Close to 1000 earthquakes in a week, very atypical and scientifically unexplained. I’m not talking about Turkey, but their neighbor and Ukraine’s: my home-country, Romania. These occur as I type this and they unearthed a long-buried scandal: The Romanian mini-HAARP.
“So HAARP directs beams of enormous energy from the atmosphere to Earth, inside our planet. This causes disruptions in the Earth’s own magnetic field, which can cause major earthquakes. Many of the recent high-intensity earthquakes of the last period were preceded by atmospheric coloring phenomena, characteristic of illumination with HAARP radiation.” – General Dr. Marius Opran, scientific expert/coordinator on defense, security and critical space infrastructure issues within the Romanian Space Agency / Adevarul daily newspaper, February, 23, 2023
BREAKING: A team of Romanian scientists created a method of PREDICTING EARTHQAKES 2 DAYS IN ADVANCE, they already are contracted by NASA and several governments, but no one seems in a rush to implement it, Romanian TV news channel Realitatea reveals in an interview. Their technology has been internationally known and recognized for over FIVE YEARS now, just not implemented. Among them there are military experts WHO HAVE CONFIRMED EARTHQUAKES CAN BE ARTIFICIALLY PROVOKED WITH HAARP TECHNOLOGY. WHAT NO ONE ELSE TELLS YOU: THEIR NEW METHOD IS FOR NATURAL EARTHQUAKES, THEREFORE IT CAN REVEAL ARTIFICIAL EARTHQUAKES.
In August 2010, the landscape next to Corbu Beach in Romania has been visibly altered by two clusters of 20 antennas each and some barracks, suddenly landed there, next to an air-defense training camp belonging to the Romanian Army. By September, social media was already sounding the alarm: “is this anything like HAARP?!”. Because earthquakes are not a rare occurrence in Romania, neither are extreme weather phenomena. Some are just nature being nature, some of are truly scientifically inexplicable, some only defy experience and common sense. The topic generated a surprising amount of media coverage, talk shows, interviews and the whole shabazz, in which top Romanian Army experts and generals, as well as some government officials, expressed personal opinions and stances that are very rich in unsettling information they vouch for. And I can translate it for you. Yet, 13 years later, the general population is almost as clueless about this installation as it was in 2010, both the Romanian Government and the Romanian Army couldn’t be less bothered to calm the waters, they knew another scandal will diffuse this one soon. Some folks really went down the HAARP rabbit hole and that changed their lives. But no one has managed to come up with anything official, just mere speculations about that specific gear next to Corbu Beach, lurking somewhere middle way if you walk from Odessa to Ankara. No one before us, I mean…
SOURCE
But only after I finished the video above I bumped into the most coincidental of all coincidences here (from a long list):
LITTLE HAARP AND BIG HAARP COME FROM THE SAME MOTHER!
Below is the press release for HAARP’s completion, now deleted and archived HERE:
June 27, 2007 06:30 PM Eastern Daylight Time
BAE Systems Completes World’s Premiere Facility for Ionospheric Physics Research
GAKONA, Alaska–(BUSINESS WIRE)–BAE Systems has completed work on the world’s largest and most capable ionospheric research facility. The facility will be used to study interactions between high-power radio signals and the earth’s ionosphere.
“HAARP is a scientific project to study the properties and behavior of the ionosphere, with emphasis on using the ionosphere to improve communications and surveillance systems for civilian and defense purposes”
As the prime contractor for the U.S. Defense Department’s High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program (HAARP) research station, BAE Systems designed and built the facility, operating software, and controls under a series of contracts valued at more than $250 million from the Office of Naval Research.
The research station was dedicated on June 27 in a ceremony held at the Gakona site. Construction of the station was jointly funded by the U.S. Air Force, U.S. Navy, and the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency.
It includes 360 radio transmitters with a combined power of 3.6 megawatts; 180, 68-foot-tall antennas covering an area of 40 acres; and five large generators providing more than 16 megawatts of power.
“HAARP is a scientific project to study the properties and behavior of the ionosphere, with emphasis on using the ionosphere to improve communications and surveillance systems for civilian and defense purposes,” said Rob Jacobsen, HAARP program director for BAE Systems in Washington, D.C.
The ionosphere is the part of the atmosphere between space and the earth in which electrically charged atoms, or ions, reflect radio waves, making long-distance radio communication possible.
About BAE Systems
BAE Systems is a global defense and aerospace company, delivering a full range of products and services for air, land, and naval forces, as well as advanced electronics, information technology solutions, and customer support services. BAE Systems, with 88,000 employees worldwide, had 2006 sales that exceeded $25 billion.
______________________
BAE Systems and Raytheon are perceived as top competitors in the military industry, but that’s only partly true.
Raytheon Aircraft Company is the owner of HAARP patents, and, NOAA-funded aerosol weather modification/AESA radar weather weapons”
“BAE Systems is program and apparatus-owner of the HAARP facility, Railgun technology, electromagnetic armor, and, a sub-corporation partner with Raytheon via British Aerospace Corporation
“General Dynamics Robotics (owned by Raytheon Corp) is the military contractor/manufacturer of Unmanned Autonomous Vehicles (UAV) aircraft designed for “all-weather,” computer-controlled weapons defense progams
“Boeing, Lockheed Martin, BAE Systems, and Raytheon to create B2B exchange for the aerospace and defense industry, powered by Microsoft”
“Boeing, Lockheed Martin, BAE Systems, and Raytheon to create B2B exchange for the aerospace and defense industry, powered by Microsoft”
“The Weather Modification Operations and Research Board (passed Oct.2005) – in corporate cooperation with BAE Systems (HAARP apparatus & facility owner) and Raytheon Corporation (HAARP patent owner)
Raytheon, in partnership with BAE, designed Excalibur to be fired from the Paladin (among other weapons systems). The Paladin’s ammunition magazine holds 39 rounds. And at last report, the U.S. Army and National Guard had bought a total of 975 Paladins for their arsenals.
BAE Systems selects Raytheon’s projector for UAE F-16 DLE HUD
Raytheon will design, develop and manufacture the projector for BAE Systems’ Digital Light Engine (DLE) Head-Up Display (HUD) on the F-16 Fighting Falcon for the United Arab Emirates (UAE) armed forces.
Raytheon’s partnership with BAE Systems provides pilots with real-time, mission critical information using its projector for BAE Systems’ Digital Light Engine (DLE) Head-Up Display (HUD) on the UAE’s F-16. Courtesy Lockheed Martin
BAE Systems completes $1.9 billion acquisition of Raytheon’s military GPS business
WASHINGTON — BAE Systems has completed its $1.9 billion purchase of Collins Aerospace’s military GPS business from Raytheon Technologies Corporation, BAE announced July 31.
The two companies had already struck a deal with BAE in January, which saw BAE purchasing Collins Aerospace’s military GPS business from UTC for $1.9 billion and Raytheon’s airborne tactical radio business for $275 million.
A special CBC report aired in Canada early 2000’s also reveals Raytheon is behind the “Mother HAARP” in Alaska.
A kind of FAQ:
SO WHAT IS THIS THING IN ROMANIA?
Officially, it’s a radar for monitoring the territorial waters in the Black Sea.
Comparing its description with the presentations on the HAARP official website, what I see is a pocket HAARP.
The main relevant difference I found is that HAARP has to use the word “transmitter” while Raytheon can avoid it because that’s not the on-label purpose.
A physics professor who’s just saw that Raytheon page told me in a recent private chat: If HAARP was a firetruck, this is like a car fire extinguisher. They use similar physics to accomplish similar goals, to different scales.
Can this thing use the ionosphere to focus energy in a specific location like HAARP does? Theoretically yes, de facto we can’t know as of now. These capabilities can even be hidden to the rightful owner and third parties can have access to them through backdoors, same way the Pegasus spyware that hands control over your phone to anyone who can afford to buy it. So the Romanian Army can use it in good will to surveil its territory and, same time, the DoD could use it to send an energy impulse somewhere else.
CAN THIS THING REALLY BE BLAMED FOR EARTHQUAKES
I personally have found NO evidence that causally connects this installation and an earthquake, that is NOT my thesis here.
My stance is that this thing COULD, theoretically, achieve that, we are in a territory of agnosticism on this topic and, if we are impartial, we need to be open to either possibilities and collect more information on both.
From this position, this is my analysis:
Someone argued that all HAARP-like installation known on Earth, about a dozen, summed up, can’t generate enough energy to kickstart an earthquake.
To which, a Romanian Army general responded on some Romanian cable news TV: “they don’t need to. “
Simplifying what he and other experts said publicly, in Romania and beyond, they only need to be the straw the breaks the camel’s back. And that’s something even a tiny installation like the Corbu one can over-achieve if enough seismic tension accumulates in Earth’s crust somewhere close enough. Even more so if you overlap two of them…
So what I’m saying is:
“Suspicious” is the reasonable default position about any earthquake in this day and age, regardless of what “de-radicalizers” say. Just collect enough evidence before any conclusion.
This question has been scientifically settled long ago, as you will see further below.
I have another one that no one dares to touch:
CAN THE ROMANIAN HAARP SET A RUSSIAN WARSHIP ON FIRE?
No quotable sources I know dared to answer.
WHERE IS THE SECOND POCKET-HAARP?
No one knows, as of now. No one even knew there were two, besides the parts that signed the contract and probably 10 more people who paid attention to the press release and forgot about it the next minute.
We explored the possibility that both of them have been deployed in the same location, as we have two rows x 20 antennas each.
First of all, it’s unusual because senseless to overlap radars, the whole point of radars being to surveil as much territory as possible. Even more so in this case, where one installation can cover the whole Romanian shore and beyond. Placing two radars in the same location doubles the power over the same area. The power to what, these are radars, officially at least…?
On the other hand, these are “beyond the horizon” radars, specifically useful for surveilling large surfaces of water, there are no other seas or oceans Romania has an opening to. Surely they can be used on land too, but Romania is about 2/3 mountains and hills, from a military standpoint, other types of radars were more needed to secure borders and this acquisition makes half-sense as announced.
So, if they deployed both of them in Corbu, that only makes things more illogical and suspicious.
HOW DOES ROMANIA NEED TWO IF ONE DOES THE JOB?? SOURCE
But we don’t know yet either way, this investigation is ongoing.
As an experienced former insider in Romanian politics, I advise investigating an alternative question:
HAS THE SECOND RADAR EVER BEEN DELIVERED?
I know some precedents there…
LAST MINUTE: CORPORATE SHILLS BLAME CORPORATE FRACKING FOR THE ROMANIAN EARTHQUAKES
A series of surprising voices raised to blame some natural gas exploitations nearby for about 1000 earthquakes in Gorj, Romania. “They’re fracking there, this caused the earthquakes”, activists claimed. Some MEP even started a social media campaign on this.
I almost bought that, but a red light kept blinking in the back of my head, as these voices came mostly from the NPC area of the Romanian society and media, the ones that usually line behind corporatist agendas, not against them. If they turned their weapons, much higher stakes are played.
It didn’t take long until the incriminated company responded with a press release simply stating they are not using any form of fracking there.
And I am open to believe they’re not bullshitting us this time because it’s something easily verifiable and I know they know it’s hard to get away with such a lie even in Romania. However, hard is not impossible.
I will update this if time proves me wrong. Until then, at least officially, it wasn’t fracking.
If I am correct, I am also correct when I say some people were sent out there to put out the fire on the topic of geophysical weapons.
PLOT TWIST: The event is used by authorities to expropriate people who live in “endangered edifices”.
I’m sitting on a mountain of sources and resources supporting the statements above and more, here are just some of them, more to come as I process them, always good to revisit our reports for updates:
The HAARP project and non-lethal weapons. Experts alarmed – public debate needed.
The hearing on the HAARP project and non-lethal weapons was held in connection with a European Parliament own-initiative report, to be drawn up by Maj Britt THEORIN (PES, S), on the possible use of military resources in environmental strategies.
Non-lethal (or non-deadly) weapons – a varied scenario As Peter TRUSCOTT (PES, UK) said in his introduction, “There is an invisible line between what is acceptable and what is suspect”. This is the nub of the issue.
Non-lethal weapons constitute a trend in military thinking which has developed since the end of the Cold War. The world is dealing with a different sort of crisis, which is less easily identifiable and less easy to manage with traditional methods and weapons – hence the desire to master the violence by means other than the same violence. Non- lethal weapons are compared by some authors to “straitjackets” and defined as “any action capable of modifying the behaviour of the adversary while avoiding his annihilation”. This appears to be a significant element of crisis prevention but can be – and is – also used in civilian situations (e.g. crowd control).
Mr Luc MAMPAEY, a researcher at GRIP, the Brussels-based European institute for research and information into peace and security, said he believed the expression “non-lethal weapons” was semantically contentious. He argued that the term had reassuring connotations. It was the politically correct term, and one which could delude the public into thinking that nowadays a clean war was possible and hence morally acceptable. In fact, as he himself and the Red Cross representative, Mr Robin COUPLAND (Geneva), pointed out, the dividing line between deadly and non-deadly weapons was not clear. Some weapons might result in death, while others could incapacitate their victims permanently or temporarily. Mr COUPLAND was quite categorical: the term “non-deadly”, he said, was ultimately a marketing slogan.
The problem of definition “by default” led all the experts to stress that there was no single type of non-lethal weapon and that a careful distinction must be made between the various types, from the simplest to the most sophisticated. These new weapons covered a broad spectrum of technologies, from optical systems with a dazzling or blinding effect, through sound and electro- magnetic waves, chemical, medicinal, adhesive, slippery, super-caustic and acidic substances, biological agents, bacteria and micro-organisms, to rubber bullets and electric-shock batons.
Dangers to health and the environment
The effects on health and the environment were also described as variable. Any weapon designed to disrupt an organism, as well as weapons capable of affecting an organism indirectly, by chemical or biological means, or optical, acoustic or neurological stimuli, could become fatal under certain conditions. Adhesive foam, it was said, could also have extremely dangerous side- effects.
Only if a precisely calculated dose were perfectly delivered could it be guaranteed that sensory (or xenobiotic) stimuli would not have irreversible, or indeed, fatal effects. In practice, this perfect control over the degree of disruption was the first thing likely to go by the board under extreme conditions, where the desire for a swift and decisive solution would rapidly override considerations of ethics or toxicology.
The risk of abuse in democratic societies
However, it was argued, health and environmental issues were not the only concerns raised by the use of non-lethal weapons. Mr COUPLAND expressed concern about an overlap of civil, police and military applications. He was also afraid that these weapons might be used not to replace conventional weapons but in addition to them.
In Mr MAMPAEY’s view, as non-lethal weapons developed, links were bound to be created between military and law-and-order operations, which, he said, would enable certain current conventions to be bypassed. There was a danger of growing militarisation of domestic police forces, which would have access to more sophisticated weaponry. This could raise problems in any state which was supposed to be based on the rule of law and to be mindful of human rights and individual freedoms.
The HAARP project
Tom SPENCER (EPP, UK), chair of the Foreign Affairs Committee, said that the United States had been invited to state its viewpoint on this matter to the hearing. Although the US had declined an initial invitation, Mr SPENCER reiterated his offer, saying that the Americans could send a representative to address the committee in future if they wished.
Ms Rosalie BERTELL, from Toronto (Canada), is one of the best-informed experts about HAARP (the High Frequency Active Auroral Research Programme), a programme which has been developed by the US military.
She described the background to HAARP. The ionosphere is a high-altitude layer of the atmosphere with particles which are highly charged with energy. If radiation is projected into the ionosphere, huge amounts of energy can be generated and used to annihilate a given region.
The HAARP project involves the manipulation of the earth’s ionosphere, whose natural role is to moderate energy transfer from the sun to the earth and is used as a missile trajectory and as a reflector for radio communication. The aim of HAARP is to control and manipulate the ionosphere so as to enable the manipulator to wipe out communications at will on a global scale, or to make them resilient in the event of a nuclear war.
It also enables communications to take place with submerged submarines and can, in theory, create geomagnetic pathways to guide particle beams which could then deposit large amounts of energy anywhere on the globe. In simpler terms, HAARP, with its power of intimidation, of delivery or denial of electrical energy on a global scale and its control of communications, is an element of a system which could control the global village in some frightening ways.
According to Dr Nick BEGICH, an expert from Alaska and author of one of the leading publications on the subject*, the HAARP programme would allow such concentrations of energy to be attained that an entire region of the planet could be deprived of water. Electromagnetic waves can cause earthquakes or tidal waves. Mr SPENCER pointed out that, under international conventions, any actions leading to climate change were prohibited.
Mr BEGICH said that in his eyes the project was purely and simply “Star Wars technology”. Moreover, it was a secret project, as the US Congress had refused to finance Star Wars. The USA, he claimed, had allocated 91 million dollars to the main programme, to which must be added the related programmes. Over the last 50 years, he said, certain levels of security had been developed which were protected from public scrutiny. State secrets were acceptable in themselves but if they involved such major repercussions for human beings and the environment they must be made public. In his view, the international community should be allowed to evaluate the risks of the HAARP programme.
Eurico DE MELO (EPP, P) said he regarded the revelations as terrifying and said that there was a need for a campaign to inform the public about it.
Winding up, Magda AELVOET (Green, B) told the hearing that there was a saying: “War is too important to be left to the generals”. She feared we had forgotten this truth.
Further information: Etienne BASSOT – tel. 284 47 41
Interestingly, the above report references this book:
* Angels Don’t Play This Haarp, Advances in tesla technology, Earthpulse Press, USA, 1995
The foreign affairs committee of the European Parliament has criticised plans by the US military to beam high-frequency signals into the atmosphere. The committee is worried about the effect of the high- frequency active auroral research programme (HAARP) on the environment.
HAARP is a facility to study upper atmospheric and solar terrestrial physics. The programme is paid for by the US Air Force and Navy and has already cost hundreds of million dollars. Opponents of the project believe that the defence department is studying ways of improving communications with the US submarine fleet. The array acts like a powerful radar and transmits high frequency 3600 kW signals into the ionosphere.
Starting 35 miles above the Earth’s surface, the ionosphere contains charged particles which distort and deflect radio signals. These particles are produced by the interaction of solar radiation with the atmosphere. HAARP can pump energy some 70 miles into the ionosphere diameter. Military applications for such phenomena are many – devising radar systems, disrupting communications, and improving US logistics.
When the foreign affairs committee invited North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) and the US permanent representative to NATO to discuss the HAARP project at a public meeting two weeks ago, both groups refused. The secretary general of NATO said that the organisation had neither a policy on this topic, nor an expert they could send to the committee. Tom Spencer, chairman of the committee chairman, vowed to take the matter further, possibly to the US Congress.
Not all researchers believe that opposition to HAARP is justified. Peter Cargill, a space physicist at Imperial College in London, believes that the physics is interesting in its own right, and points out that there are several other facilities carrying out this type of research. “HAARP is just bigger than the other programmes around the world, ” he says. “However, the military don’t spend that kind of money for pure science.”
Report on the environment, security and foreign policy Draftsman: Mr Olsson, Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Protection (Hughes procedure)
14 January 1999
Committee on Foreign Affairs, Security and Defence Policy Rapporteur: Mrs Maj Britt Theorin
At the request of the Conference of Committee Chairmen, the President, at the sitting of 15 November 1996, announced that the Committee on Foreign Affairs, Security and Defence Policy had been authorised to submit a report on the matter.
At its meeting of 19 November 1996 the Committee on Foreign Affairs, Security and Defence Policy appointed Mrs Maj Britt Theorin rapporteur.
At the sitting of 19 June 1998 the President of Parliament announced that this report would be drawn up, pursuant to the Hughes Procedure, by the Committee on Foreign Affairs, Security and Defence Policy and the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Protection.
The draft report was considered by the Committee on Foreign Affairs, Security and Defence Policy at its meetings of 5 February, 29 June, 21 July, 3, 23 and 28 September, 13, 27 and 29 October 1998 and 4 and 5 January 1999, and by the Subcommittee on Security and Disarmament at its meetings of 5 February and 3 and 23 September 1998.
At the last meeting the Committee on Foreign Affairs, Security and Defence Policy adopted the motion for a resolution by 28 votes to none with one abstention.
The following took part in the vote: Spencer, chairman; Theorin, rapporteur; Aelvoet, AndréLéonard, Barón-Crespo, Bertens, Bianco, Burenstam Linder, Carnero González, Carrozzo (for Colajanni), Dillen, Dupuis, Gahrton, Goerens (for Cars), Graziani, Günther (for Gomolka), Lalumière, Lambrias, Pack (for Habsburg), Pettinari (for Imbeni pursuant to Rule 138(2), Piha, Rinsche, Sakellariou, Salafranca Sánchez-Neyra, Schroedter (for M. Cohn-Bendit), Schwaiger (for Mme Lenz), Speciale, Swoboda (for Mme Hoff), Tindemans, Titley and Truscott.
The opinion of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Protection is attached.
The report was tabled on 14 January 1999.
The deadline for tabling amendments will be indicated in the draft agenda for the relevant partsession.
A MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION
Resolution on the environment, security and foreign policy
….
“…whereas, despite the existing conventions, military research is ongoing on environmental manipulation as a weapon, as demonstrated for example by the Alaska-based HAARP system”
Legal aspects of military activities
26. Calls on the European Union to seek to have the new ‘non-lethal’ weapons technology and the development of new arms strategies also covered and regulated by international conventions;
27. Considers HAARP (High Frequency Active Auroral Research Project) by virtue of its farreaching impact on the environment to be a global concern and calls for its legal, ecological and ethical implications to be examined by an international independent body before any further research and testing; regrets the repeated refusal of the United States Administration to send anyone in person to give evidence to the public hearing or any subsequent meeting held by its competent committee into the environmental and public risks connected with the high Frequency Active Auroral Research Project (HAARP) programme currently being funded in Alaska;
28. Requests the Scientific and Technological Options Assessment (STOA) Panel to agree to examine the scientific and technical evidence provided in all existing research findings on HAARP to assess the exact nature and degree of risk that HAARP poses both to the local and global environment and to public health generally;
29. Calls on the Commission, in collaboration with the governments of Sweden, Finland, Norway and the Russian Federation, to examine the environmental and public health implications of the HAARP programme for Arctic Europe and to report back to Parliament with its findings;
30. Calls in particular for an international convention for a global ban on all research and development, whether military or civilian, which seeks to apply knowledge of the chemical, electrical, sound vibration or other functioning of the human brain to the development of weapons which might enable any form of manipulation of human beings, including a ban on any actual or possible deployment of such systems;
31. Calls on the European Union and its Member States to work for the establishment of international treaties to protect the environment from unnecessary destruction in the event of war;
32. Calls on the European Union and its Member States to work towards the establishment of international standards for the environmental impact of peacetime military activities;
…
HAARP – a weapons system which disrupts the climate
On 5 February 1998 Parliament’s Subcommittee on Security and Disarmament held a hearing the subject of which included HAARP. NATO and the US had been invited to send representatives, but chose not to do so. The Committee regrets the failure of the USA to send a representative to answer questions, or to use the opportunity to comment on the material submitted.[21]
HAARP (High Frequency Active Auroral Research Project) is run jointly by the US Air Force and Navy, in conjunction with the Geophysical Institute of the University of Alaska, Fairbanks. Similar experiments are also being conducted in Norway, probably in the Antarctic, as well as in the former Soviet Union.[22] HAARP is a research project using a ground based apparatus, an array of antennae each powered by its own transmitter, to heat up portions of ionosphere with powerful radio beams.[23] The energy generated heats up parts of the ionosphere; this results in holes in the ionosphere and produces artificial ‘lenses’.
HAARP can be used for many purposes. Enormous quantities of energy can be controlled by manipulating the electrical characteristics of the atmosphere. If used as a military weapon this can have a devastating impact on an enemy. HAARP can deliver millions of times more energy to a given area than any other conventional transmitter. The energy can also be aimed at a moving target which should constitute a potential anti-missile system.
The project would also allow better communications with submarines and manipulation of global weather patterns, but it is also possible to do the reverse, to disrupt communications. By manipulating the ionosphere one could block global communications while transmitting one’s own. Another application is earth-penetrating, tomography, x-raying the earth several kilometres deep, to detect oil and gas fields, or underground military facilities. Over-the-horizon radar is another application, looking round the curvature of the earth for in-coming objects.
From the 1950s the USA conducted explosions of nuclear material in the Van Allen Belts[24] to investigate the effect of the electro-magnetic pulse generated by nuclear weapon explosions at these heights on radio communications and the operation of radar. This created new magnetic radiation belts which covered nearly the whole earth. The electrons travelled along magnetic lines of force and created an artificial Aurora Borealis above the North Pole. These military tests are liable to disrupt the Van Allen belt for a long period. The earth’s magnetic field could be disrupted over large areas, which would obstruct radio communications. According to US scientists it could take hundreds of years for the Van Allen belt to return to normal. HAARP could result in changes in weather patterns. It could also influence whole ecosystems, especially in the sensitive Antarctic regions.
Another damaging consequence of HAARP is the occurrence of holes in the ionosphere caused by the powerful radio beams. The ionosphere protects us from incoming cosmic radiation. The hope is that the holes will fill again, but our experience of change in the ozone layer points in the other direction. This means substantial holes in the ionosphere that protects us.
With its far-reaching impact on the environment HAARP is a matter of global concern and we have to ask whether its advantages really outweigh the risks. The environmental impact and the ethical aspect must be closely examined before any further research and testing takes place. HAARP is a project of which the public is almost completely unaware, and this needs to be remedied.
HAARP has links with 50 years of intensive space research for military purposes, including the Star Wars project, to control the upper atmosphere and communications. This kind of research has to be regarded as a serious threat to the environment, with an incalculable impact on human life. Even now nobody knows what impact HAARP may have. We have to beat down the wall of secrecy around military research, and set up the right to openness and democratic scrutiny of military research projects, and parliamentary control.
A series of international treaties and conventions (the Convention on the prohibition of military or any other hostile use of environmental modification techniques, the Antarctic Treaty, the Treaty on principles governing the activities of states in the exploration and use of outer space including the moon and other celestial bodies, and the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea) casts considerable doubt on HAARP on legal as well as humanitarian and political grounds. The Antarctic Treaty lays down that the Antarctic may be used exclusively for peaceful purposes.[25] This would mean that HAARP is a breach of international law. All the implications of the new weapons systems should be examined by independent international bodies. Further international agreements should be sought to protect the environment from unnecessary destruction in war.
Climate change – an integral part of US ‘Star Wars’ programme
by Michel Chossudovsky, Ottawa, November 2000. (Michel Chossudovsky is Professor of Economics at the University of Ottawa and author of The Globalization of Poverty (second edition, Common Courage Press, 2000).
While world attention and concern have been focussed on the need to prevent climate change by the control of carbon emissions, the dangers of ‘weather warfare’ have been ignored. Michel Chossudovsky draws attention to a US drive to perfect technology under its ‘Star Wars’ programme which will have the capacity to trigger climate change.
THE important debate on global warming under UN auspices provides but a partial picture of climate change; in addition to the devastating impacts of greenhouse gas emissions on the ozone layer, the world’s climate can now be modified as part of a new generation of sophisticated ‘non-lethal weapons.’ Both the Americans and the Russians have developed capabilities to manipulate the world’s climate.
In the US, the technology is being perfected under the High-frequency Active Auroral Research Programme (HAARP) as part of the (‘Star Wars’) Strategic Defence Initiative (SDI). Recent scientific evidence suggests that HAARP is fully operational and has the ability to potentially trigger floods, droughts, hurricanes and earthquakes. From a military standpoint, HAARP is a weapon of mass destruction. Potentially, it constitutes an instrument of conquest capable of selectively destabilising agricultural and ecological systems of entire regions.
While there is no evidence that this deadly technology has been used, surely the United Nations should be addressing the issue of ‘environmental warfare’ alongside the debate on the climatic impacts of greenhouse gases…
Despite a vast body of scientific knowledge, the issue of deliberate climatic manipulations for military use has never been explicitly part of the UN agenda on climate change. Neither the official delegations nor the environmental action groups participating in the Hague Conference on Climate Change (COP6) (November 2000) have raised the broad issue of ‘weather warfare’ or ‘environmental modification techniques’ (ENMOD) as relevant to an understanding of climate change.
The clash between official negotiators, environmentalists and American business lobbies has centred on Washington’s outright refusal to abide by commitments on carbon dioxide reduction targets under the 1997 Kyoto Protocol.1 The impacts of military technologies on the world’s climate are not an object of discussion or concern. Narrowly confined to greenhouse gases, the ongoing debate on climate change serves Washington’s strategic and defence objectives.
‘Weather warfare’
World-renowned scientist Dr. Rosalie Bertell confirms that ‘US military scientists … are working on weather systems as a potential weapon. The methods include the enhancing of storms and the diverting of vapour rivers in the Earth’s atmosphere to produce targeted droughts or floods.’2 Already in the 1970s, former National Security advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski had foreseen in his book Between Two Ages that:
‘Technology will make available, to the leaders of major nations, techniques for conducting secret warfare, of which only a bare minimum of the security forces need be appraised… [T]echniques of weather modification could be employed to produce prolonged periods of drought or storm. ‘
Marc Filterman, a former French military officer, outlines several types of ‘unconventional weapons’ using radio frequencies. He refers to ‘weather war,’ indicating that the US and the Soviet Union had already ‘mastered the know-how needed to unleash sudden climate changes (hurricanes, drought) in the early 1980s.’3 These technologies make it ‘possible to trigger atmospheric disturbances by using Extremely Low Frequency (ELF) radar [waves].’4
A simulation study of future defence ‘scenarios’ commissioned for the US Air Force calls for:
‘US aerospace forces to ‘own the weather’ by capitalising on emerging technologies and focusing development of those technologies to war-fighting applications… From enhancing friendly operations or disrupting those of the enemy via small-scale tailoring of natural weather patterns to complete dominance of global communications and counterspace control, weather modification offers the war fighter a wide range of possible options to defeat or coerce an adversary… In the United States, weather modification will likely become a part of national security policy with both domestic and international applications. Our government will pursue such a policy, depending on its interests, at various levels’.5
The High-frequency Active Auroral Research Programme (HAARP)
The High-frequency Active Auroral Research Programme (HAARP) based in Gokoma, Alaska – jointly managed by the US Air Force and the US Navy – is part of a new generation of sophisticated weaponry under the SDI. Operated by the Air Force Research Laboratory’s Space Vehicles Directorate, HAARP constitutes a system of powerful antennas capable of creating ‘controlled local modifications of the ionosphere’. Scientist Dr. Nicholas Begich – actively involved in the public campaign against HAARP – describes HAARP as:
‘A super-powerful radiowave-beaming technology that lifts areas of the ionosphere [upper layer of the atmosphere] by focusing a beam and heating those areas. Electromagnetic waves then bounce back onto earth and penetrate everything – living and dead.’6
Dr. Rosalie Bertell depicts HAARP as ‘a gigantic heater that can cause major disruption in the ionosphere, creating not just holes, but long incisions in the protective layer that keeps deadly radiation from bombarding the planet.’ 7
Misleading public opinion
HAARP has been presented to public opinion as a programme of scientific and academic research. US military documents seem to suggest, however, that HAARP’s main objective is to ‘exploit the ionosphere for Department of Defence purposes.’8 Without explicitly referring to HAARP, a US Air Force study points to the use of ‘induced ionospheric modifications’ as a means of altering weather patterns as well as disrupting enemy communications and radar.9
According to Bertell, HAARP is part of an integrated weapons system which has potentially devastating environmental consequences:
‘It is related to 50 years of intensive and increasingly destructive programmes to understand and control the upper atmosphere. It would be rash not to associate HAARP with the space laboratory construction which is separately being planned by the United States. HAARP is an integral part of a long history of space research and development of a deliberate military nature. The military implications of combining these projects [are] alarming. … The ability of the HAARP/Spacelab/rocket combination to deliver very large amount[s] of energy, comparable to a nuclear bomb, anywhere on earth via laser and particle beams, [is] frightening. The project is likely to be ‘sold’ to the public as a space shield against incoming weapons, or, for the more gullible, a device for repairing the ozone layer.’10
In addition to weather manipulation, HAARP has a number of related uses:
‘HAARP could contribute to climate change by intensively bombarding the atmosphere with high-frequency rays… Returning low-frequency waves at high intensity could also affect people’s brains, and effects on tectonic movements cannot be ruled out.11
More generally, HAARP has the ability to modify the world’s electromagnetic field. It is part of an arsenal of ‘electronic weapons’ which US military researchers consider a ‘gentler and kinder warfare’.12
Weapons of the New World Order
HAARP is part of the weapons arsenal of the New World Order under the SDI. From military command points in the US, entire national economies could potentially be destabilised through climatic manipulations. More importantly, the latter can be implemented without the knowledge of the enemy, at minimal cost and without engaging military personnel and equipment as in a conventional war.
The use of HAARP – if it were to be applied – could have potentially devastating impacts on the world’s climate. Responding to US economic and strategic interests, it could be used to selectively modify climate in different parts of the world, resulting in the destabilisation of agricultural and ecological systems.
It is also worth noting that the US Department of Defence has allocated substantial resources to the development of intelligence and monitoring systems on weather changes. The US National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and the Department of Defence’s National Imagery and Mapping Agency (NIMA) are working on ‘imagery for studies of flooding, erosion, land-slide hazards, earthquakes, ecological zones, weather forecasts, and climate change’ with data relayed from satellites.13
Policy inertia of the United Nations
According to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) signed at the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro:
‘States have… in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations and the principles of international law, the (…) responsibility to ensure that activities within their jurisdiction or control do not cause damage to the environment of other States or of areas beyond the limits of national jurisdiction.’14
It is also worth recalling that an international convention which entered into force in 1978 bans ‘military or any other hostile use of environmental modification techniques having widespread, long-lasting or severe effects.’15 Both the US and the Soviet Union were signatories to the Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques. The Convention defines ‘environmental modification techniques’ as referring to ‘any technique for changing – through the deliberate manipulation of natural processes – the dynamics, composition or structure of the Earth, including its biota, lithosphere, hydrosphere and atmosphere, or of outer space.’16
Why then did the UN – disregarding the ENMOD Convention as well as its own charter – decide to exclude from its agenda climatic changes resulting from military programmes?
European Parliament acknowledges impacts of HAARP
In February 1998, responding to a report of Mrs. Maj Britt Theorin – Swedish MEP (Member of the European Parliament) and longtime peace advocate – the European Parliament’s Committee on Foreign Affairs, Security and Defence Policy held public hearings in Brussels on HAARP.17 The Committee’s ‘Motion for Resolution’ submitted to the European Parliament:
‘Considers HAARP… by virtue of its far-reaching impact on the environment to be a global concern and calls for its legal, ecological and ethical implications to be examined by an international independent body…; [the Committee] regrets the repeated refusal of the United States Administration… to give evidence to the public hearing …into the environmental and public risks [of] the HAARP programme.’18
The Committee’s request to draw up a ‘Green Paper’ on ‘the environmental impacts of military activities’, however, was casually dismissed on the grounds that the European Commission lacks the required jurisdiction to delve into ‘the links between environment and defense’.19 Brussels was anxious to avoid a showdown with Washington.
Fully operational
While there is no concrete evidence of HAARP having been used, scientific findings suggest that it is at present fully operational. What this means is that HAARP could potentially be applied by the US military to selectively modify the climate of an ‘unfriendly nation’ or ‘rogue state’ with a view to destabilising its national economy.
Agricultural systems in both developed and developing countries are already in crisis as a result of New World Order policies including market deregulation, commodity dumping, etc. Amply documented, IMF and World Bank ‘economic medicine’ imposed on the Third World and the countries of the former Soviet bloc has largely contributed to the destabilisation of domestic agriculture. In turn, the provisions of the World Trade Organisation (WTO) have supported the interests of a handful of Western agri-biotech conglomerates in their quest to impose genetically modified seeds on farmers throughout the world.
It is important to understand the linkage between the economic, strategic and military processes of the New World Order. In the above context, climatic manipulations under HAARP (whether accidental or deliberate) would inevitably exacerbate these changes by weakening national economies, destroying infrastructure and potentially triggering the bankruptcy of farmers over vast areas. Surely national governments and the United Nations should address the possible consequences of HAARP and other ‘non-lethal weapons’ on climate change.
Notes
1. The latter calls for nations to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by an average of 5.2% to become effective between 2008 and 2012. See Background of Kyoto Protocol at http://www.globalwarming.net/gw11.html.
12. Don Herskovitz, ‘Killing Them Softly’, Journal of Electronic Defense, August 1993. According to Herskovitz, ‘electronic warfare’ is defined by the US Department of Defence as ‘military action involving the use of electromagnetic energy…’ The Journal of Electronic Defense at http://www.jedefense.com/ has published a range of articles on the application of electronic and electromagnetic military technologies.
A leading American climate scientist has said he felt “scared” when a shadowy organisation claiming to represent the CIA asked him about the possibility of weaponised weather.
Professor Alan Robock received a call three years ago from two men wanting to know if experts would be able to spot a hostile force’s attempts to upset the US climate.
But he suspected the real intention was to find out how feasible it might be to secretly interfere with the climate of another country.
…
A further twist in Prof Robock’s story concerns the CIA’s alleged co-funding of a major report on geoengineering published this week by the prestigious US National Academy of Sciences.
The report mentions the “US intelligence community” in its list of sponsors, which also includes the American space agency Nasa, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and the US Department of Energy.
Prof Robock said the CIA had told one of his colleagues it wanted to fund the report, but apparently did not want this fact to be too obvious.
“The CIA is a major funder of the National Academies report so that makes me really worried who is going to be in control,” he added.
He pointed out that the US had a history of using the weather in a hostile way. During the Vietnam War clouds were seeded over the Ho Chi Minh trail – a footpath-based supply route used by the North Vietnamese – to make the track muddy in an attempt to cut it off.
The CIA had also seeded clouds over Cuba “to make it rain and ruin the sugar harvest”.
During a press conference on the potential risks of geoengineering, Prof Robock was asked what its greatest hazard might be.
He replied: “The answer is global nuclear war because if one country wants to control the climate in one way, and another doesn’t want it or if they try to shoot down the planes … if there is no agreement, it could result in terrible consequences.”
On the first day of 2015, a strange thing happened: a surface earthquake in Vrancea, at a depth of 31 kilometers, followed by aftershocks, also surface, in Hungary, the Czech Republic and Slovakia. We mention that the Vrancea seismic zone is a deep one, where natural tectonic movements occur below 50 kilometers. In parentheses, it must be said that the surface earthquake can produce greater destruction than the deep one, but zonally, on a much smaller area.
Eventually, another 18 earthquakes followed in 14 days. Among them, on Monday, a surface earthquake of 4.1 degrees Richter was registered in Vrancea. Kind of strong… Provoked tectonic movements? According to the Ieşe weekly “7 est”, the physicist Constantin Antohi, associate professor at the Faculty of Hydrotechnical Cadastre and Environmental Engineering, within the Gheorghe Asachi Technical University, believes that these atypical earthquakes for the Vrancea area are not the result of natural tectonic activity, but are caused by the use of HAARP-like technology by the Russians, for military purposes. The earthquake interrupted the phone land-lines. “I felt one of the earthquakes and immediately wanted to call my wife. When I called… nothing! The phone was dead! Usually, when the networks are busy, you are told that the subscriber cannot be reached or something like that. Nothing appeared on my phone and I didn’t even hear a message”, declared Constantin Antohi. This oddity made the professor think, who came up with the idea that electromagnetic induction might have taken place.
“I also talked with my colleagues and I realized that an electromagnetic field was produced. I immediately thought of the HAARP phenomenon, based on the inventions of Nikola Tesla (no. – physicist and inventor). Some states have this technology, of emitting microwaves into the ionosphere, and from there, they are reflected to certain points on Earth, to create earthquakes. I think someone from the East is causing earthquakes in the Vrancea area. I think that someone doesn’t want us in NATO!”, said Professor Antohi. In support of his theory, Antohi says that this “HAARP phenomenon” can also cause climate change, something that has also happened here recently. The past few days, for example, our country oscillated within a few hours from temperatures of -15 degrees to plus 10 degrees. Practically, there are temperature jumps of over 20 degrees in just 24 hours. And these changes are too frequent, in the sense that after two or three very cold days, below the annual average, two or three warm days follow, above the annual average.
The HAARP phenomenon also changes the climate
“The HAARP phenomenon can produce these oscillations! At some point, an interruption of the circuit of long-wave atmospheric currents, which propagates rapidly from east to west, may occur. Interrupting, a depression is created, which attracts the current of warm air, from the Sahara”, states the physicist.
Many earthquakes with a large magnitude in 2014
According to a statistic of the National Institute for Earth Physics, in Romania, in the area of Vrancea, since 2009, more and more earthquakes with a magnitude greater than 4.5 have occurred. In 2009, three such earthquakes occurred, the largest being the one on April 25, with a magnitude of 5.4. In 2010, there were only two stronger ones, in 2011 there were also two larger ones, in 2012, one, so that in 2013, there were three, the largest having a magnitude of 5.3. As for last year, there were no less than eight earthquakes with a magnitude of over 4.5, the largest being the one on November 21, which had a magnitude of 5.6. In 2015, no less than five earthquakes have already occurred, three of which were 4.3 degrees.
HAARP (Active Auroral High Frequency Research Program) started in 1992 at the Geophysical Institute of the University of Alaska in Fairbanks. It is a scientific project created to determine the behavior of ozone, nitrogen and ions during the bombardment of solar and cosmic radiation, as well as the emission of high or low frequency radiation from the Earth. The project holder is the Department of Defense of the United States, through the US Navy and the US Air Force.
The similar European project, called EISCAT, an acronym for the European Incoherent Scatter Scientific Association, is located in Norway and Sweden, the participating countries being Great Britain, Germany, Norway, Sweden, Finland, China and Japan.
Russia has developed its own ionospheric research base at Vas i l surk, called SURA.
“Geophysical warfare is that type of conflict that uses environmental modification techniques for military purposes. From a geoclimatic point of view, snow, rain, fog, tornadoes, typhoons, cyclones, hurricanes, drought are created on demand, and from a geophysical point of view, earthquakes, volcanoes, landslides, directing asteroids and meteorites, all knowingly done against a potential enemy. This type of war, never declared, started in the 50s.
The most perfected systems in this category are the SURA System from the Russian Federation and HAARP from the USA”, says General Emil Străinu, the only Romanian who has a doctorate in the field of geophysical warfare .
Does Romania also have a geophysical weapon?
Romania also has a strange set of military antennas, which do not resemble anything that the Romanian army has used so far – but rather the HAARP network. It is a system consisting of approximately 40 antennas arranged in two rows. Several military containers are placed nearby – that is, the installation’s command center.
Not a single military specialist could specify what the array of antennas could be.
Moscow attacked Romania with a geophysical weapon before in 2005. At the end of June 2006, the Public Administration Committee of the Senate decided to establish a subcommittee to analyze the reasons for the catastrophic floods in the north of Moldova in 2005, which killed 38 people and devastated 476 localities. At the time, it was suspected that the Russians would have used geophysical weapons to cause torrential rains in Romania. The results of the investigation have remained secret, but simply raising the issue at this level suggests that the situation in the field of geophysical weapons is quite serious. Such technologies are used today in space espionage and in the testing, from a military point of view, of “space, to check the vulnerability of the enemy’s environment from the point of view of the operational response capacity in crisis situations.
Following the conflict in eastern Ukraine, these meteorological anomalies have increased due to the use of geophysical weapons in the confrontation between Russia and NATO forces. Romania, due to its geographical position, is a buffer zone and an experiment zone for such confrontations”, military analyst Silviu Crăescu (photo), president of the National Security Academy, told us.
Scandal in Haiti In 2010, political scientist Claudia von Werlhof of the University of Innsbruk, Austria, advanced the thesis that the 7.3-magnitude earthquake in Haiti in January 2010, following in which 230,000 people lost their lives, and another 300,000 were injured, would have been caused artificially, through the HAARP installation. Her statements created a huge international scandal, and the management of the university accused Werlhof of speaking inappropriately and harming the institution. – Libertatea, 2015
The development of devastating geophysical weapons as part of the United States’ Full Spectrum Dominance strategy is causing serious concern around the world. By Baffour Ankomah
The US military’s High Frequency Active Auroral Research Programme (HAARP), based at Gakona, Alaska, is the latest electromagnetic, geophysical warfare programme to raise concerns locally and internationally. So much is the concern that the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) once interrupted its news programme to run a 15-minute documentary, titled Geophysical Warfare, to alert its viewers.
HAARP’s origins go back to Nikola Tesla, the Serbian-American cult hero whose inventions have influenced so many of the technologies we use today. Tesla theorised about a “Tesla Shield” of electromagnetic weapons which, he said, would protect the Earth from missiles. He also talked about the possibility of electronic particles being turned into a weapon using a beam. In the 1920s and 30s, this idea became known as the ‘Death Ray’.
Tesla’s ideas greatly influenced Dr Bernard Eastlund, an American physicist, who finally registered a patent for an invention that could be used to change the weather, disrupt communications all over the world, and might be used to deflect a missile attack. The biggest attraction of Dr Eastlund’s idea was the ability to blast enemy ballistic missiles from the air.
Eastlund himself was interviewed by the History Channel for its documentary, and he explained that his original plan involved the building of a huge antennae, “big enough and powerful enough to make major modifications to the ionosphere. This was at the height of the Cold War. My focus was on the defence against a major Russian missile occurrence. The plan was to make a shield over Canada, over the United States, over the whole world, which a missile could not penetrate.”
Sky zapper
Eastlund told the CBC: “The basic concept was to build a very large antennae, then to utilise a large amount of power to beam those radio waves up into the upper atmosphere.” Asked if he had approached the US Pentagon with his invention, Eastlund said, “yes, but what I am not able to tell you is the details of what they are going to do.”
The CBC said an American delegate, identified only as Mr X, called the journalist who broke the original story and said: “the maniacs are actually going to do it, up in Alaska”. The maniacs were in the Pentagon and he was convinced that they were conspiring to build Bernard Eastlund’s sky zapper under the guise of a nice research project deep in the Alaskan bush called HAARP.”
Soon word spread in the Alaskan cold recesses and a band of suspicious Alaskans set out to warn people of what they saw as the US military’s secret agenda.
Eventually, HAARP was designed and built by BAE Advanced Technologies, the company Dr Eastlund used to work for. Official construction started in 1993, and the first functional facility was completed by the winter of 1994.
The project was jointly funded by the US Air Force, US Navy, the Defence Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), and the University of Alaska Fairbanks, but run by the US military between 1999 and 2014.
According to the US military, the project is “aimed at studying the properties and behaviour of the ionosphere, with particular emphasis on being able to understand and use it to enhance communications and surveillance systems for both civilian and defence purposes.
But if you believe this, you will also believe that pigs can fly. Judging from the urge to amass electromagnetic/geophysical weapons even before World War II, the benefit of the doubt should be given to Jim Roderick, an American anti-HAARP activist, who says: “The military is incapable of doing pure science. Science is conducted by them for application in weapon systems, for no other reasons.”
Though denied by HAARP officials, some respected researchers insist that HAARP was designed to achieve the US military’s stated goal of gaining full-spectrum dominance of the world from outer space by 2020.
The project was built based on the contents of a 600-page publication, titled Technical Memorandum 195, which the US military forbids its officials to publicly acknowledge.
The US military is not comfortable talking in public about Technical Memorandum 195 because it consists of notes from a secret conference on the breakdown of HAARP, where they were going to use the technology and how it was going to be applied.
In January 1999, the European Union described HAARP as a project of global concern and passed a resolution calling for more information on its health and environmental risks. Despite those concerns, officials at HAARP insist the project is nothing more sinister than a radio science research facility.
The EU resolution came with many bullet points. At bullet point 24, the EU “considers HAARP by virtue of its far-reaching impact on the environment to be a global concern and calls for its legal, ecological and ethical implications to be examined by an international independent body before any further research and testing.” But the US ignored the EU resolution.
Rather HAARP officials claim that “the radio waves in the frequency ranges that HAARP transmits are not absorbed in either the troposphere or the stratosphere – the two levels of the atmosphere that produce the Earth’s weather. Since there is no interaction, there is no way to control the weather.”
The CBC discovered that the small company that owned Eastlund’s patents was later swallowed up by a large military intelligence front company called E-Systems, which in turn was swallowed up by another bigger corporation that specialises in super-secret contracts with the Pentagon.
In the end, by 2014, when more eyes and tongues became focussed on HAARP and the controversy over its impact on the world’s weather system grew, the US military turned HAARP over to the University of Alaska Fairbanks (UAF) in August 2015 to be run by the university. But nobody was fooled
The Los Alamos Laboratory which was the principal site of the Manhattan Project that built the atomic bomb was operated by the University of California during World War II. Project Seal that experimented with the tsunami bomb was operated by the University of Auckland. So transferring HAARP to the control of the University of Alaska Fairbanks changes nothing about its essential military nature. In fact the military is only behaving to type.
Idai – experiment gone wrong?
Why people are questioning if Cyclone Idai was caused by a HAARP event gone awry is because the cyclone nearly coincided with the latest HAARP research campaign on 25-28 March 2019. Far from being “conspiracy theorists”, these people are not saying Idai was a direct electromagnetic attack on Mozambique or Zimbabwe, but that Idai could have been an electromagnetic experiment gone wrong.
Since HAARP was transferred to the University of Alaska Fairbanks in 2015, five research campaigns have been conducted: (a) 19-23 February 2017, (b) 21-25 September 2017, (c) 6-14 April 2018, (d) 30 July-1 Aug 2018, and (e) 29 Nov-3 Dec 2018.
Idai’s landfall on the Mozambican coast on the night of 14 March was 11 days before HAARP’s next advertised research campaign began on 25-28 March. All things being equal, one can safely say this research campaign might have had nothing to do with Idai.
But, as we all know, all things are not always equal in this world, particularly judging from how the world has been run in the past, and continues to be run, by the puppet masters. Therefore the people who are asking the world to look at Idai beyond it being a mere natural disaster deserve to be heard, even if they are making fools of themselves.
As at now, no one can say with an absolute yes that Idai was caused by electromagnetic warfare, or an absolute no that it was not caused by electromagnetic warfare. Only time will tell. But looking at the sheer quantum of the destruction wrought by Idai and the fierceness of the cyclone in general, one is tempted to say nature would have been more merciful if it sired this cyclone from its massive loins.
._____________
So it looks like we have to re-evaluate many events and many of our own beliefs, doesn’t it?
Here’s more food for thought:
Yes, nature is seriously deregulated by human activity, but not as advertised on TV. And it’s not OUR activity, it’s THEIRS, as per usual.
Put this on your list of things to be suspicious about: EVERYTHING that comes out these reality-inverters that populate your screens, but not your communities.
To be continued? Our work and existence, as media and people, is funded solely by our most generous supporters. But we’re not really covering our costs so far, and we’re in dire needs to upgrade our equipment, especially for video production. 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
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’
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.
“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.”
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
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.
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.
Counter-Extremism Project from Germany are German Jewish Ukraine-fanboy WEF types and they always try to spin the facts they present, but they give out some good scoops in the process and an intelligent and informed listener can weed out the BS and extract some valuable tips. As I did in the following video
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.
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.
How Russia foiled an US-UK program for grooming Nazis and sending them behind Russian lines SHARE VIDEO
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
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
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
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.
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
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
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.”
Посол України в Державі Ізраїль 🇺🇦 Геннадій Надоленко спростовує fake news в ізраїльській 🇮🇱 газеті “Haaretz”. The Ambassador of Ukraine 🇺🇦 to the State of Israel 🇮🇱 Hennadii Nadolenko refuted fake news in the Israeli newspaper "Haaretz". pic.twitter.com/hWDTYX455H
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.’”
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.”
This story is wild: Azov even has a "review" video of two models of Israel's "Tavor" rifles on its Nazi @YouTube channel. The weapons are assembled in Ukraine, but made under licences from Israel Weapons Industries, approved by the Israeli defence ministry. pic.twitter.com/xRfq4mcj8K
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.”
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. pic.twitter.com/hlGfL8pSAW
“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.”
The Ukrainian govt claims that I’m hiding behind the pseudonym “John Brown” to expose how Israel is arming its neo-Nazi Azov Battalion. 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. https://t.co/jdwwQucVwzpic.twitter.com/1yONyu5tFX
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.
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.
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 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
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.”
Israel avoids sanctioning oligarchs, 14 private jets arrive from Russia. Putin pal Roman Abramovich's Jet is on its way to Israel. He donated $100 Million to Elad, a settler org responsible for ethnically cleansing 1000s of Palestinians. Netanyahu himself gave him 🇮🇱 citizenship. pic.twitter.com/boW6ipJtzG
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 thantwo 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”.
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 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 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
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 supporters. But we’re not really covering our costs so far, and we’re in dire needs to upgrade our equipment, especially for video production. 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
SILVIEW.media 
