Wednesday 12 October 2022

EXPOSED: Before Ukraine blew up Kerch Bridge, British spies plotted it


Ukraine held talks with Britain for destruction of Crimean bridge

Ukraine held talks with Britain for destruction of Crimean bridge

Deputy of the Rada Goncharenko announced negotiations with Wallace on the destruction of the Crimean bridge, APA reports.

Ukraine held talks with British Defense Secretary Ben Wallace on a plan to destroy the Crimean Bridge at the NATO summit in June, Verkhovna Rada deputy Oleksiy Goncharenko said.

The parliamentarian drew attention to the statement of expert Igor Korotchenko, who said on the air of the Rossiya 1 TV channel that, according to some information, the plan for striking the bridge was allegedly being developed under the personal supervision of the head of the British military department.

“Ben Wallace and I discussed the plan to destroy the Crimean bridge back in June,” Goncharenko wrote, posting a photo from the talks, which, in addition to him and the head of the British Ministry of Defense, shows British Prime Minister Boris Johnson.

In July, Aleksey Arestovich, an adviser to the head of Vladimir Zelensky’s office, said that Ukraine could attack the Crimean Bridge as soon as the first technical opportunity appeared.

The secret British intelligence plot to blow up Crimea’s Kerch Bridge is revealed in internal documents and correspondence obtained exclusively by The Grayzone.

The Grayzone has obtained an April 2022 presentation drawn up for senior British intelligence officers hashing out an elaborate scheme to blow up Crimea’s Kerch Bridge with the involvement of specially trained Ukrainian soldiers. Almost six months after the plan was circulated, Kerch Bridge was attacked in an October 8th suicide bombing apparently overseen by Ukraine’s SBU intelligence services.

Detailed proposals for providing “audacious” support to Kiev’s “maritime raiding operations” were drafted at the request of Chris Donnelly, a senior British Army intelligence operative and veteran high ranking NATO advisor. The wide-ranging plan’s core component was “destruction of the bridge over the Kerch Strait.” 

Documents and correspondence plotting the operation were provided to The Grayzone by an anonymous source. 

The truck bombing of the Kerch Bridge differed operationally from the plot sketched therein. Yet, Britain’s evident interest in planning such an attack underscores the deep involvement of NATO powers in the Ukraine proxy war. At almost precisely the time that London reportedly sabotaged peace talks between Kiev and Moscow in April this year, British military intelligence operatives were drawing up blueprints to destroy a major Russian bridge crossed by thousands of civilians per day.

The roadmap was produced by Hugh Ward, a British military veteran. A number of strategies for helping Ukraine “pose a threat to Russian naval forces” in the Black Sea are outlined. The overriding objectives are stated as aiming to “degrade” Russia’s ability to blockade Kiev, “erode” Moscow’s “warfighting capability”,  and isolate Russian land and maritime forces in Crimea by “denying resupply by sea and overland via Kerch bridge.”

Read the complete blueprint: Support for Maritime Raiding Operations – Proposal

In an email, Ward asked Donnelly to “please protect this document,” and it’s easy to see why. Of these assorted plans, only the “Kerch Bridge Raid CONOPS [concept of operation]” is subject to a dedicated annex at the conclusion of Ward’s report, underlining its significance.

The content amounts to direct, detailed advocacy for the commission of what could constitute a grave war crime. Markedly, in plotting ways to destroy a major passenger bridge, there is no reference to avoiding civilian casualties.

Across three separate pages, alongside diagrams, the author spells out the terms of the “mission” – “[disabling] the Kerch Bridge in a way that is audacious, disrupts road and rail access to Crimea and maritime access to the Sea of Azov.”

Ward suggests that destroying the bridge “would require a cruise missile battery to hit the two concrete pillars either side of the central steel arch, which will cause a complete structural failure,” and “prevent any road re-supply from the Russian mainland to Crimea and temporally [sic] disrupt the shipping lane.”

An alternative “scheme” entails a “team of attack divers or UUVs [unmanned underwater vehicles] equipped with limpet mines and linear cutting charges” targeting a “key weakness” and “design flaw” in the bridge’s pillars.

This “flaw” is “several thin pylons used to support the main span,” which were intended to allow strong currents to flow underneath the Bridge with minimal friction. Ward pinpoints a particular area in which the depth of water around a set of pillars was just 10 meters, making it the “weakest part” of the structure.

In related emails obtained by The Grayzone, Chris Donnelly, the senior British army intelligence operative and former NATO advisor, declared the proposals to be “very impressive indeed.”

Reached by phone, Hugh Ward did not deny that he had prepared the Kerch Bridge destruction blueprint for Chris Donnelly.

“I’m going to have a chat with Chris [Donnelly] and confirm with him what he’s prepared for me to release,” Ward told The Grayzone, when asked directly if he drafted the “audacious” plan.

Asked again to confirm his role in the blueprint, Ward paused, then said: “I can not confirm that. I’ll have a chat with Chris first.”

A suicide attack on a $4 billion transportation artery 

At dawn on October 8th, an incendiary attack damaged the Kerch Bridge. A truck exploded, setting two oil tankers ablaze, causing two Crimea-bound spans of the roadway to collapse into the sea below, and killing three. 

While the affected section was quickly repaired and traffic resumed the next day, Western media has celebrated the incident as the latest Russian embarrassment and failure in the conflict with Ukraine. In some cases, journalists openly cheered and joked about what could plausibly be categorized as a war crime that claimed civilian lives.

The suicide strike targeted a connecting structure between Crimea and mainland Russia constructed at a cost of $4 billion, and whose opening provided a major public relations victory for the Kremlin, reinforcing Moscow’s renewed control of the majority Russian-speaking territory.

Upon its unveiling in May 2018, Russian President Vladimir Putin remarked:

“In different historical epochs, even under the tsar priests, people dreamed of building this bridge. Then they returned to this in the 1930s, the 40s, the 50s. And finally, thanks to your work and your talent, the miracle has happened.”

The Bridge has been heavily defended since February 24th, not least because it serves as a major transport route for military equipment to Russian soldiers in Ukraine. Russia has previously promised major reprisals in response to any strike on the structure. 

Following the attack, widespread euphoria erupted among Ukrainians, Ukrainian authorities, and Ukraine supporters on social media. Oleksiy Danilov, head of Ukraine’s national security and defense council, posted a video of the burning bridge alongside a black-and-white clip of Marilyn Monroe singing Happy Birthday, Mr. President — a reference to Putin turning 70 the same day.

Furthermore, Ukrainian media has reported via an anonymous source “in law enforcement agencies” that the attack was carried out by the Security Service of Ukraine. Yet, high-ranking Ukrainian officials, including chief presidential adviser Mykhailo Podolyak, are now backtracking, claiming instead that the incident was a Russian false flag. 

Such allegations have become commonplace in the wake of incidents in which Ukrainian – or Western – culpability seems likely or indeed certain, such as the Nord Stream pipeline explosions.

Lithuanian ex-Minister of Defense Audrius Butkevičius was involved in secret British intelligence plans to destroy Kerch Bridge.

Laying the foundations of World War III

While the attack on Kerch Bridge did not involve specialist divers, underwater drones or cruise missiles, there are indications that Ward’s plans were shared with the Ukrainian government at the highest levels. In fact, Chris Donnelly forwarded them to former Lithuanian Minister of Defense Audrius Butkevičius, before introducing the pair by email.

A leading figure in Lithuania’s anti-Communist movement, Butkevičius has admitted to deliberately leading pro-independence fighters into Soviet snipers’ line of fire on January 13th 1991. This incident is sometimes referred to as Vilnius’ “Bloody Sunday,” and is officially observed as the Day of the Defenders of Freedom. Butkevičius and his confederates knew the maneuver would provoke mass casualties, further inflaming the local population against Soviet leadership and encourage regime change, which is why they orchestrated it. 

More recently, Butkevičius co-owned Bulcommerce KS, a company that served as “the main intermediary in the supply of Bulgarian weapons and ammunition to Ukraine through third countries,” for use in the civil war in Donbas.

Butkevičius has been credibly accused of working for British intelligence. Email exchanges with Donnelly confirm he is in contact with Guy Spindler, a long-time MI6 officer who was posted in London’s Moscow Embassy concurrently with the infamous Trump-Russia “dossier” author Christopher Steele.

Reached by phone and asked if he reviewed the “Audacious” plan to destroy Kerch Bridge, Spindler told The Grayzone: “I have absolutely no idea what you’re talking about.”

Contemporary accounts suggest Spindler directly coordinated with Boris Yeltsin at the time of a failed coup against Mikhail Gorbachev in August 1991.

Butkevičius was also for many years a “senior fellow” at the Institute for Statecraft, a shadowy “charity” founded by Donnelly that manages a number of arm’s length military and intelligence operations on behalf of the British state and NATO, including the now notorious Foreign Office black propaganda unit, the Integrity Initiative.

Leaked Initiative files name Butkevičius as the organization’s key contact in Ukraine at the time of the country’s 2019 election. Three years earlier, he was one of the “escorting personnel” for five Ukrainian intelligence operatives whisked to London by the Institute for Statecraft in order to brief the British military on Russian “hybrid warfare” techniques. Alongside him was Vidmantas Eitutis, who at the time trained Ukraine’s army to conduct “active counterintelligence operations” in Luhansk.

In the Kerch Bridge sabotage proposal commissioned by Donnelly, Ward asks whether the Russian military knew how vulnerable the bridge supposedly was, and “what countermeasures could be expected” in response to its destruction (see image above).

The blitz of retaliatory missile strikes on Ukraine on October 10th provides a likely answer. It is also probable that if Ward’s outline was followed, Moscow’s reprisal would have been even more deadly, putting the lives of countless Ukrainians – and Russians – at significant risk.

Donnelly was clearly unmoved by such concerns, declaring the plans to be “very impressive indeed.”

A similar disregard for catastrophic consequences was evident in a private memo authored by Donnelly in March 2014, outlining “military measures” that Ukraine should take following Moscow’s seizure of Crimea. 

Stating that, “if I were in charge I would get the following implemented,” Donnelly advocated mining Sevastopol harbor using a “car ferry,” destroying fighter jets on Crimean airfields “as a gesture that they are serious,” using a “big microwave anti-satellite weapon” to take down Russian space installations, and turning to the West for oil and gas supplies. 

“I am trying to get this message across,” he concluded. These prescriptions have yet to be implemented, perhaps because they risk triggering an apocalyptic situation. Indeed, such “gestures” would amount to brazen provocations against a nuclear power, from which Ukraine’s oil and gas network was and remains exclusively designed to receive energy.

Yet it appears Donnelly and those around him would be content to see World War III erupt over Crimea. In fact, as the leaked documents obtained by The Grayzone will continue to demonstrate, provoking conflict between the West and Russia has long-been one of his ultimate objectives.

Monday 10 October 2022

Some apposite comments from Br. Bugnolo about the nature of the plandemic and "controlled opposition:

This morning I received an email from Israeli News Live which gave some details of how they have been under spiritual attack and Jana ben-Noon has been out of the picture for 9 months. I cannot give any more details than that but it took me back to wondering what happened to the TruNews team when they all got covid last year.

In contemplating what all this means it took me back to the words of Br. Alexis Bugnolo in his interview with Dr. Jane Ruby last week.

I have extracted his words to emphasise what he said.

It is the best definition of controlled opposition ( a concept I have always been adverse to) that I have heard

"They have a hierarchy of truths that must be suppressed some at the highest red alert level, you can't go there. And that if you go there, they will come after you".....

...."If you started to betray them, you would be dead before you did it.

"So they do however, permit divergence from the narrative, they do permit. And they want operators and pawns on the table, who will take up the opposition narrative 80% 90%.

"But never the part that is most sensitive.

If you touch the sensitive truth, then you will be zapped"

Here is what he has said:

Here is his recent Manifesto for the free Peoples of the Earth

Brother Alexis Bugnolo (From Rome) - A Manifesto for the free Peoples of the Earth

In his interview Br. Bugnolo made some very interesting comments about what Dr. Malone apparently revealed.

Dr. Malone let the cat out of the bag

Brother Alexi Bugnolo raises very important questions and asks did ROBERT MALONE let the cat out of the bag? How can a vaccine contain gain of function? How can a vaccine be contagious? What were they really working on in the Wuhan lab? The answers to these questions will astound!

These are his comments to Dr. Jane Ruby

I am mindful of the logic of the main character in Umberto Eco's book, the Name of the Rose, another Franciscan friar, William of Baskerville

I cannot fault the Brother's impeccable logic but is he right?

All this took me back to an interview another person with an impeccable logic, Dr. David Martin with Reiner Fuellmich from last year.

Do they resonate with Br. Bugnolo's observations?

FULL INTERVIEW: There is No Variant - Not Novel - No Pandemic. Dr David Martin with Reiner Fuellmich

... not novel... no pandemic.. no variants... campaign of coercion & terror to address a stated objective. Dr David Martin, SG!! Who can tell us what the Vaxxed can do about this synthetic recombinant chimera protein?

"There was no novel Coronavirus. Check of gene sequence vs all patent records showed not novel since 1999! There are 120 patented pieces of evidence showing total fallacy of claim 'novel'!" 

Thursday 6 October 2022

Rand Scenario, Jan 2022: How US Can Destroy Germany - Involve It In War wth Russia

Weaken Germany to strengthen US: Alleged leaked RAND doc outlines plan to destroy Europe as 'political competitor'

RAND corporation offices
Either this leak is a brilliant piece of technothriller fiction - or it shows that collapse we are experiencing was Made in the U.S.A.

"How can we destabilize Europe?"

"How can we destroy Germany and make life hard for Russia at the same time?"

"How can we seize total control over all people, everywhere?"

Total conspiracy theory questions. Right?

Well, to be sure, what you are about to read may be such good technothriller writing that Tom Clancy would have a run for his money. However, this reportedly comes from none less than the RAND Corporation, which is a real and well-known think tank in California that makes it its business to think about how to do things. All kinds of things.

A few days ago a leaked document from RAND started to appear in the news cycle, even making it to Russia Today. It was a small piece but it did get international attention from RT's estimated 700 million English-speaking viewers. However, the scope of the story was not delved into very deeply, and understandably so, because it is an alleged leak and one without confirmation, and by the standards of truly good journalism, sources really do need to be verified.

However, having viewed the entire document, it seems necessary to bring its full text to your attention for reading and consideration. We have a link to it here:

And, yes, this is on Yandex, Russia's Google in essence. Take that as you will. However, the writing is very polished for the most part and it appears to be serious.

Here, though, I want to insert a few notes that make me distrust this document's authenticity, for your consideration:
  1. There are occasional missing articles, in a manner consistent with the errors Russians make when they write in English. These errors are arguable within the context of professional language, but they still exist in places that surprise me. I am an English grammar-nazi, so I see this stuff easily, especially since I live and work in Russia. Examples include, "This gap will be primarily filled with dollar and yuan." (American English would render this as, "This gap will be primarily filled by dollars and yuan" or "by the dollar and the yuan.")
  2. The title "Vulnerabilities in German and EU economy" should be rendered "Vulnerabilities in German and EU economies" or "Vulnerabilities in the German and EU economies" - the missing article and incorrect use of plural references gives me a moment of pause. At the very least, this would not pass my eyes as an editor!! If this is really from Rand, they need some help in their editing department. I am available...
  3. Reference to the Russian president as simply "Putin" - perhaps this is internal language for an internal document, but the reference is unprofessional and banal. It should be "President Putin" at least, in my view. By contrast, the two German leaders named are given both first and last names.
  4. Near the end of the document, which supposedly comes from Rand Corporation in California, there are the words, "neutralised" and "labour", which are spelled in the manner consistent with UK English, AND which is the common denominator for the English language as it is professionally used in Russia and Europe. Why do these words appear this way in a California-based company?
  5. The word "crossgovernmental" should be rendered as "cross-governmental."
  6. Also, the document presumes knowledge of "THE military conflict in Ukraine" a month before it actually begins. This is troubling, and it has two explanations: Either it is a fake, cleverly written AFTER the military operations began but made incorrectly to appear as before it, with the definite article THE being the giveaway that this was written in full knowledge of the war, which already exists. That is Possibility Number One. Possibility Number Two is that the military conflict in Ukraine itself was planned by RAND and is addressed in other documents besides this one. Similar "we already know about this" style references appear elsewhere in this document, as well.
There are probably more errors, but these all jumped out at me. Signs of a hoax or signs of something else? We leave it up to you, Dear Reader, to decide.

We only have the Executive Summary, but it is interesting to note the destinations for it. Here is the key for the alphabet soup that we see:

WHCS: The White House Chief of Staff

ANSA: Assisstant to the President for National Security Affairs

Dept. of State is obvious enough...

CIA: Central Intelligence Agency

NSA: National Security Agency

DNC: Democrat National Committee

Note that the RNC is not included in this destination list. Just keep that in mind.

What follows is the full text of the document's Executive Summary itself, but please look at the files to see the boilerplate introduction and the original documentation yourself:


Executive Summary: Weakening Germany, strengthening the U.S

The present state of the U.S. economy does not suggest that it can function without financial and material support from external sources. The quantitative easing policy, which the Fed has resorted to regularly in recent years, as well as the uncontrolled issue of cash during the 2020 and 2021 Covid lockdowns, have led to a sharp increase in the external debt and an increase in the dollar supply.

The continuing deterioration of the economic situation is highly likely to lead to a loss in the position of the Democratic Party in Congress and the Senate in the forthcoming elections to be held in November 2022. The impeachment of the President cannot be ruled out under these circumstances, which must be avoided at all costs.

There is an urgent need for resources to flow into the national economy, especially the banking system. Only European countries bound by EU and NATO commitments will be able to provide them without significant military and political costs for us.

The major obstacle to it is growing independence of Germany. Although it still is a country with limited sovereignty, for decades it has been consistently moving toward lifting these limitations and becoming a fully independent state. This movement is slow and cautious, but steady. Extrapolation shows that the ultimate goal can be reached only in several decades. However, if social and economic problems in the United States escalate, the pace could accelerate significantly.

An additional factor contributing to Germany's economic independence is Brexit. With the withdrawal of the UK from the EU structures, we have lost a meaningful opportunity to influence the negotiation of crossgovernmental decisions.

It is fear of our negative response which by and large determines the relatively slow speed of those changes. If one day we abandon Europe, there will be a good chance for Germany and France to get to a full political consensus. Then, Italy and other Old Europe countries - primarily the former ECSC members - may join it on certain conditions. Britain, which is currently outside the European Union, will not be able to resist the pressure of the Franco-German duo alone. If implemented, this scenario will eventually turn Europe into not only an economic, but also a political competitor to the United States.

Besides, if the U.S. is for a certain period is engulfed by domestic problems, the Old Europe will be able to more effectively resist the influence of the U.S.-oriented Eastern European countries.

Vulnerabilities in German and EU Economy

An increase in the flow of resources from Europe to U.S. can be expected if Germany begins to experience a controlled economic crisis. The pace of economic development in the EU depends almost without alternative on the state of the German economy. It is Germany that bears the brunt of the expenditure directed towards the poorer EU members.

The current German economic model is based on two pillars. These are unlimited access to cheap Russian energy resources and to cheap French electric power, thanks to the operation of nuclear power plants. The importance of the first factor is considerably higher. Halting Russian supplies can well create a systemic crisis that would be devastating for the German economy and, indirectly, for the entire European Union.

The French energy sector could also soon begin to experience heavy problems. The predictable stop of Russian-controlled nuclear fuel supplies, combined with the unstable situation in the Sahel region, would make French energy sector critically dependent on Australian and Canadian fuel. In connection with the establishment of AUKUS, it creates new opportunities to exercise pressure. However this issue is beyond the scope of the present report.

A Controlled Crisis

Due to coalition constraints, the German leadership is not in full control of the situation in the country. Thanks to our precise actions, it has been possible to block the commissioning of the Nord Stream 2 pipeline, despite the opposition of lobbyists from the steel and chemical industries. However, the dramatic deterioration of the living standards may encourage the leadership to reconsider its policy and return to the idea of European sovereignty and strategic autonomy.

The only feasible way to guarantee Germany's rejection of Russian energy supplies is to involve both sides in the military conflict in Ukraine. Our further actions in this country will inevitably lead to a military response from Russia. Russians will obviously not be able to leave unanswered the massive Ukrainian army pressure on the unrecognized Donbas republics. That would make possible to declare Russia an aggressor and apply to it the entire package of sanctions prepared beforehand.

Putin may in turn decide to impose limited counter-sanctions - primarily on Russian energy supplies to Europe. Thus, the damage to the EU countries will be quite comparable to the one to the Russians, and in some countries - primarily in Germany - it will be higher.

The prerequisite for Germany to fall into this trap is the leading role of green parties and ideology in Europe. The German Greens are a strongly dogmatic, if not zealous, movement, which makes it quite easy to make them ignore economic arguments. In this respect, the German Greens somewhat exceed their counterparts in the rest of Europe. Personal features and the lack of professionalism of their leaders - primarily Annalena Baerbock and Robert Habeck - permit to presume that it is next to impossible for them to admit their own mistakes in a timely manner.

Thus, it will be enough to quickly form the media image of Putin's aggressive war to turn the Greens into ardent and hardline supporters of sanctions, a 'party of war'. It will enable the sanctions regime to be introduced without any obstacles. The lack of professionalism of the current leaders will not allow a setback in the future, even when the negative impact of the chosen policy becomes obvious enough. The partners in the German governing coalition will simply have to follow their allies - at least until the load of economic problems outweighs the fear of provoking a government crisis.

However, even when the SPD and the FDP are ready to go against the Greens, the possibility for the next government to return relations with Russia to normal soon enough will be noticeably limited. Germany's involvement in large supplies of weapons and military equipment to the Ukrainian army will inevitably generate a strong mistrust in Russia, which will make the negotiation process quite lengthy.

If war crimes and Russian aggression against Ukraine are confirmed, the German political leadership will not be able to overcome its EU partners' veto on assistance to Ukraine and reinforced sanctions packages. This will ensure a sufficiently long gap in cooperation between Germany and Russia, which will make large German economic operators uncompetitive.

Expected Consequences

A reduction in Russian energy supplies - ideally, a complete halt of such supplies - would lead to disastrous outcomes for German industry. The need to divert significant amounts of Russian gas for winter heating of residential and public facilities will further exacerbate the shortages. Lockdowns in industrial enterprises will cause shortages of components and spare parts for manufacturing, a breakdown of logistic chains, and, eventually, a domino effect. A complete standstill at the largest in the chemical, metallurgical, and machine-building, plants is likely, while they have virtually no spare capacity to reduce energy consumption. It could lead to the shutting down of continuous-cycle enterprises, which would mean their destruction.

The cumulative losses of the German economy can be estimated only approximately. Even if the restriction of Russian supplies is limited to 2022, its consequences will last for several years, and the total losses could reach 200-300 billion euros. Not only will it deliver a devastating blow to the German economy, but the entire EU economy will inevitably collapse. We are talking not about a decline in economy growth pace, but about a sustained recession and a decline in GDP only in material production by 3-4% per year for the next 5-6 years. Such a fall will inevitably cause panic in the financial markets and may bring them to a collapse.

The euro will inevitably, and most likely irreversibly, fall below the dollar. A sharp fall of euro will consequently cause its global sale. It will become a toxic currency, and all countries in the world will rapidly reduce its share in their forex reserves. This gap will be primarily filled with dollar and yuan.

Another inevitable consequence of a prolonged economic recession will be a sharp drop in living standards and rising unemployment (up to 200,000-400,000 in Germany alone), which will entail the exodus of skilled labour and well-educated young people. There are literally no other destinations for such migration other than the United States today. A somewhat smaller, but also quite significant flow of migrants can be expected from other EU countries.

The scenario under consideration will thus serve to strengthen the national financial condition both indirectly and most directly. In the short term, it will reverse the trend of the looming economic recession and, in addition, consolidate American society by distracting it from immediate economic concerns. This, in turn, will reduce electoral risks.

In the medium term (4-5 years), the cumulative benefits of capital flight, re-oriented logistical flows and reduced competition in major industries may amount to USD 7-9 trillion.

Unfortunately, China is also expected to benefit over the medium term from this emerging scenario. At the same time, Europe's deep political dependence on the U.S. allows us to effectively neutralise possible attempts by individual European states to draw closer to China.


So, there it is. What do you think?

The team at have a great report on this:

Certainly the occurrences in the world since February 24 of this year are a pretty close match to what is specified in this document, dated only a month earlier. The successful management of propaganda in the US and in the West overall has got governments in supposedly liberal democracies now treating Russians - actual regular Russian citizens in a manner that would have done old Adolf proud. With statements from new popular attractive party wannabe fascists like Finland's prime minister Sanna Marin saying things like "Visiting Europe is a privilege, not a right" and "It is time to end tourism from Russia now" coming from Estonian PM Kaja Kallas.

Both women, incidentally. Feminists? Probably.

The US economy is definitely self-destructing, thanks to Imposter Biden and his puppeteers. It does seem that President Putin is outmaneuvering the PLAN, but he appears to have been caught up in it at least from early points. We have yet to see what Russia does after the recent "counteroffensive" by the Ukrainians in the area around Kharkov. The silence from Moscow on this speaks volumes, and while speculation about it goes in all directions (Just read Western papers!), it also says this: "We are not worried. We will decide the next moves and when we are ready to act, we will."

This is a very confident stance, and Russia has gotten it right so many times in this conflict that it seems safe to assume this is the stance and not "oh, my God what do we do now!?"

Here in Moscow there is no sense of panic, and Moscow is far more liberal than many Russian cities, so there are more people here that would tend to look askance at the government than in other places. Some of them have spoken out, but very few, and there is no sense of "you better not say what you think" in place. (This points to the need to write about how one handles dissent in time of war - something the United States has long forgotten, but that is for another time.)

Something is coming, for sure. However, the premise shown by the "RAND letter" if true, is outrageous and stunning. It shows that the United States is the architect behind all of this, and that the whole war, perhaps even COVID, the economic gyrations - all of these are the machinations of some very powerful people who wish to preserve, consolidate and strengthen that power.

It makes even more sense in light of dozens of FBI raids on Trump supporters, which started to happen at an accelerated pace following the Imposter's "Red Speech."

OF COURSE the Rand Corporation have denied it!

Fake RAND Report on 'Weakening Germany'


September 14, 2022

A supposedly leaked RAND report about a bizarre U.S. conspiracy to “weaken Germany” is fake.

Genuine RAND research, analysis, and commentary on the war in Ukraine may be found at this page.

Given the potential origins of this fake document, we encourage you to explore this resource on the “firehose of falsehood” approach to propaganda and RAND's extensive research on “Truth Decay,” a phenomenon driven in part by the spread of disinformation.

The documents are stored on Yandex