Good news out of Russia - even the "non-system" opposition refuses to blame the Kremlin

Honestly, I never thought the day would come where I would have anything good to say about the Russian "liberal" or "democratic" "non-system" opposition but apparently this day has come today. To my surprise, all the leaders of this opposition have so far made very moderate and reasonable statement and all those which I have heard have apparently dismissed the notion that the Kremlin was behind the murder. Now this might be self-evident for most of us, but for the Russian "liberal" or "democratic" "non-system" opposition this is quite a change of tone.  Many have even said that this murder was a "provocation" (which in this context means "false flag"!) to destabilize Russia and create a crisis.  Even Irina Khakamada, normally a real crackpot, has said that this was either a "provocation" or the action of a small group of extremists.

Maybe they are aware that the Russian public will not "buy" it, maybe MH17 was too clearly a false flag, or maybe they simply had a momentary moment of decency, but as far as I know nobody pointed the finger at Putin (okay, somebody somewhere probably did, I am just not aware of it).  Again, this is quite remarkable.

Everybody, pro and anti Kremlin, agree that it is absolutely essential that this crime be solved.  Since I personally believe that this was a US/UK organized false flag, I fully expect that somebody will be found and, as we say in Russian, that the "(trail) end will end in the water" meaning that there will be no proof of western involvement.  If fact, even if the FSB *does* come across such proof, the Russians will most likely not make it public but use it behind the scenes.  As for those who organized it, they also need somebody to get caught because if nobody ever gets caught, then this looks way too professional, but if a small cell of, say,  rabid anti-Semitic nationalists, does get caught, then that exculpates all other possible suspects.  Considering that the crime happened 200m away from the Kremlin, and that the city center is laced with cameras, I fully expect an arrest in the next 48 hours, a week max.

The bottom line is that in Russia this false flag is already a clear failure, not even the notorious Russian "liberal" or "democratic" "non-system" opposition wants to touch this thing.  This is very good news indeed.  In the West, of course, this is a different story, the AngloZionist will use that to a max, no doubt here at all.

The Saker

PS: while we are discussing false flags, I often get the question of why Putin does not say that 9/11 was in inside job even though he must know.  Well, of course he knows, but ask yourself a simple question: why would he say anything?  What would Russia gain from doing this?  This would only further demonize him, and Russia, in the eyes of those who believe the official fairy tale and it would do nothing at all for Putin or Russia.  As for the fact - they are all out in the open, and have been for a long time, just as the JFK murder or Gladio, 7/7, the Bologna railway station bombing, Charlie-Hebdo and all the rest of them.  It is simply not Putin's job to share info with the western public, his job is to serve the Russian people.  Finally, though I personally doubt it, there is some possibility that some Russian security services were involved in the Moscow apartment bombings on 1999 so Putin might want to tread carefully here lest the US retaliates by revealing what they know.

Saker note @EVERYBODY PLEASE POST YOUR COMMENTS ON THE NEW BLOG!
This blog will CLOSE for comments on March 1st. The new one has the popular threaded comments and faster moderation:
http://thesaker.is/blog/  

Nemtsov murder: Putin warned about exactly this type of "false flag" two years ago

Already in February 2012 (two years ago!) Putin was warning Russians about exactly the kind of false flag which we just saw happening with the murder of Nemtsov.  See for yourself:


Note: the Russian word "provocatsiia" is often translated as "provocation" which is not incorrect as long as you are aware that in Russian "provocation" can mean "false flag", as it does in this context.  Putin is clearly warning about a false flag "sacrifice".

This video was emergency-translated by one of our "brother in arms", Tatzhit, to whom I am most grateful for this ultra-rapid translation.

As for the "liberal" or "democratic" "non-system" opposition it has already announced that it will convert the planned protest into a memorial rally.

We will keep you posted.

The Saker
Saker note @EVERYBODY PLEASE POST YOUR COMMENTS ON THE NEW BLOG!
This blog will CLOSE for comments on March 1st. The new one has the popular threaded comments and faster moderation:
http://thesaker.is/blog/ 

Breaking news: FALSE FLAG IN MOSCOW!

Boris Nemtsov has been shot dead in Moscow.  He was one of the most charismatic leaders of the "liberal" or "democratic" "non-system" opposition in Russia (please understand that in the Russian context "liberal" and "democratic" means pro-US or even CIA-run, while "non-system" means too small to even get a single deputy in the Duma).  He was shot just a few days before the announced demonstration of the very same "liberal" or "democratic" "non-system" opposition scheduled for March 1st. 

Nemtsov with Yushchenko

As I have already explained many times on this blog, the "liberal" or "democratic" "non-system" opposition in Russia has a popular support somewhere in the range of 5% (max). In other words, it is politically *dead* (for a detailed explanation, please read "From Napoleon to Adolf Hitler to Conchita Wurst").  In the hopes of getting a higher number of people to the streets the "liberal" or "democratic" "non-system"opposition allied itself with the ultra-nationalists (usually useful idiots for the CIA) and the homosexual activists (also useful idiots for the CIA).  Apparently, this was not enough.

And now, in *perfect* timing, Nemtsov is murdered.

We all know the reaction of the AngloZionists and their propaganda machine.  It will be exactly the same as for MH-17: Putin the Murderer!!! Democracy Shot!! Freedom Killed!! etc. etc. etc. etc.

There is no doubt in my mind at all that either this is a fantastically unlikely but always possible case of really bad luck for Putin and Nemtsov was shot by some nutcase or mugged, or this was a absolutely prototypical western false flag: you take a spent politician who has no credibility left with anyone with an IQ over 70, and you turn him into an instant "martyr for freedom, democracy, human right and civilization".

By the way if, as I believe, this is a false flag, I expect it to be a stunning success in the West and a total flop in Russia: by now, Russians already can smell that kind of setup a mile away and after MH-17 everybody was expecting a false flag.  So, if anything, it will only increase the hostility of Russians towards the West and rally them around Putin.  In the Empire, however, this will be huge, better than Politkovskaya or Litvinenko combined.  A "Nemtsov" prize will be created, a Nemtov statue will be place somewhere (in Warsaw?), the US Congress will pass a "Nemtsov law" and the usual combo package of "democratic hagiography" will be whipped-up.

What worries me most is that the Russian security services did not see this one coming and let it happen.  This is a major failure for the FSB which will now have a lot at stake to find out who did it.  I expect them to find a fall-guy, a patsy, who will have no provable contacts with any western services and who, ideally, might even have some contacts with the Russian services (like Andrei Lugovoi).

As for the "liberal" or "democratic" "non-system" - it will probably re-brand the upcoming protests as a "tribute to Nemtsov" thereby getting more people into the streets.

There are folks in Langley tonight who got a promotion.

The Saker
-------
Saker note @EVERYBODY PLEASE POST YOUR COMMENTS ON THE NEW BLOG!
This blog will CLOSE for comments on March 1st. The new one has the popular threaded comments and faster moderation:
http://thesaker.is/blog/  

The proof that Kramatorsk Tornado (Smerch) strike was a false flag by the Ukrainian side

Translated from Russian by Kristina Rus on February 11, 2015

 

Original translation here: http://fortruss.blogspot.com/2015/02/the-proof-that-kramatorsk-tornado.html  

Blogger Dragon First 
11 Feb, 2015 at 5:54
WHO, FROM WHERE AND WITH WHAT FIRED AT KRAMATORSK ON FEBRUARY 10, 2015?

Dear readers!

Today, your faithful servant tried to deal with the issues in the title.
Let's start with the last question:

WITH WHAT?

To answer this question we will need the pictures, published yesterday in the Ukrainian media, and videos posted by the residents of KRAMATORSK.

For those who haven't seen it:

Video # 1:

[Video transcript: "Oh, God! Boys! They fired at an airport and got it. Who fired?" - tr.]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RpHYLORu_KM

Without going into the details of the methodology of searching for the location, from which this video was filmed, after applying it to the terrain, it is highly probable to conclude that the main impact area of most of the exploded ammunition (or rather their damaging elements), was the KRAMATORSK airfield and the nearby area of garage, cottage and dacha [small summer houses with gardens - tr.] buildings.

Map # 1:



We see that the shrapnel was very scattered, covering a sufficiently large area. And yet, the video and the map do not give us a definite answer to the question "WITH WHAT?"

However, in video # 1 a gradual wave of a series of explosions is well observed - at first far away, then closer and closer to the point of filming. The direction of the wave is from the Southeast to the Northwest.

Towards the city center.

It was also hit. Almost in the heart of Kramatorsk fell the non-explosive, or unexploded elements of ammunition.

Video # 2:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BUmC4lAD-XY

There is another video with ammunition right in the yard of houses.

Video #3:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0oiLGEC6eR0

Here the address is named in the video:

It is a courtyard of the angular houses on Dvortsovaya street , #47, and Yubileynaya #23.

Will try to accurately establish the location of filming of video #2 using photos posted on the websites of Ukrainian media.

Photo 1:


Photo 2:

Photo 3:

Photo 4:

Photo 5:

Photo 6:

Photo 7:

Photo 8:


Thus, the exact address of the point of impact of the rocket on Video #2 - is Dvortsovaya street, between the houses #26 and #34

Photo 9:



Map № 3:


Same area, but zoomed in:
Map № 4:



Pictures from the location of filming of the Video #2, and the video itself allow us to determine the type of ammunition with a high probability.

For example, by comparison:

Here is an image of the same ammo taken in Syria:

Photo # 9:


And this a picture not from Syria:

Photo 10:



Dear reader!

You probably already guessed, where the photo #10 was taken?

And here is another photo of a rocket which fell at Dvortsovaya street, between the houses #26 and #34.

Zoomed in:

Photo № 11:



Do you see similarities between the last two pictures?

I will make it easy.

On pictures #9, 10 and 11, and the one below - is ammunition for multiple rocket launcher system "Smerch" (Tornado), 300 mm caliber, marked 9M55.
Figure 1:




Minimum firing range for this rocket - 20-25 kilometers (depending on modification). The maximum is 70 kilometers.

The projectile can be loaded with a monobloc high-explosive warhead or cluster striking elements.

A cluster warhead can contain 72 shrapnel, or more than 600 cumulative-shrapnel elements.

One "Tornado" launcher has 12 tracks for such missiles.

The area of damage - 672 000 square meters from one launcher.
Accuracy (dispersion) - of 0.3% of range

Now the question is: where did the fire came from?

You see, dear readers, any self-respecting ammunition rocket fired from a gun, or MRLS at an angle close to 45 degrees, flies along the trajectory, the path of which resembles a parabola with two branches. The ascending branch (red) will be more gentle and descending (blue)- more steep.

Figure 2:




A rocket, due to the stabilizer at the tail, behaves on the descending branch of the trajectory, as an arrow released from a bow. And if it hits the ground, then it strikes it at an angle, which is determined by the tangent to the trajectory at the point of the strike.

The tilt of the body of the projectile will always be in the direction, from which it had come. Plus or minus a few degrees. Even if it hits a concrete slab.

Where is the angle of the projectile directed, which had fallen between the houses # 26 and 34 on the Dvortsovaya street?

Let's look at the photo again.

The direction from which the rocket came is shown by the red arrow:

Photo 12:



Photo 13:



Photo 14:




As we see, the rocket came practically between the houses #24 and 34 on Dvortsovaya street from the direction of the yard and barely missed the street. 

Let's apply the point of impact and its direction to a satellite image.

Map 5:



The conclusion is simple - the rocket came from Southwest direction.

Now lets carefully apply the diagram onto the map of hostilities, regularly published on the pages of this blog. 

And then measure the maximum and minimum range of fire of MLRS "Tornado" [Russian - Smerch] in the Southwestern direction. We get the area, from which the strike was made.

Map 6:




Clarification:

Calculated direction of fire - thick blue-yellow arrow.

Green arrows - possible scattering of shells, plus the possibility of errors in the calculation. Brown dashed line defines the technically possible location of starting positions of MRLS Tornado, which fired on KRAMATORSK.

Until the nearest positions of NAF from there - not less than 35 km

By the way, dear reader!

Similar calculations of the trajectory of the rocket from the point of filming of video # 2 at the address of another point of impact (courtyard of houses #47 Dvortsovaya street, and #23 Yubilejnaya street, you may conduct yourselves.

If you do this faithfully, you will be surprised by arriving at the same results as myself!

Now to answer the question "Who fired?" we need to have just a drop of common sense. For the calculated area, from which KRAMATORSK was striked, is located deep inside the territory, which has been long and firmly in control of the forces of the ATO [Ukraine].

While it is  35 (thirty-five!) kilometers away from the nearest units of the armies of DPR and LPR.

Sincerely, Dragon First.

Update1:

About the scattering of the soil in a North-Westerly direction at the crater of the rocket.

Upon careful examination of the images it is clear that in the ground at the impact site was a kind of reinforced concrete structure. On photos No. 15 and 16 a beam of this structure is circled with a yellow oval. One end of the beam is exposed from the ground in the direction shown by the yellow arrow. This end took this position because the other end was "sunk" into the ground under the force of the rocket impact in the direction indicated by an orange arrow.

As a result of this shift, pieces of concrete, (the largest of which is shown by the broken yellow line) were elevated above the ground level and turned the layer of soil that has accumulated for the most part to the left from the direction of the flight of the rocket (shown with a large red arrow). 

On the left - because the rocket impact was not on the center of the structure, but its edge, or corner. With the same probability, the impact could be on the other edge of the structure, and then the soil would be pushed to the right, or behind the rocket relative to the direction of its path.

Photo 15:

Photo 16:

About the "maximum range" of "Tornado" being 120 km, specified in Wikipedia.

With all due respect to this source of information in the same article in the expanded table more detailed information about the maximum ranges of firing of different types of ammunition is provided. In particular, with cluster warheads, which were used in KRAMATORSK. 

Read CAREFULLY:

The maximum range for:
9M55K - 70 000 meters
9M55K5 - 70 000 meters 

And, about WHO fired:

Here are interesting photos with geotags:

http://codename-it.livejournal.com/773125.html

That's just one of them:

False Flag in Kramatorsk

As always before any important negotiation, the US backed junta has executed yet another false flag, this time by firing at the city of Kramatorsk.  For all the details, please click here for a full analysis in Russian and here for a machine translated version of the same article.  The bottom line is this: the missile strike came from a location to the southwest of Kramatorsk, at least 35 miles away from the closets Novorussian positions.

To add "moral credibility" to this latest false flag, Poroshenko invited the French pseudo-philosopher but Ueber-Zionist warmonger Bernard Henri Levi (aka BHL) to inspect the results for himself.  Good move, but to add absolutely unimpugnable moral authority, Poroshenko should have also invited Elie Wiesel too.

Poroshenko and BHL - but where is Elie Wiesel?

Maybe next time?

The Saker

Maidan snipers: who did or did not know? Everybody knew!

So this morning we have a "revelation": EU officials are discussing the reports that the Maidan snipers were not sent by Yanukovich but that they were insurgents firing on both sides.

Immense surprise everywhere!

Well, a few "minor fringe proponents of conspiracy theories" did mention something like that, but for the "proper and rational people" (the folks who watch TV and read the corporate media) this is a big surprise.

Might make you wonder who really did know about this.

I can tell you.  I have seen it happening many years ago, in the wars in Croatia, Bosnia and Kosovo.  Here is how this works:

How does intelligence work?

One good model of how intelligence works are the "three As": Acquisition, Analysis and Acceptance.  Let's look at them one by one:

Acquisition: this is the collection or raw data which includes translations of the world and, importantly, local press, and all other types of "open sources" such as blogs, magazines, press conferences and releases, official news bulletins etc.  The next level are the proprietary but not formally classified sources.  Think tank reports, banking documents, commercial documents, corporate memoranda, etc.  Then comes the level in which sources, methods and means must be protected and concealed from public view: informal conversations with officials, radio intercepts, conversations with bankers, with transportation officials (trucks, trains, airlines, shipping), reports from political and military attaches and exchanges with other intelligence services.  Actual "spying" or HUMINT also contributes to this level.  All these multi-level sources provide simultaneous raw data which is then analyzed on the next level:

Analysis: first, the data is usually classified by some source of system which gives a rating on a) the source itself (reliable? trustworthy?) and then b) on the information received (corroborated? credible?).  The information is then passed on to the next level analyst who will process it and make a synthesis of his/her main finding for his/her department head (by regions or specialization). These guys then go over the findings and typically present them in an inter-departmental meeting which then is submitted to the next level.

Acceptance: this is a crucial level because the folks getting the processed information from the analytical section are already not intelligence specialists, but generals (this is a political rank, really), politicians, government officials, etc.  They make the key judgment call as to what to do with the info they get.  They also get to express their satisfaction, or lack thereof, with the intelligence they get and that, in turn, has a direct career impact upon the senior department heads in charge of analysis.  In plain English this means that the top analysts take a big risk if they pass on "politically incorrect" or, rather, "politically unwanted" information up the chain of command.  They, in turn, will whether consciously or unconsciously promote those analysts who do not put them in this difficult situation.

This system works pretty well when dealing with low-visibility or politically neutral or minor issues.  But when a government places its full weight behind "theory A" this system often breaks down and begins sending up the chain of command information which will not result in career loss.  "Theory B" rapidly disappears.

The example of Bosnia:

I can personally attest to the fact that the vast majority of sources did report that the so-called "UN Safe Areas" in Bosnia, which were supposed to be entirely demilitarized, were chock full of Bosnian-Muslim forces and that most of them actually hosted a full Army Corps.  Likewise, everybody knew that the US and Turkey were flying in weapons and dropping them in huge amounts in the Bosnian-Muslim controlled areas.  Furthermore, most analysts were also aware the bombings of the Markale Market were not committed by Serb, but by unknown individuals shooting from Bosnian-Muslim areas.  In my experience this information was, however, usually simply ignored at the level of department heads.  It was not denied, mind you, and in private conversations all the department heads knew about it, but that is where it stopped.  The pretext?  Always the same one: "it's a rumor and a detail, not really relevant for the overall picture".  Nevermind that it came in from all sources, including high rated ones, and nevermind that this info was corroborated many times over.  And nevermind that it paints a totally different picture of a false flag operation which resulted in the US and NATO getting militarily involved.

Then, those who organized the false flag operation in the first place will use their contacts in the corporate media to leak the info. At this point the big and "reputable" media outlets will quote each other and literally bounce that story off each other, sometimes add a few "details" (aka complete fabrications) or pure speculations (really spins) to the story.  At which point all the politicians are presented with a mass media which literally screams "the world is flat!  the world is flat!" and a few highly classified reports which, at best, report that "some sources claim the world is round".  Guess with whom the politicians will go?

Back to the Maidan snipers intercept

Now listen carefully to Ashton's reaction to  news about the insurgent snipers:

"I think that they do want to investigate, gosh!" 

What?!  Is she seriously suggesting that the new regime, which came to power courtesy of these snipers, will actually investigate itself?  Is she that dumb?  Of course not!  But she is annoyed by this topic so she just tosses in a simple cop-out which basically means "I am not interested, let the Ukies handle it" (knowing full well that they won't).

Paet, by the way, immediately got the message and gives a new spin to his previous remark: he mentioned this info not because he is outraged, no, only because if this story takes on its own life this "will discredit the new coalition". Oh how nice of him, he worries that if the truth comes out the Eurofascists will be embarrassed.  Next time, he won't even bring it up.  Those central European politicians sure learn fast from their western masters.

But Ashton is not even happy with that, she wants to change the topic, and begins making general pious statements about how it is important that the Rada work well.

End of topic, turn the page, next!

This is how it's done.  I know. I lost my career over something like that.

As for the media, it is even worse.

There are two types of reporters in a conflict zone:

Type A: never leaves his fortified bunker/hotel and only attends the briefing of whichever side he is with.  Then he sends reports back home claiming that these reports come "from the battle zone".  He could get the same reports by videoconference sitting at home, but nevermind.

Type B: that is the true frontline reporter.  He does run around under bullets, he interviews local commanders, often on both sides, he spends nights drinking cheap booze with local mafia men or mercenaries and he is often very, very well informed.  In fact, his reports are often used by intelligence services (whether by agreement or by other methods).

Type A just parrots whatever he hears.  The problem with type B is that while he is typically very well informed, he also is typically highly partisan to one side or the other.  If he "turns local" and begins to have sympathies with the 'bad guys' he soon has to find new employers,  usually smaller magazines and newspapers, or his career ends.  But if he is on the side of the "good guys" (Empire puppets) then he often sees his role as a participant in the war.  He hates the other side and will use his audience to trash it as much as can be.  Bottom line: even if some reporters are very well informed, the system is such that their reports usually get buried in the small or local media.

There is one exception to this rule: specialized magazines.  During the war in Bosnia you could get far better information from magazines like the US Army's Parameters, the USN Proceedings or the Reports of the US Military Studies Office or the Occasional Papers of the Royal Military Academy at Sandhurst, than from the Washington Post or the Wall Street Journal.  This applies to non-English speaking countries too: France, Belgium, Russia, Brazil - they all have their specialized magazines which often are far better informed that the big press.

What does this all mean for you?

What this all means is that the information you are getting from your politicians or the corporate media is at best useless, and typically deliberate fabrications.  There is only one thing you can do about it: throw away your TV, throw away your radio, don't ever read the papers and basically cut off your brain form the sewage flow.  The next step is to get your info only on the Internet, preferably from "non-major" sources including: local media websites (by local I mean "local to the conflict area"), blogs, discussion groups, specialized and professional websites.

True, there is a lot of garbage on the Internet, so you need to do the same thing as analysts do: begin by rating your sources and then rely mostly on those you trust.  Likewise, you can also begin by rating the information itself.  Language can be a problem, but then built for yourself a list of sources which you trust and which know the local language.

And did you know that it is estimated that 80% of all the information used by a government is "open source" - available to the general public.  As for the 20% of it, it is mostly boring technical stuff which will become public after a while but which is critical now.  Not stuff you are ever going to need.

This is not as hard as it seems and most of us doing something similar instinctively.  With a little time and effort cutting yourself totally away from the corporate media and switching to an Internet based selection of sources you trust will give you a totally different view of the world.  If you are then later exposed to the corporate media you will be amazed by the nonsense you hear and you will wonder what the hell they are talking about on the Idiot Tube.  It's quite fun, really.  Or very discouraging.  Or both.

The exception:

There is one exception to this rule: the new big media which has appeared in recent years to present an anti-CNN option for the world.  First, al-Jazeera, then Russia Today, Telemundo, Press TV, etc.  They have vested interest in debunking the Imperial lies and in presenting the true facts.  However, the example of al-Jazeera which almost suddenly became a propaganda tool during the war on Libya should make us cautious and careful and always keep an eye on whether any of these Internet TV are becoming yet another propaganda tool.

Conclusion:

This sniper business is going nowhere.  Everybody knows about it, and nobody cares.  Just like everybody knows that the Right Sector and Svoboda are neo-Nazi parties, just like everybody knows that the new regime is illegal, illegitimate and that it came to power by deceit and by violence.  Everybody knows and nobody cares as long as "our SOBs win".  So use this opportunity to "retaliate" against the plutocracy which controls the entire informational space except the Internet and reject their sources.  All of them.

Kind regards and many thanks,

The Saker

Intercepted phone call between Estonian Foreign Minister Urmas Paet and Catherine Ashton: Snipers were hired by insurgents!

Good job SVR!  They apparently intercepted a telephone conversations between Foreign Minister Urmas Paet and Catherine Ashton, High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy for the European Union, which clearly shows that the Europeans knew that the snipers on the Maidan square were not sent by Yanukovich but by the insurgents.

Now let's see what the Western media does with this info.

Nice sound quality too :-)

The Saker

Putin dares Obama to bring his evidence to the UNSC

Important note: the word "provocation" in the English voice-over is a mistranslation from the Russian word провокация ("provokatsia") which, in this context, clearly means "false flag operation".  Putin is unambiguously stating that he knows that the Syrian military did not use chemical weapons but that this was a staged event.

US fabricated excuses for military intervention from Markale to Ghouta?

One of the labels which I have been using more and more recently is the "Bosnia v5 Chechnia v4 Kosovo v3 Libya v2 Syria v1" which refers to the fact that the Empire uses exactly the same trick over and over again to justify its military aggressions.

Though history is replete with false flag attacks, the end of the Cold War saw a systematization of a specific complex of measures designed to give a sophisticated illusion of an undeniable fact.  Here is how this works:

I will present a theoretical model and one example:

First, a high-visibility target is identified.  During the war in Bosnia, the most "visible" location was the city of Sarajevo, and the most "visible" location inside Sarajevo was the Markale market.  By "visible" I, of course, mean "visible to the media".

Second, a specific moment is chosen for the attack.  It can be right before or after a crucial negotiation, it can be made to coincide with an election, it can be matched to a religious or secular holiday or whatever other optimal moment in time is preferred.  In Bosnia the first "Markale market massacre" was intended to justify the use of NATO airpower against Bosnian-Serb artillery position while the second Markale market massacre was intended to justify a second wave of airstrikes against Bosnian-Serb forces.

Third, the actual false flag attack is conducted with the triple aim of having a maximum amount of killed civilians, to secure the maximal amount of media coverage and to coincide with the exact moment when the forces needed for the military intervention are ready.  The need for this maximization of casualties and coverage is explained by the fact that enough military specialists on the ground will inevitable have the expertise to see through the false flag and try to challenge the official version.  In Bosnia, the official narrative about the Bosnian-Serb responsibility was almost immediately challenged by no less than the UNPROFOR Commander Sir Michael Rose (for the first massacre) and by the UNPORFOR Sarajevo Intelligence Chief Colonel Andrei Demurenko (for the second massacre).  And, just in case anybody has doubts about this, I would note here that the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia has had to acquit the Bosnian-Serbs initially charged with the crime.

Finally, even if the accusation is absolutely ridiculous (like Gaddafi giving Viagra to his soldiers to rape Libyan woman), the vast majority of Western politicians will go along with it just to avoid appearing not "strong" enough "on" whatever entity dares to resist the Empire.

As for those who actually conducted the attack, all they need is "plausible deniability" (a CIA-coined expression meaning that it is possible that the US was not behind the attack).  I would even say that all the Empire needs is "short term plausible deniability" just because even if with time the false flag nature of the attack is proven beyond reasonable doubt, nobody cares.

Think of 9/11.  By now the fact that the destruction of WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 was caused by controlled demolition has been proven beyond any reasonable doubt.  I would even argue that the US government has implicitly admitted to this through its NIST report on WTC1 and WTC2 and almost explicitly admitted that through its report on WTC7.  So what?  Does anybody even care by now?  Of course not.

Most of the imperial false flag operations have been debunked, in most cases rather rapidly.  But in a world ruled by political expediency and, let's be honest, an almost total indifference to the very concept of "truth", that kind of debunking, while historically important, is operationally easy to ignore.  "We lied?  So what?  Whatcha gonna do about it".  After Saddams non-existing WMD the very notion that being caught lying is a problem has vanished.  Now the imperial politicians can lie all they want, with no consequences for that at all.

Which brings me to so-called "Ghouta" chemical attacks.

Key imperial politicians, Fabius in France, but also UK and Sweden and others, have already stated that this was an attack by Syrian forces.  They were in such a hurry to apportion blame that they could not even wait for any investigation.  They just "knew"!  Fabius even said that the guilty party should be punished by "force", but something tells me that he did not mean bombing the insurgents should the UN report blame them.  Besides, France is *already* bombing al-Qaeda in Mali, how could it possibly do the same thing in Syria were al-Qaeda are the "good guys"?

According to the Anglo media, the US is preparing for cruise missile strikes.

Now, to understand what that really means, one has to understand what cruise missiles stand for in the collective psyche of the US Democrats: Democrats use cruise missiles not only to destroy a target, but also to simply "appear strong" and get the Republicans off their backs.  I am thus quite sure that even if the White House fully understands that the Syrian military did not use chemicals 2 days after the arrival of the UN investigation team (if only because the attack might have been organized by the CIA), this will not at all prevent Obama to launch a series of cruise missile strikes just to appear strong, macho, with hair on his chest.  It will be easy to tell, by the way:

If the White House launches a sustained cruise missile strike campaign of at least 5 days, with each round of damage assessment followed by repeat attacks - then they are trying to intervene militarily on the side of the insurgency and tip the balance on the ground.

If the White House launches a one time series of cruise missile strikes lasting 24 or less, and then declares victory and stops, then its just a way to deal with the crazy Republicans and Neocons who always want blood, blood and more blood.

Finally, if the White House orders no strikes at all, then this means that this false flag operation was not a US or NATO one, but an "independent" effort of Wahabi crazies, probably with Saudi or Qatari complicity.

We shall know very soon.

The Saker

Ex-Argentina Jewish gov’t official to be probed in bombing

the JTA reports:

The Jewish ex-interior minister of Argentina will be investigated for his ties to the AMIA Jewish center bombing.

The Buenos Aires Federal Appeals Court last week ordered the probe of Carlos Vladimir Corach in connection with an illegal payment of $400,000 to Carlos Telleldin, an auto mechanic who was among those charged in the 1994 attack that left 85 dead and hundreds wounded.

Telleldin, who allegedly provided the car bomb that blew up the Jewish center, has not been indicted.

The three Appeals Court justices called on Federal Judge Ariel Lijo to investigate “the existence of concrete allegations involving Carlos Vladimir Corach, which have not been investigated until now” regarding the illegal payment to Telleldin.

Corach was interior minister during the Carlos Menem government in the 1990s. He was responsible for obtaining the building for the Holocaust Museum of Buenos Aires and was the main speaker at its inauguration. 
-------
Note: for context see here.

It Takes a Village, and Some… The Recent Attacks Against Israelis

by Soraya Sepahpour-Ulrich

On July 18, 2012, attack on an Israeli tourist bus in Bulgaria took the lives of 5 Israeli nationals, a Bulgarian, and the mysterious suicide bomber. It is reported that the suspect, a young Caucasian, had a fake Michigan driver’s license. According to Israeli Haaretz, a top Bulgarian official warned that it would be a “mistake” to blame a specific country or organization for the attack. However, Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had other ideas.

Quick to point the finger at Iran, Mr. Netanyahu called it an “Iranian terror network spreading throughout the world”. He added: "Exactly 18 years after the attack on a Jewish community center in Argentina, the Iranian terror continues to hurt innocent people." Apparently, it takes a village and some to set Iran up.

These serious allegations with a potential for disaster, demand scrutiny on several levels. The most fundamental question which needs to be addressed is who benefits from these attacks. One must question the location – location, location, location. And finally, analyze the empirical data.

Who Benefits?

In spite of Israel and its Washington lobbies pushing for a war against Iran, of late, prominent voices have adopted a less bellicose stance towards Iran and its nuclear program. The possibility of any military action against Iran which would undoubtedly lead to a closure of the world’s most important oil chokepoint, the Strait of Hormuz, has prompted politicians around the globe to opt for a diplomatic solution to end the impasse with Iran.

Somewhat optimistically, Iran is investing its efforts in diplomacy. While continuing to work towards a mutually acceptable solution with the P5+1, Iran is making extensive preparations for the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) summit it will be hosting in Tehran in August. Over the past three centuries, Iran has never initiated a war and it would seem unlikely that at this juncture Tehran would resort to terrorism and solicit condemnation and possibly war. On the other hand, the targeting and killing of Israeli citizens by Iran would serve to support and justify Netanyahu’s call for military action against Iran.

For Netanyahu, domestic dissatisfaction aside, Israel’s policy of settlement expansion, a policy which government appointed jurists called legal, has brought international condemnation. With the moderate Kadima party pulling out of government, leaving Netanyahu in charge of hard-line coalition opposed to Middle East peace, Israel needs support from its allies more than ever. Undoubtedly, Israel would have greater support as a victim instead of an aggressor.

Location, Location, Location

In addition to the Bulgaria attack, Mr. Netanyahu has blamed Iran for attacks in other countries, including the apparent foiled attack in Cyprus and the accusations leveled against Iran for plotting an attack in Kenya.

Bulgaria - Bulgaria and Israel have very cordial relations. In July 2011, an Israeli-Bulgarian declaration pledged wide range cooperation. A year later, on July 8th, Bulgaria’s former foreign minister Solomon Passy told The Times of Israel that Israel should aggressively seek to join NATO and the EU. Passy said: “Israel is part of Western civilization and of the Euro-Atlantic political culture and that’s why Israel shouldn’t be shy to vocally say that it wants to become a member of NATO, the EU and OSCE [Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe],”. Ten days later, an attack against Israel took place in Bulgaria.

Thailand – Thailand and Israel have had cordial relations with moderate and steady trade. In January 2012, Thailand recognized Palestine as an independent state. A month later, Israel blamed Iran for “terrorist attacks” in Bangkok. Allegedly, one of the perpetrators had carried his “Iranian” passport on him to carry out the mission.

India - India and Israel have had very amicable relations. On July 17, 2003, JINSA’s executive director delivered a speech in Washington to the US–India Political Action Committee International Conference on Terrorism in India in which he put Israel, the United States, and India in the same boat – as the number one on the terrorist hit list (Bonney 2008). In 2008, India launched Israel’s spy satellite into orbit. In spite of its close ties to Israel, India has not stopped trade with Iran. In fact, two days prior to the Israeli embassy staff in India were targeted on February 13, 2012, India defended its oil trade with Iran.

Georgia – Israel’s relations with Georgia are unique. It was widely reported in 2008 that Israel had the green light to attack Iran from Georgian territory. Israel is thought to have played a prominent role in the Russian-Georgian conflict (see link for full details of the relationship. In 2010, Georgia and Iran entered a new phase in their relationship and Nino Kalandadze, the Georgian deputy foreign minister expressed that “ties will further deepen”. As with India, Iran was blamed for the bomb attempts in Georgia.

Given the nature of Israel’s relations with these countries, one cannot definitively conclude why these countries were picked by the perpetrators of these crimes. Perhaps these Israeli allies are not safe for Israelis, or they are safe for false-flag operations.

Empirical Data

Mr. Netanyahu made a clear reference to 1994 saying: “Exactly 18 years after the attack on a Jewish community center in Argentina, the Iranian terror continues to hurt innocent people." The 1994 bombing in Argentina was blamed squarely on Iran without any evidence while all other voices were silenced. Prominent voices such as Rabbi Abraham Cooper, associate director of the Simon Wiesenthal Center in Los Angeles who suggested that [Argentine] government and military figures may have sought to embarrass the Menem government because of its decision to release the files” being investigated in the AMIA building at the time. An important project being carried out at the Argentine Israelite Mutual Association building was a review of previously secret government files that reportedly reveal how Nazis entered Argentina following World War II helped by Argentine officials. The review of the files had gone on for two years, but had not been completed at the time of the bombing. “Speculation centered on the possibility that former Argentine government and military officials, fearful of exposure, were responsible for the bomb attack." ¹

This is but one of the many instances where allegations against Iran have been made without any proof. However, there have been many instances where Israeli false flag operations have come to light.

Many reports as well as a detailed account (“Operation Cyanide”) reveals the Israeli plan to kill everyone on board the USS Liberty in 1967 and put the blame on Egypt. The survivors prompted President Johnson and Defense Secretary Robert McNamara to order the investigation to conclude the attack was a case of mistaken identity.

Israel has always had a knack for stealing passports and other IDs to carry out false flag operations. According to The New Zealand Herald (September 21, 2004)² Mossad agents tried to steal New Zealand passports, causing friction between New Zealand and Israel. It is not the first time this has come to light, according to the same source.

Mossad agents had stolen Canadian passports to assassinate a Jordanian leader. These are not isolated cases.

In January 2012, it came to light that Israeli Mossad officers recruited operatives belonging to the terrorist group Jundallah by passing themselves off as American agents.

According to two U.S. intelligence officials, while toting U.S. passports and posing as CIA officers, they recruited Jundallah operatives. One month later, in February, NBC reported that according to US officials, Israel armed and trained the terrorist MEK.

While there is plenty of empirical data to support that Israelis are not shy about false flag operations, one would be hard pressed to accept that Israel would carry out a false flag operation and kill its own. Not so.

The 1976 Operation Entebbe was a great tribute to Israeli courage and praise of Israeli commandos of the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) who rescued Israeli citizens at Entebbe airport in Uganda. But newly released British government documents reveal that the 1976 rescue of hostages, kidnapped on an Air France flight and held in Entebbe was a false flag operation – the file claims that Israel itself was behind the hijacking.

This “rescue operation” which became known as “operation Jonathan” in honor of the unit’s leader – Yonatan Netanyahu, the current Prime Minister’s brother. Yonatan was killed in the false flag operation – as were four other Israelis.

When it comes to Israel’s political agenda, no sacrifice is too great. A move against Iran will reverberate throughout the world. It is important for political leaders around the globe to understand that it may take a village to implement a political agenda, but it is up to them to make sure that the agenda does not destroy the global village.

Soraya Sepahpour-Ulrich is a Public Diplomacy Scholar, independent researcher and blogger with a focus on U.S. foreign policy and the role of lobby groups.

¹Jewish Center Bombed in Argentina. The Christian Century. Chicago:Jul 27, 1994. Vol. 111, Iss. 22, p. 716 (2 pp.)

²http://www.stormfront.org/solargeneral/library/www.fpp.co.uk/online/04/09/Israel_spy7.html 

Saker addendum: See this article about the Buenos-Aires bombing.