False Flag Dirty Nuke Imminent In Ukraine? Russia Is Calling It Out

WeR0206

Well-Known Member
Apr 9, 2014
20,352
26,077
1
2020evidence.org

This is a very similar environment to what was happening in Syria in 2013. Same deep state playbook.



There is an uptick in the panicked speculation about Ukraine using a dirty bomb in order to fabricate a pretext that would justify NATO’s intervention in Ukraine. Reminds me a lot of the previous efforts by the Brits and the Yanks to manufacture a crisis in Syria in August 2013 that would compel the United States and the Brits to send their troops to aid Islamic rebels seeking to overthrown Syrian leader Assad. Barack Obama had vowed in August of 2012 that any use of chemical weapons by Assad’s government would represent crossing a red line that would be followed by retaliation by the West. Why did Obama balk at responding to this alleged crime against humanity by Syria? Sy Hersh provided the answer:

The answer lies in a clash between those in the administration who were committed to enforcing the red line, and military leaders who thought that going to war was both unjustified and potentially disastrous.
We may be on the cusp of a new fabricated provocation–this one involving a dirty nuke. The Russian General Staff are taking this threat seriously and are on the phone to Turkey, France and China to warn about this plot to detonate a dirty bomb and blame Moscow. The Russians clearly learned the lessons from Syria and sarin. Remains to be seen if the current U.S. military leadership has the backbone their predecessors displayed in August 2013.

Let me take you back 9 years to August 2013. Washington’s political class had Syrian fever–i.e., they were hot and anxious to overthrow Syria’s Bashir Assad and the news channels were peppered with dire predictions of Assad’s imminent demise. Then came word of an alleged “sarin” gas attack on Syrian civilians by Assad’s military. At least that this the story the media was pushing.

I was working inside a SCIF at Fort Bragg at the time and had access to the intelligence reports about the attack at Ghouta. General Michael Flynn was the head of DIA at the time. In contrast to the propaganda being spun by State Department’s INR, the CIA and the media–i.e., that the Syrian rebels were steamrolling the Syrian government and, wait for it, Syrian President Assad was on the ropes–DIA did a great job of honestly reporting the combat activity and the order of battle. The DIA reports told an entirely different story–the Syrian Army was making progress in containing the rebel uprising and the combat effectiveness of the rebels was waning.

Then came the alleged sarin attack by the Syrian government at Ghouta. Turns out this was a lie. Sy Hersh got the story and did, as always, first rate reporting:

Obama’s change of mind had its origins at Porton Down, the defence laboratory in Wiltshire. British intelligence had obtained a sample of the sarin used in the 21 August attack and analysis demonstrated that the gas used didn’t match the batches known to exist in the Syrian army’s chemical weapons arsenal. The message that the case against Syria wouldn’t hold up was quickly relayed to the US joint chiefs of staff. The British report heightened doubts inside the Pentagon; the joint chiefs were already preparing to warn Obama that his plans for a far-reaching bomb and missile attack on Syria’s infrastructure could lead to a wider war in the Middle East. As a consequence the American officers delivered a last-minute caution to the president, which, in their view, eventually led to his cancelling the attack. . . .
The joint chiefs also knew that the Obama administration’s public claims that only the Syrian army had access to sarin were wrong. The American and British intelligence communities had been aware since the spring of 2013 that some rebel units in Syria were developing chemical weapons. On 20 June analysts for the US Defense Intelligence Agency issued a highly classified five-page ‘talking points’ briefing for the DIA’s deputy director, David Shedd, which stated that al-Nusra maintained a sarin production cell: its programme, the paper said, was ‘the most advanced sarin plot since al-Qaida’s pre-9/11 effort’. (According to a Defense Department consultant, US intelligence has long known that al-Qaida experimented with chemical weapons, and has a video of one of its gas experiments with dogs.) The DIA paper went on: ‘Previous IC [intelligence community] focus had been almost entirely on Syrian CW [chemical weapons] stockpiles; now we see ANF attempting to make its own CW … Al-Nusrah Front’s relative freedom of operation within Syria leads us to assess the group’s CW aspirations will be difficult to disrupt in the future.’ The paper drew on classified intelligence from numerous agencies: ‘Turkey and Saudi-based chemical facilitators,’ it said, ‘were attempting to obtain sarin precursors in bulk, tens of kilograms, likely for the anticipated large scale production effort in Syria.’ (Asked about the DIA paper, a spokesperson for the director of national intelligence said: ‘No such paper was ever requested or produced by intelligence community analysts.’)
When the first reports surfaced about the attack in Ghouta I immediately started looking at the intelligence briefs to the Joint Chiefs of Staff that were published in the days prior to the attack. I reasoned that if the Syrian military was the culprit then the United States intelligence community would have detected the Syrian chemical weapons units standing up and making preparations for the attack. Why? Because the United States was part of warning system for Israel. There was the fear that Syria might use chemical weapons against Israel and the United States was using its technical means to monitor the activity of the Syrian military units that would carry out such an attack. The Syrians used a binary chemical weapon system. This means that two chemicals had to be mixed together in order to create a deadly brew. That type of activity can be detected by intelligence technical measures. Oddly, there was no prior intelligence indicating any activity by the Syrian military in the days preceding Ghouta. Nothing. Nada. Zero. Zip.

Would you be surprised to learn that British and CIA intelligence officers may have been involved in the Ghouta plot with the mission of manufacturing a casus belli that would allow the United States and the United Kingdom to intervene militarily in Syria?

Which brings us back to Ukraine. There is serious concern that the West is once again trying to concoct a false flag that can be used to rally a reluctant public to go to war with Russia. Instead of chemical weapons, the current scheme reportedly involves detonating a dirty nuke in territory ostensibly under the control of Russia. The Ukrainian military is suffering catastrophic casualties and, western propaganda notwithstanding, will have great difficulty sustaining any offensive. The United States and its NATO allies realize this and are searching for a pretext to send NATO forces to the rescue. It appears that the West is considering using the threat of defeating a nuclear attack as the justification for sending its own forces into the Ukrainian maelstrom.

I think the Ukraine situation is far more dangerous than what transpired in Syria. Russia’s national security is at stake and the West is panicked at the prospect of Ukraine being beaten into submission. At least Russia is doing the right thing–moving preemptively to warn relevant countries that it knows what is being plotted and that it will take appropriate actions to counter such an attack if it occurs. We are sitting on a nuclear powder keg. Pray that cooler heads prevail.”
 

WeR0206

Well-Known Member
Apr 9, 2014
20,352
26,077
1
2020evidence.org
You're a moron wrapped around a idiot
Coming from you that's a compliment, and thanks for the bump! You're probably one of the morons that believe Assad gassed his own people despite the fact that analysis showed the gas didn't come from his stockpiles and that it would be a good idea to arm violent extremist "rebels" in both Syria and Ukraine to foment regime change. Run along now.
 

WeR0206

Well-Known Member
Apr 9, 2014
20,352
26,077
1
2020evidence.org
Ok Commie

Imagine buying the gaslighting by Russia. If this scumbag was alive in 1942 he would be rooting for Hitler
Lulz! I'm very much against commies and nazis (two sides to the same coin IMO). In fact one of the reasons I'm not blindly supporting Urkaine is they were never denazified after WW2 and are in effect being run by a totalitarian dictator who silences all political dissent. They have nazis holding high level govt positions (deputy PM, etc.).

Speaking of gaslighting check out all these msm articles from pre 2022 that talk about them being infested with nazis....then suddenly in 2022 they were all magically refromed...fancy that!

https://www.newsweek.com/evidence-war-crimes-committed-ukrainian-nationalist-volunteers-grows-269604 (Ukrainian Nationalist Volunteers Committing 'ISIS-Style' War Crimes)

https://www.hrw.org/news/2014/07/24/ukraine-unguided-rockets-killing-civilians (Ukraine: Unguided Rockets From AFU Killing Civilians)

https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/EUR50/040/2014/en/ (Ukraine: Abuses and war crimes by the Aidar Volunteer Battalion in the north Luhansk region)

https://thehill.com/opinion/interna...in-the-ukraine-is-far-from-kremlin-propaganda (The reality of neo-Nazis in Ukraine is far from Kremlin propaganda)

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ukraine-crisis-farright-insight-idUSBREA2H0K620140318 (Nazis held 5 senior roles in the new Ukrainian govt that was installed in 2014)

https://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/09/world/europe/ukraines-ultranationalists-do-well-in-elections.html (Ukraine’s Ultranationalists Show Surprising Strength at Polls)

https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-20824693 (Svoboda: The rise of Ukraine’s ultra nationalists/neonazis)
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Ronnie_B

maypole

Well-Known Member
May 9, 2022
2,218
894
1
Lulz! I'm very much against commies and nazis (two sides to the same coin IMO). In fact one of the reasons I'm not blindly supporting Urkaine is they were never denazified after WW2 and are in effect being run by a totalitarian dictator who silences all political dissent. They have nazis holding high level govt positions (deputy PM, etc.).

Speaking of gaslighting check out all these msm articles from pre 2022 that talk about them being infested with nazis....then suddenly in 2022 they were all magically refromed...fancy that!

https://www.newsweek.com/evidence-war-crimes-committed-ukrainian-nationalist-volunteers-grows-269604 (Ukrainian Nationalist Volunteers Committing 'ISIS-Style' War Crimes)

https://www.hrw.org/news/2014/07/24/ukraine-unguided-rockets-killing-civilians (Ukraine: Unguided Rockets From AFU Killing Civilians)

https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/EUR50/040/2014/en/ (Ukraine: Abuses and war crimes by the Aidar Volunteer Battalion in the north Luhansk region)

https://thehill.com/opinion/interna...in-the-ukraine-is-far-from-kremlin-propaganda (The reality of neo-Nazis in Ukraine is far from Kremlin propaganda)

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ukraine-crisis-farright-insight-idUSBREA2H0K620140318 (Nazis held 5 senior roles in the new Ukrainian govt that was installed in 2014)

https://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/09/world/europe/ukraines-ultranationalists-do-well-in-elections.html (Ukraine’s Ultranationalists Show Surprising Strength at Polls)

https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-20824693 (Svoboda: The rise of Ukraine’s ultra nationalists/neonazis)
Syria? L O L. You do love your dictators, don’t you Ivan?
 
  • Like
Reactions: franklinman

WeR0206

Well-Known Member
Apr 9, 2014
20,352
26,077
1
2020evidence.org
In 2016, the United States committed to arming Ukraine to fight and win a war against Russia. Subsequently, the US Department of Defense organized a biological research program in Ukraine, and then huge amounts of nuclear fuel were secretly transferred to the country. These data change the interpretation of this war: it was not wanted and prepared by Moscow, but by Washington neocons/neoliberals.

https://www.voltairenet.org/article217092.html
 

JR4PSU

Well-Known Member
Sep 27, 2002
41,089
12,435
1
SE PA


This is a very similar environment to what was happening in Syria in 2013. Same deep state playbook.



There is an uptick in the panicked speculation about Ukraine using a dirty bomb in order to fabricate a pretext that would justify NATO’s intervention in Ukraine. Reminds me a lot of the previous efforts by the Brits and the Yanks to manufacture a crisis in Syria in August 2013 that would compel the United States and the Brits to send their troops to aid Islamic rebels seeking to overthrown Syrian leader Assad. Barack Obama had vowed in August of 2012 that any use of chemical weapons by Assad’s government would represent crossing a red line that would be followed by retaliation by the West. Why did Obama balk at responding to this alleged crime against humanity by Syria? Sy Hersh provided the answer:


We may be on the cusp of a new fabricated provocation–this one involving a dirty nuke. The Russian General Staff are taking this threat seriously and are on the phone to Turkey, France and China to warn about this plot to detonate a dirty bomb and blame Moscow. The Russians clearly learned the lessons from Syria and sarin. Remains to be seen if the current U.S. military leadership has the backbone their predecessors displayed in August 2013.

Let me take you back 9 years to August 2013. Washington’s political class had Syrian fever–i.e., they were hot and anxious to overthrow Syria’s Bashir Assad and the news channels were peppered with dire predictions of Assad’s imminent demise. Then came word of an alleged “sarin” gas attack on Syrian civilians by Assad’s military. At least that this the story the media was pushing.

I was working inside a SCIF at Fort Bragg at the time and had access to the intelligence reports about the attack at Ghouta. General Michael Flynn was the head of DIA at the time. In contrast to the propaganda being spun by State Department’s INR, the CIA and the media–i.e., that the Syrian rebels were steamrolling the Syrian government and, wait for it, Syrian President Assad was on the ropes–DIA did a great job of honestly reporting the combat activity and the order of battle. The DIA reports told an entirely different story–the Syrian Army was making progress in containing the rebel uprising and the combat effectiveness of the rebels was waning.

Then came the alleged sarin attack by the Syrian government at Ghouta. Turns out this was a lie. Sy Hersh got the story and did, as always, first rate reporting:


When the first reports surfaced about the attack in Ghouta I immediately started looking at the intelligence briefs to the Joint Chiefs of Staff that were published in the days prior to the attack. I reasoned that if the Syrian military was the culprit then the United States intelligence community would have detected the Syrian chemical weapons units standing up and making preparations for the attack. Why? Because the United States was part of warning system for Israel. There was the fear that Syria might use chemical weapons against Israel and the United States was using its technical means to monitor the activity of the Syrian military units that would carry out such an attack. The Syrians used a binary chemical weapon system. This means that two chemicals had to be mixed together in order to create a deadly brew. That type of activity can be detected by intelligence technical measures. Oddly, there was no prior intelligence indicating any activity by the Syrian military in the days preceding Ghouta. Nothing. Nada. Zero. Zip.

Would you be surprised to learn that British and CIA intelligence officers may have been involved in the Ghouta plot with the mission of manufacturing a casus belli that would allow the United States and the United Kingdom to intervene militarily in Syria?

Which brings us back to Ukraine. There is serious concern that the West is once again trying to concoct a false flag that can be used to rally a reluctant public to go to war with Russia. Instead of chemical weapons, the current scheme reportedly involves detonating a dirty nuke in territory ostensibly under the control of Russia. The Ukrainian military is suffering catastrophic casualties and, western propaganda notwithstanding, will have great difficulty sustaining any offensive. The United States and its NATO allies realize this and are searching for a pretext to send NATO forces to the rescue. It appears that the West is considering using the threat of defeating a nuclear attack as the justification for sending its own forces into the Ukrainian maelstrom.

I think the Ukraine situation is far more dangerous than what transpired in Syria. Russia’s national security is at stake and the West is panicked at the prospect of Ukraine being beaten into submission. At least Russia is doing the right thing–moving preemptively to warn relevant countries that it knows what is being plotted and that it will take appropriate actions to counter such an attack if it occurs. We are sitting on a nuclear powder keg. Pray that cooler heads prevail.”
WeR, who has been threatening nuks for months, now?
 

WeR0206

Well-Known Member
Apr 9, 2014
20,352
26,077
1
2020evidence.org
I haven't heard Ukraine make any nuclear threats. Could you point me to one?
If Ukraine made the threats it wouldn't make sense b/c they aren't supposed to have any nukes. The threats came from NATO countries/leaders. I'll look for some links but they will be hard to find now. This was several months ago. Lots of blustering from both sides.

Also as a side note, check out this prank call where the Ministry of Defense in the UK said he'd be open to giving Ukraine Nukes


Video #5

INSANE: Phony Ukraine PM asks for help with nuclear weapons & actual British Defence Secretary replies UK “will support Ukraine” if they “want to explore new weapons.”

Apparently there were even wilder segments removed due to potential impact on “the national security of the UK”

https://files.catbox.moe/yewc5o.mp4


Video #6

British Defence Secretary advises a man he incorrectly believes to be the Ukrainian Prime Minister to “just be very careful” about efforts to acquire nuclear weapons.

As a signatory to Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, the UK “can’t be seen to be” involved.

In other words: CYA.

https://files.catbox.moe/z2vpqu.mp4
 

JR4PSU

Well-Known Member
Sep 27, 2002
41,089
12,435
1
SE PA
If Ukraine made the threats it wouldn't make sense b/c they aren't supposed to have any nukes. The threats came from NATO countries/leaders. I'll look for some links but they will be hard to find now. This was several months ago. Lots of blustering from both sides.

Also as a side note, check out this prank call where the Ministry of Defense in the UK said he'd be open to giving Ukraine Nukes


Video #5

INSANE: Phony Ukraine PM asks for help with nuclear weapons & actual British Defence Secretary replies UK “will support Ukraine” if they “want to explore new weapons.”

Apparently there were even wilder segments removed due to potential impact on “the national security of the UK”

https://files.catbox.moe/yewc5o.mp4


Video #6

British Defence Secretary advises a man he incorrectly believes to be the Ukrainian Prime Minister to “just be very careful” about efforts to acquire nuclear weapons.

As a signatory to Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, the UK “can’t be seen to be” involved.

In other words: CYA.

https://files.catbox.moe/z2vpqu.mp4
Ukraine doesn't have nuclear weapons, but they do have nuclear powerplants, which could be a source of fissionable material for a dirty bomb. So, to say they don't have nucs, is sort of not correct.

So, I'll ask again, has Ukraine ever threatened the use of nuclear weapons, to include, since Russia has raised the specter, dirty bombs.
 

The Spin Meister

Well-Known Member
Nov 27, 2012
27,083
32,602
1
An altered state
Ukraine doesn't have nuclear weapons, but they do have nuclear powerplants, which could be a source of fissionable material for a dirty bomb. So, to say they don't have nucs, is sort of not correct.

So, I'll ask again, has Ukraine ever threatened the use of nuclear weapons, to include, since Russia has raised the specter, dirty bombs.
You don’t need fissionable material for a dirty bomb, which is a bomb with radioactive materials in it. You could various isotopes like found in x Ray machines, many industrial tools, even old smoke detectors. And using the stuff in nuclear reactors would be quite dangerous to work with.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WeR0206

WeR0206

Well-Known Member
Apr 9, 2014
20,352
26,077
1
2020evidence.org
Ukraine doesn't have nuclear weapons, but they do have nuclear powerplants, which could be a source of fissionable material for a dirty bomb. So, to say they don't have nucs, is sort of not correct.

So, I'll ask again, has Ukraine ever threatened the use of nuclear weapons, to include, since Russia has raised the specter, dirty bombs.
Zelensky just recently was imploring the west to do a pre-emptive nuclear strike on Russia. Pre-emptive. Let that sink in. I made a thread about.. Will find the link.

He says don't wait for them to nuke us and then retaliate with a nuke, you guys do a pre-emptive strike to show them you mean business:
You don’t need fissionable material for a dirty bomb, which is a bomb with radioactive materials in it. You could various isotopes like found in x Ray machines, many industrial tools, even old smoke detectors. And using the stuff in nuclear reactors would be quite dangerous to work with.
True. Things are def escalating over there. When shit does pop off there will be so much info coming from all directions (by design) it will be very hard to sift through the noise.
 

JR4PSU

Well-Known Member
Sep 27, 2002
41,089
12,435
1
SE PA
You don’t need fissionable material for a dirty bomb, which is a bomb with radioactive materials in it. You could various isotopes like found in x Ray machines, many industrial tools, even old smoke detectors. And using the stuff in nuclear reactors would be quite dangerous to work with.
All radioactive materials are quite dangerous to work with. But thank you for validating my point as far as Ukraine having the necessary materials for a dirty bomb.

Btw, old smoke detectors aren’t going to give you enough to make any dirty bomb to instill any kind of fear.

But I’ll ask my question again for WeR. Has Ukraine ever threatened to use nucs of any sort?
 

JR4PSU

Well-Known Member
Sep 27, 2002
41,089
12,435
1
SE PA
Zelensky just recently was imploring the west to do a pre-emptive nuclear strike on Russia. Pre-emptive. Let that sink in. I made a thread about.. Will find the link.

He says don't wait for them to nuke us and then retaliate with a nuke, you guys do a pre-emptive strike to show them you mean business:


True. Things are def escalating over there. When shit does pop off there will be so much info coming from all directions (by design) it will be very hard to sift through the noise.
How did you inflate pre-emptive to pre-emptive nuclear strike?

So, one more time. Has Ukraine ever threatened the use of nucs of any sort?

I don’t understand why you can’t simply admit that it has only been Russia threatening the use of nucs. No one else.
 

WeR0206

Well-Known Member
Apr 9, 2014
20,352
26,077
1
2020evidence.org
How did you inflate pre-emptive to pre-emptive nuclear strike?

So, one more time. Has Ukraine ever threatened the use of nucs of any sort?

I don’t understand why you can’t simply admit that it has only been Russia threatening the use of nucs. No one else.
Bc that’s not true. I watched a nato/western official talking about using nukes against russia. I think it was someone from the UK. Looking for msm links for you.
 

JR4PSU

Well-Known Member
Sep 27, 2002
41,089
12,435
1
SE PA
Bc that’s not true. I watched a nato/western official talking about using nukes against russia. I think it was someone from the UK. Looking for msm links for you.
One more time. Has Ukraine ever threatened the use of nucs? This is really easy. I don’t understand why you refuse to answer the question.

This is about you accusing Ukraine of a false flag operation, not NATO.
 

WeR0206

Well-Known Member
Apr 9, 2014
20,352
26,077
1
2020evidence.org
One more time. Has Ukraine ever threatened the use of nucs? This is really easy. I don’t understand why you refuse to answer the question.

This is about you accusing Ukraine of a false flag operation, not NATO.
Lulz! You actually think there’s a difference between the two? If Ukraine had any nukes they would have probably already used them. Why do you want to focus on the sock puppet instead of the hand?
 

The Spin Meister

Well-Known Member
Nov 27, 2012
27,083
32,602
1
An altered state
Lulz! You actually think there’s a difference between the two? If Ukraine had any nukes they would have probably already used them. Why do you want to focus on the sock puppet instead of the hand?
But they don’t have any nukes BECASUE THEY GAVE THEM BACK TO RUSSIA IN RETURN FOR OUR GUARANTEE TO PROTECT THEM FROM RUSSIA.