Connect with us

Trending

U.S. & British intelligence are lying about involvement in build up to Ukraine/Russia war, according to ex-CIA officer

Published

on

The New York Times recently published a significant expose shedding light on the Central Intelligence Agency’s (CIA) activities in Ukraine, revealing the establishment of twelve covert intelligence forward operating bases near Russia’s borders. Following the publication, Russia’s Foreign Ministry scrutinized the report, contesting the narrative put forth by the NYT, which suggests that Western intelligence agencies became actively involved in Ukraine only after the Euromaidan coup in February 2014.

“The CIA has helped Kiev to train its spies, and not just spies, but outright militants, extremists, terrorists, thugs. Everyone. And one of the most striking examples of this chain being set in motion occurred in 2013-2014. Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said, reacting to the NYT’s reporting. “Under the guise of democratic forces and civilians, those which took part in the Maidan were primarily trained at bases in Poland and the Baltic states. And we have spoken about this,” she said.

NATO countries’ intelligence services worked to establish bases and other infrastructure in Ukraine long before the 2022 escalation, the spokeswoman said, and not only on the border with Russia, but across the country.

According to the Times’ account, the CIA created a dozen secret spy bases in Ukraine near Russia over an eight year period going back to 2016, with the intelligence “partnership” supposedly taking “root a decade ago,” after Maidan-appointed spy chief Valentyn Nalyvaichenko contacted then-CIA director John Brennan and the MI6 asking them to help rebuild the Security Service of Ukraine (Ukrainian acronym SBU) “from the ground up.”

But, according to a former CIA officer Larry Johnson, this is not true.

“They’re lying about the U.S. role in those early stages,” says former CIA analyst and State Department Office of Counterterrorism expert Larry Johnson.

“They’re lying about the US and British role in helping create the coup and what happened in the Maidan. They’re acting like ‘oh, you know, the Maidan happened and then the CIA was contacted, after the fact’. Well that’s not true,”

Johnson told reporters, suggesting that the NYT is looking to create a narrative on the coup, the Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17 incident, the ‘Russia the aggressor’ story which ignores Ukraine’s punitive ‘Anti-Terrorist Operation’ in the Donbass starting in 2014, etc.

“You’ve got once piece of disinformation after another” in the story, according to the observer.

“And then, they’re saying that it was the United States trying to rein in Ukraine from carrying out all these terrorist attacks. So it’s really like we’re trying to send the message that ‘these attacks on Russia were not the fault of the United States, it was the Ukrainians acting on their own,’” which is another patent falsehood, Johnson said.

“We’ve had connections [with Ukrainian anti-Soviet and anti-Russian elements] going back to 1955. I mean the CIA’s role in dealing with the Banderites goes back into the late 1940s and early 1950s. They’re trying to portray that this is like some new relationship or just over the last 10-15 years. That’s nonsense,” the former CIA analyst emphasized.

Johnson suggested that the timing of the expose amidst the escalating proxy war in Ukraine, Russia’s advances in the Donbass region, and the potential withdrawal of US and European arms assistance to Kiev, may indicate Washington’s inclination to conclude its involvement in the Ukrainian project.

“I think this is a sign that the end is near for Ukraine. That’s the only reason they’re leaking it now. Because the Ukrainians themselves are putting that information out,” Johnson said. “It’s a sign that the rats are starting to leave the sinking ship. This is their way to say that it’s not the fault of the United States. You know, ‘we did everything we could, it’s these crazy Ukrainians.’ This is part of a ‘blame Ukraine’ [narrative],” the observer noted.

As for the dozen clandestine bases mentioned in the piece, Johnson expressed confidence that Russia knew about these facilities, and likely has taken or will take action to eliminate them.

“If I’m Russian intelligence, you’re going to blow those sites up,” he said. “The bases are not going to be that close to Russian territory because the Russians can easily take them out. And they almost exaggerate the kind of intelligence that’s collected. Again, if the CIA was really operating like the CIA is supposed to, that means they would have recruited human sources in the SBU already. That would have been passing them information without admitting or acknowledging it. But that’s not what was going on. This is what they call an open liaison service, so the information is being passed freely.”

The CIA “sets up bases in every friendly territory. These are bases for facilitating the work of the CIA,” including technical, operational and human intelligence, says Rustem Klupov, a Russian reserve colonel, Hero of Russia and veteran of military intelligence.

“For a military specialist in the areas of intelligence and counterintelligence [details on the 12 secret CIA bases in Ukraine] aren’t any sort of sensational or incredible news,” Klupov told Sputnik, pointing out that similar facilities exist in Georgia and other post-Soviet republics into which US spies have been invited. “The bases are needed to place their laboratories, their technical intelligence equipment, to have facilities for stationing agents or special intelligence forces,” so as not to have to drag all this infrastructure across the ocean.

The observer emphasized that the CIA operates as a spy and military-political organization, aiming to establish favorable conditions for US soft power through special operations, including espionage and sabotage. He noted that wherever the CIA is involved, questionable activities tend to occur. Drawing parallels, the veteran Russian officer highlighted the establishment of similar bases prior to the Arab Spring protests in 2011. He suggested that the CIA’s training and preparation during those times were geared towards potential conflicts in Eastern Europe, with objectives including sowing discord among neighboring and fraternal peoples.

Klupov highlighted the strategic approach of the United States, emphasizing their historical tendency to play the long game in global conflicts, dating back to the First World War. He suggested that Ukraine’s role within the Soviet Union and its aftermath represented a long-term project for the US. Klupov speculated that Ukrainian officers sought favor with the CIA by sharing secret documents, potentially dating from the Soviet era to post-USSR interactions with Russia. He emphasized the underlying economic motivations in modern conflicts, such as the proxy war in Ukraine. Klupov stressed that the ultimate aim is the collapse of Russia, driven by its vast natural resources. He warned of the potential consequences for Russia if it hadn’t intervened in Ukraine, foreseeing the establishment of American bases with advanced weaponry near its borders.

Trending

International Criminal Court Considers Arrest Warrants for Israeli and Hamas Leaders

Published

on

Israeli officials are increasingly concerned that the International Criminal Court (ICC) is preparing to issue arrest warrants for senior government officials in connection with the conflict involving Hamas, according to information from five Israeli and foreign officials.

The officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity due to the sensitive nature of the matter, believe that the ICC is also considering arrest warrants for leaders from Hamas, the Palestinian militant group.

The potential charges against Israeli officials could include allegations of obstructing humanitarian aid delivery to the Gaza Strip and employing an overly aggressive response to Hamas-led attacks on Israel. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is among those speculated to be named in a warrant, although the specific individuals from Hamas and the crimes involved remain unclear.

The Israeli officials did not disclose the basis of their concerns regarding potential ICC action, and the court declined to comment on the issue.

If the ICC proceeds with arrest warrants, it could be viewed internationally as a significant moral indictment, particularly against Israel, which has faced criticism for its actions in Gaza, including from U.S. President Joe Biden.

The potential impact of such warrants on Israel’s military policies is also a consideration. One official indicated that the possibility of ICC action has influenced recent Israeli decision-making.

The status of the ICC process remains unclear, with the issuance of warrants requiring approval from a panel of judges and not necessarily leading to immediate arrests or trials.

Karim Khan, the ICC’s chief prosecutor, has previously confirmed investigations into incidents during the conflict but declined to comment for this article, citing a policy against addressing media speculation.

Prime Minister Netanyahu, in response to speculation about arrest warrants, voiced opposition to any ICC intervention that he perceives as a threat to Israel’s right to self-defense.

The ICC, based in The Hague, is the world’s only permanent international court authorized to prosecute individuals for war crimes, genocide, and crimes against humanity. The court relies on member countries, not including Israel or the United States, to execute arrest warrants.

The conflict between Israel and Hamas, which escalated after a raid by Hamas in October, has resulted in significant casualties and damage on both sides. The ICC’s potential involvement raises complex legal and diplomatic questions amid ongoing tensions in the region.

Both Hamas and the Israeli military declined to comment on the ICC’s actions, and the Israeli defense minister’s office also refrained from making a statement.

The developments underscore the challenges of international legal accountability in complex geopolitical conflicts, emphasizing the ICC’s role in addressing alleged war crimes and promoting accountability for all parties involved.

SOURCE: NEW YORK TIMES

Continue Reading

Trending

Owen Wilson Rejected $12 Million Role in Film Depicting O.J. Simpson as Innocent

Published

on

Owen Wilson recently made headlines for turning down a lucrative $12 million offer to star in a controversial film titled The Juice, depicting O.J. Simpson as innocent of the murders of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman. Directed by Joshua Newton, the film, described as a “satirical thriller,” explores various conspiracy theories surrounding Simpson’s infamous 1995 murder trial.

In an interview with the Hollywood Reporter, Newton shared insights into the casting process, highlighting Wilson as the ideal choice for the role of Douglas McCann, an attorney who delved into the trial’s conspiracy narratives. Despite enthusiastic support from Wilson’s agent and an enticing financial offer, the actor declined the opportunity, expressing discomfort with the film’s premise. At the conclusion of a meeting in Santa Monica, Wilson candidly voiced his reservations, stating, “If you think I’m going to take the lead role in a movie about how O.J. didn’t do it, you’ve got to be kidding me.”

The film, originally titled Nicole & OJ, has since undergone production with Boris Kodjoe portraying O.J. Simpson and Charlotte Kirk as Nicole Brown Simpson. Newton aims to complete the movie by October 3, coinciding with the 29th anniversary of Simpson’s not-guilty verdict.

Wilson’s decision has sparked discussions about ethical considerations in film roles and the complexities of depicting real-life events in cinema. Despite differing opinions on the project’s premise, Wilson’s principled stance has been recognized as a testament to his commitment to personal values and artistic integrity in Hollywood.

Continue Reading

Trending

CIA Secret Report Reveals Warning to Russia of Terrorist Attack was Marked “Urgent” but Failed to Identify Target

Published

on

US warning regarding a potential terrorist attack at a concert venue in Russia was labeled as “urgent.” However, the warning, according to Hersh’s source, did not specify Crocus City Hall as the target, despite some media reports suggesting otherwise.

The CIA allegedly provided the warning to Russian intelligence before the concert at the Crocus City Hall marking it “urgent,” meaning that the data in it “was credible and near term,” Hersh quoted the official as saying.

“The highly secret report on the attack in Moscow was prepared by the Counterterrorism Center at CIA headquarters and delivered to the terrorism division of the Russian Federal Security Service located in the old KGB building in Moscow. Separate briefings were presented in person by the FBI officer at the embassy. This is an established relationship,” the official said.

The warning, however, did not mention Crocus City Hall near Moscow and only said that an attack was being planned at some “public gathering,” according to the official.

The information provided by the official is contrary to a Washington Post report published on Tuesday claiming that Crocus City Hall was specifically identified in the warning as the target of a terrorist attack.

On March 22, several armed men broke into Crocus City Hall, a major concert venue just outside Moscow, and started shooting at people. They also started a fire in one of the auditoriums, which was full of people ahead of a concert. The attack left 695 casualties, including 144 dead, according to the latest data from the Russian Emergencies Ministry.

The four main suspects in the case — all of them citizens of Tajikistan — tried to flee the scene in a car but were detained and charged with terrorism. Russian authorities believe the perpetrators planned to flee to Ukraine, where a safe haven had been arranged for them. An investigation is underway.

Later in March, The New York Times reported, citing European and US security officials, that the US intelligence agencies did not provide the Russian side with all the information they had about the threat of a terrorist attack at Crocus City Hall in the Moscow Region out of fear that Russian authorities might learn about their intelligence sources or methods of work.

Russian Federal Security Service (FSB) Director Alexander Bortnikov also said that the information transmitted by the United States on the preparation of a terrorist attack was of a general nature, and the Russian special services responded to it.

Continue Reading

Trending