zelensky Supports Nazi Collaborators

“Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad said in a March 17, 2022 address in honor of Syrian Teachers’ Day that aired on Al-Ikhbariya TV (Syria) that the West does not have any principles and that it only cares about world domination and material interests. Explaining that the West’s only enemies are those who stand in the way of its interests and that the West and Zionism are not fundamentally opposed to Nazism, Al-Assad gave the example of how Zelensky is a “Zionist Jew,” yet he supports Ukrainian Nazi groups. Al-Assad said that this is ironic considering that “Zionist Israel” claims to cry over the victims of the Holocaust.” – Memri Tv

GO DEEPER DOWN THE RABBIT HOLE:

COVID, HITLER, BLM, THE GREAT RESET – MANY BRANDS, ONE CARTEL. AUSCHWITZ PERFECTED AND GLOBALIZED

“Bro, do you even unholy alliance?”

With the help of Yaacov Apelbaum, from the illustrated Primer, we know that Ukrainian Neo Nazis were at the Capitol on the 6th as well.  One noted member of the fascist group who refers to itself as the Zhidobanderites, Sergai Dybynyn, was photographed at the Capitol with the man known as Jacob Anthony Chansley (see above). Sergai was also in the Ukrainian army and is wanted for horrible crimes in his past.

Another member of the Zhidobanderites is a wealthy Ukrainian, Ihor Kolomoyski.

We wrote about Kolomoyski in 2019 related to his connections with Burisma.  He’s also a media giant in Ukraine.

The day after the riot at the Capitol the Ukrainians reported that Russia was behind the effort because they supported President Trump.  They also proved that they were at the Capitol and were using techniques like Antifa in storming the Capitol.  The ‘Russians’ were Ukrainians.

Below is a composite of the events from Apelbaum. 

To be continued?
Our work and existence, as media and people, is funded solely by our most generous readers and we want to keep this way.
Help SILVIEW.media survive and grow, please donate here, anything helps. Thank you!

! Articles can always be subject of later editing as a way of perfecting them

At first I wasn’t so sure these labs were even a stake in this war, I’m pretty sure Putin wouldn’t bomb them anyway, that poses huge risks to Russia too. But seeing the dumb and desperate counter-narrative efforts from US / UA, coupled with the latest press releases from Moscow., I know we’re over some major target.

BREAKING UPDATE: DANG!

China — “The US has 336 labs in 30 countries under its control, including 26 in Ukraine alone. It should give a full account of its biomilitary activities at home and abroad and subject itself to multilateral inspections.“

Chinese broadcaster CGTN: “China urges U.S. to disclose more details about biolabs in Ukraine

Only hours later, Victoria Nuland, US Undersecretary of State, replied. They’ve never reacted so promptly, definitely a massive burning issue to US:

Ukraine biolabs are real but Russian man bad – Victoria Nuland

LAST MINUTE

Xinhua news agency released this 3h prior to this update

Bat coronavirus found in U.S.-funded bio-lab in Ukraine: Russian Defense Ministry
“Dismissing the concerns about US biolabs in Ukraine is irresponsible” – China’s second shout to US

Looks like they are going to play ping-pong for a while, I’m not going to keep reporting every strike now, just the decisive ones.

In the meantime, one thing led to another and…

We were here before China and Nuland interrupted to confirm us:

Article like this one from Kyiv Post are meant to be used as credible source by Western ‘fact-checkers’ such as Politifact and their pitiful debunk attempts.
Because what is more reliable than word from the Deception Services of the incriminated part?!

Their strawman argument is rookie level, not much effort needed to tear it apart:

However, documents tell another story:

“Ukraine has no control over the military bio-laboratories on its own territory. According to the 2005 Agreement between the US DoD and the Ministry of Health of Ukraine the Ukrainian government is prohibited from public disclosure of sensitive information about the US program and Ukraine is obliged to transfer to the US Department of Defense (DoD) dangerous pathogens for biological research. The Pentagon has been granted access to certain state secrets of Ukraine in connection with the projects under their agreement. “

Dilyana Gaytandzhieva

https://www.rt.com/russia/551374-ukraine-biological-warfare-labs/

MFA = Ministry of Foreign Affairs

Russia reveals evidence of U.S.-funded bio-program in Ukraine

CGTN, 07-Mar-2022

Graphic shows part of U.S.-funded overseas bio-labs. /CGTN

Russian defense ministry spokesperson said on Sunday that evidence of a U.S.-financed military biological program developed in Ukraine has been revealed during Russia’s special operation on Ukraine.

The spokesperson Igor Konashenkov said, “In the course of the special military operation, evidence of the Kyiv regime’s hasty measures to conceal any traces of the military biological program, financed by the U.S. Department of Defense in Ukraine, has been revealed.”

Konashenkov pointed out that the employees of Ukrainian bio laboratories had provided information that especially hazardous pathogens: plague, anthrax, cholera, tularemia and other lethal diseases infecting agents had been urgently destroyed following the beginning of Russia’s special military operation in Ukraine on February 24.

The defense ministry further informed that the results of the analysis of the documents will be shared in the near future.

“We will share the results of the analysis of the documents we have received in the near future. Some of them, in particular the Ukrainian health ministry’s instruction to destroy pathogens and certificates of completion from the Kharkov and Poltava bio laboratories we are publishing right now,” Konashenkov added.

A screenshot of The Rio Times’ online page.

U.S. embassy deletes files on Ukrainian bio-labs

According to a report of The Rio Times and a Twitter message posted by the Brazilian new agency’s investigative journalist Dilyana Gaytandzhieva, the American Embassy in Ukraine on February 26 removed all documents about Pentagon-financed bio-labs in Ukraine from its website. But they forgot to remove a document showing that the Pentagon is funding two new biolabs in Kyiv and Odesa.

One of the old labs financed by the U.S. in Ukraine is located in Kharkiv, the country’s second-largest city. In January 2016, at least 20 Ukrainian soldiers died there from a flu-like virus in two days while another 200 soldiers were hospitalized. However, the Ukrainian government did not provide details on the soldiers who died.

U.S.-funded overseas bio-labs concerns

The U.S. has set up over 200 bio-labs in 25 countries and regions across the Middle East, Africa, Southeast Asia and the former Soviet Union, with 16 in Ukraine alone.

Some of the places where the labs are based have seen large-scale outbreaks of measles and other dangerous infectious diseases, triggering international concerns about the safety of U.S. overseas laboratories. – CGTN

We discussed Dyliana research and the biolab issue one year ago, but at least it didn’t take two, like the Covid masks hoax.


IN FACT, RUSSIA HAS COMPLAINED FOR YEARS THAT US IS CONDUCTING BIOWARFARE IN UKRAINE LABS AT THE BORDER. PROJECTS INVOLVED INSECT SPREADERS JUST LIKE IN BILL GATES AND DARPA’S CRAZIEST PLANS.

If US/UA were smart enough to deny the lab bombings, not the labs, this would’ve been a closed case to me.. But no… They are desperate to deny the whole shabazz…

And that’s borderline insane, given the abundance of evidence, see some examples below.

Another point Ukraine and Western narrative control is trying to push:
The labs work in accordance with Ukraine laws for biodefense and vaccine research.
But we know that the difference between bio-defense / vaccine research and bioweapon / biowarfare research is solely in INTENTION.
And to settle this problem, all they are offering is a declaration of positive intentions from the accused.

As I was writing this previous paragraph, I heard Shaggy singing “It Wasn’t Me” in my head, do you get this too?

You loved her epic expose on the American biolabs network around the world.
The Bulgarian one-woman-media-army did it again!
Dilyana Gaytandzhieva is a Bulgarian investigative journalist, Middle East correspondent and founder of Arms Watch. Over the last years she has published a series of revealing reports on weapons supplies to terrorists in Syria, Iraq and Yemen. Her current work is focused on documenting war crimes and illicit arms exports to war zones around the world.

Documents expose US biological experiments on allied soldiers in Ukraine and Georgia

  January 24, 2022

The US Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) program in the Republic of Georgia. Photo: Ministry of Internal Affairs of Georgia

While the US is planning to increase its military presence in Eastern Europe to “protect its allies against Russia”, internal documents show what American “protection” in practical terms means.

The Pentagon has conducted biological experiments with a potentially lethal outcome on 4,400 soldiers in Ukraine and 1,000 soldiers in Georgia. According to leaked documents, all volunteer deaths should be reported within 24 h (in Ukraine) and 48 h (in Georgia).

Both countries are considered the most loyal US partners in the region with a number of Pentagon programs being implemented in their territory. One of them is the $2.5 billion Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) Biological engagement program which includes research on bio agents, deadly viruses and antibiotic-resistant bacteria being studied on the local population.

Project GG-21: “All volunteer deaths will be promptly reported”

The Pentagon has launched a 5-year long project with a possible extension of up to 3 years code-named GG-21: “Arthropod-borne and zoonotic infections among military personnel in Georgia”. According to the project’s description, blood samples will be obtained from 1,000 military recruits at the time of their military registration physical exam at the Georgian military hospital located in Gori.

The samples will be tested for antibodies against fourteen pathogens:

  • Bacillus anthracis
  • Brucella
  • CCHF virus
  • Coxiella burnetii
  • Francisella tularensis
  • Hantavirus
  • Rickettsia species
  • TBE virus
  • Bartonella species
  • Borrelia species
  • Ehlrichia species
  • Leptospira species
  • Salmonella typhi
  • WNV

The amount of blood draw will be 10 ml. Samples will be stored indefinitely at the NCDC (Lugar Center) or USAMRU-G and aliquots might be sent to WRAIR headquarters in US for future research studies. Walter Reed Army Institute of Research (WRAIR) is the largest biomedical research facility administered by the U.S. Department of Defense. The results of the blood testing will not be provided to the study participants.

Such a procedure cannot cause death. However, according to the project report, “all volunteer deaths will be promptly reported (usually within 48 h of the PI being notified)” to the Georgian Military Hospital and WRAIR.

According to the GG-21 project report, “all volunteer deaths will be promptly reported” to the Georgian military hospital and WRAIR, USA.

The soldiers’ blood samples will be stored and further tested at the Lugar Center, a $180 million Pentagon-funded facility in Georgia’s capital Tbilisi.

The Lugar Center has become notorious in the last years for controversial activitieslaboratory incidents and scandals surrounding the US drug giant Gilead’s Hepatitis C program in Georgia which has resulted in at least 248 deaths of patients. The cause of death in the majority of cases has been listed as unknown, internal documents have shown.

[Gilead makes Remdesivir – Silview Media]

The Georgian project GG-21 has been funded by DTRA and implemented by American military scientists from a special US Army unit code-named USAMRU-G who operate in the Lugar Center. They have been given diplomatic immunity in Georgia to research bacteria, viruses and toxins without being diplomats. This unit is subordinate to the Walter Reed Army Institute of Research (WRAIR).

The Lugar Center is the $180 million Pentagon-funded biolaboratory in Georgia’s capital Tbilisi.
A diplomatic car with a registration plate of the US Embassy to Tbilisi in the car park of the Lugar Center. US scientists working at the Pentagon laboratory in Georgia drive diplomatic vehicles as they have been given diplomatic immunity. Photos: Dilyana Gaytandzhieva

Documents obtained from the US Federal contracts registry show that USAMRU-G is expanding its activities to other US allies in the region and is “establishing expeditionary capabilities” in Georgia, Ukraine, Bulgaria, Romania, Poland, Latvia and any future locations. The next USAMRU-G project involving biological tests on soldiers is due to start in March of this year at the Bulgarian Military Hospital in Sofia.

Project UP-8: All deaths of study participants should be reported within 24 h

The Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) has funded a similar project involving soldiers in Ukraine code-named UP-8: The spread of  Crimean-Congo hemorrhagic fever (CCHF) virus and hantaviruses in Ukraine and the potential need for differential diagnosis in patients with suspected leptospirosis. The project started in 2017 and was extended few times until 2020, internal documents show.

According to the project’s description, blood samples will be collected from 4,400 healthy soldiers in Lviv, Kharkov, Odesa and Kyiv. 4,000 of these samples will be tested for antibodies against hantaviruses, and 400 of them – for the presence of antibodies against Crimean-Congo hemorrhagic fever (CCHF) virus. The results of the blood testing will not be provided to the study participants.

There is no information as to what other procedures will be performed except that “serious incidents, including deaths should be reported within 24 hours. All deaths of study subjects that are suspected or known to be related to the research procedures should be brought to the attention of the bioethics committees in the USA and Ukraine.”

Blood samples from 4,000 Ukrainian soldiers will be tested for hantaviruses. Another 400 blood samples will be tested for CCHF under the DTRA-sponsored Ukrainian Project UP-8.
Project UP-8: “Serious incidents, including deaths should be reported within 24 hours. All deaths of study subjects that are suspected or known to be related to the research procedures should be brought to the attention of the bioethics committees in the USA and Ukraine.” Source: ukr-leaks.org

DTRA has allocated $80 million for biological research in Ukraine as of 30 July 2020, according to information obtained from the US Federal contracts registry. Tasked with the program is the US company Black &Veatch Special Projects Corp.

Another DTRA contractor operating in Ukraine is CH2M Hill. The American company has been awarded a $22.8 million contract (2020-2023) for the reconstruction and equipment of two biolaboratories:  the State Scientific Research Institute of Laboratory Diagnostics and Veterinary-Sanitary Expertise (Kyiv ILD) and the State Service of Ukraine for Food Safety and Consumer Protection Regional Diagnostic Laboratory (Odesa RDL).

US personnel are indemnified for deaths and injuries to the local population

The DTRA activities in Georgia and Ukraine fall under the protection of special bilateral agreements. According to these agreements, Georgia and Ukraine shall hold harmless, bring no legal proceedings and indemnify the United States and its personnel, contractors and contractors’ personnel, for damage to property, or death or injury to any persons in Georgia and Ukraine, arising out of activities under this Agreement. If DTRA-sponsored scientists cause deaths or injuries to the local population they cannot be held to account.

Furthermore, according to the US-Ukraine Agreement, claims by third parties for deaths and injuries in Ukraine, arising out of the acts or omissions of any employees of the United States related to work under this Agreement, shall be the responsibility of Ukraine.

Subscribe to Dilyana’s Telegram channel using the link: https://t.me/armswatch

UPDATE MARCH 10 2022:

Klaus Schwab & Hunter Biden Connected To Ukraine Bio-Labs

As I was working on exposing these connections myself, Infowars moved faster and they did great job. I can vouch for almost every sentence there

Mind that not all dangerous virus research is illegal and needs outsourced.

HUNDREDS DEADLY BIOLABS WITH DISASTROUS SECURITY RECORDS, RAN BY CDC AND PHARMAFIA IN YOUR BACKYARD

Exactly one year before the Ukraine “invasion”, Grayzone obtained hard evidence that Reuters, BBC, Bellingcat and Zinc acted as intelligence operatives for UK against Russia. I don’t know how such activities are regarded by laws, national or international, but in my books, by common sense criteria, the hostility of their plan is nothing short of war. Same UK intelligence is most likely behind the Bucha false flag one year later.

epilogue

Once we pull it out you better pick up on it quickly, I told you we’re in the business of dictating future MSM headlines. But without the sugar glazing. 🙂

To be continued?
Our work and existence, as media and people, is funded solely by our most generous readers and we want to keep this way.
Help SILVIEW.media survive and grow, please donate here, anything helps. Thank you!

! Articles can always be subject of later editing as a way of perfecting them

ORDER