Nazi Roots of Ukraine’s Conflict

Few Americans understand the ugly history behind the Nazi-affiliated movements that have gained substantial power in today’s U.S.-backed Ukrainian regime. Western propaganda has made these right-wing extremists the “good guys” versus the Russian “bad guys,” as Jonathan Marshall explains.

By Jonathan Marshall
The latest issue of Foreign Policy magazine, one of the leading journals in its field, offers a two-page photo essay on “what to see, do, and buy” in Lviv, a picturesque city in the Western Ukraine. “Amid the turmoil that has rocked Ukraine over the past two years,” the article gushes, “Lviv has stood firmly as a stronghold of national culture, language, and identity.”

That’s one way of putting it. Another, less charitable way would be to note that Lviv has for nearly a century been a breeding ground of extreme Ukrainian nationalism, spawning terrorist movements, rabid anti-Semitism, and outright pro-Nazi political organizations that continue to pollute the country’s politics.

On the lovely cobblestone streets admired today by tourists flowed the blood of some 4,000 Jews who were massacred by locals in 1941, during the German occupation. They were egged on by the radical Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN), whose founder and wartime leader is today a national hero to many of his countrymen.

On April 28, 2011, the 68th anniversary of the formation of a Ukrainian Waffen-SS division, hundreds of people marched through Lviv, with support from city council members, chanting slogans like “One race, one nation, one Fatherland!”

Two months later, residents celebrated the 70th anniversary of the German invasion “as a popular festival, where parents with small children waived flags to re-enactors in SS uniforms,” according to the noted Swedish-American historian Per Anders Rudling.

Later that year, extreme right-wing deputies at a nearby town in the Lviv district “renamed a street from the Soviet-era name Peace Street to instead carry the name of the Nachtigall [Nightingale] Battalion, a Ukrainian nationalist formation involved in the mass murder of Jews in 1941, arguing that ‘Peace’ is a holdover from Soviet stereotypes.’”

Read More

US Intel Vets Demand US Release Data On Shoot Down of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17: They Think the US Is Hiding Something

US Went Silent On the Issue When Their Intelligence Data Didn't Support Blaming Ukraine Rebels and Russia

Wreckage from Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 after it was shot down over Ukraine on July 14, 2014.
US Intel Vets think the US went silent on the issue when their intelligence data didn't support
blaming Ukraine rebels and Russia.

_____________

MEMORANDUM FOR: The President

FROM: Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS)

SUBJECT: Releasing an Intelligence Report on Shoot-Down of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17

It has been a year since the shoot-down of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 over Ukraine, resulting in the death of 298 passengers and crew. The initial response by the U.S. government supported the contention that the likely perpetrators were anti-government forces in southeastern Ukraine (the customary media misnomer for them is “separatists”), and that they were possibly aided directly by Moscow.

On July 29, 2014, we Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS) suggested that the United States Government report publicly what intelligence it actually had relating to the shoot-down lest the incident turn into another paroxysm of blaming Russia without cause. We are still waiting for that report.

Executive Summary

Tensions between the United States and Russia over Ukraine are fast reaching a danger point. A major contributing factor in the American public’s negative perception of Moscow is last year’s downing of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17.

A public report detailing the investigation of the incident by the Dutch Safety authorities is expected by October but the draft is reportedly already in the hands of the United States government. There is speculation that the report will dovetail with media and leaked government sources that have placed primary blame on the ethnic Russian Ukrainians in southeastern Ukraine opposed to the government put in place after the Western-engineered coup of Feb. 22, 2014, in Kiev.

As the relationship with Moscow is of critical importance, if only because Russia has the military might to destroy the U.S., careful calibration of the relationship is essential. If the United States signs on to a conclusion that implicates Russia without any solid intelligence to support that contention it will further damage an already fractious bilateral relationship, almost certainly unnecessarily. It is our opinion that a proper investigation of the downing would involve exploring every possibility to determine how the evidence holds up.

Currently, the only thing the American public and worldwide audiences know for sure is that the plane was shot down. But the shoot-down might have been accidental, carried out by any one of a number of parties. Or it might have been orchestrated by anti-government forces, with Moscow either conniving in some way in that action or not. It is also possible that the downing was deliberately carried out by the Kiev government or one of Ukraine’s powerful oligarchs to implicate the anti-Kiev forces and Russia in this mass murder. And finally, though less likely, it might even be that based on the available intelligence it is impossible to determine who did it.

In light of the high stakes involved both in terms of our extremely important relationship with Russia as well as in establishing a trustworthy narrative that does credit to the White House, the failure of the Administration to issue a coordinated intelligence assessment summarizing what evidence exists to determine who was responsible is therefore puzzling. If the United States government knows who carried out the attack on the plane it should produce the evidence. If it does not know, it should say so.

In what follows, we former intelligence professionals with a cumulative total of some 360 years in various parts of U.S. intelligence provide our perspective on the issue and request for a second time that the intelligence over the downing be made public to counter the fuzzy and flimsy evidence that has over the past year been served up – some of it based on “social media.”

The Russian Dimension

It would not be the first time for a tragic incident to be exploited for propaganda reasons with potentially grave consequences. We refer to the behavior of the Reagan administration in the immediate aftermath of the shoot-down of Korean Airlines Flight 007 over Siberia on August 30, 1983.

Hours after the tragic shoot-down on August 30, 1983, the Reagan administration used its very accomplished propaganda machine to manage a narrative emphasizing Soviet culpability for deliberately killing all 269 people aboard KAL-007 in full knowledge that it was a civilian airliner. In reality, the airliner had been shot down after it strayed hundreds of miles off course and penetrated Russia’s airspace over sensitive military facilities in Kamchatka and Sakhalin Island. The Soviet pilot tried to signal the plane to land, but the KAL pilots did not respond to the repeated warnings. Amid confusion about the plane’s identity – a U.S. spy plane had been in the vicinity hours earlier – Soviet ground control ordered the pilot to fire.

The Soviets soon realized they had made a horrendous mistake. U.S. intelligence also knew from sensitive intercepts that the tragedy had resulted from a blunder, not from a willful act of murder (much as on July 3, 1988, the USS Vincennes shot down an Iranian civilian airliner over the Persian Gulf, killing 290 people, an act which President Ronald Reagan dismissively explained as an “understandable accident”).

The story of KAL-007 should come to mind when considering the fate of MH-17. There might be legitimate reasons for opposing the increasingly authoritarian government of President Vladimir Putin, but exploiting a tragedy does not equate to constructive statecraft for dealing with an adversary.

At a minimum, the White House and State Department one year ago displayed unseemly haste in deciding to be first out of the starting gate with a narrative implicating Russia, at least indirectly – a narrative that may not be based on fact. That twelve months have passed and there has been no effort made to either correct or amplify the record is unacceptable.

Someone Is Lying

Both Russia and Ukraine deny any active role in the MH-17 shoot down. So do the anti-coup forces in southeastern Ukraine. Someone knows something and is lying to conceal a role in the incident. From the U.S. perspective what happened needs to be clarified and become a matter of public record. No other nation has the resources that the U.S. had to come up with an evidence-based answer; and intelligence collection and analysis are the tools that must be used. The information released to date does not bear close scrutiny; it does not permit an informed judgment as to who is lying about the shoot-down of Flight 17.

One year ago today, National Intelligence Director James Clapper authorized a background briefing including some sketchy talking points in a very short “Government Assessment” for selected mainstream journalists. It was just five days after the shoot-down and two days after Secretary of State Kerry pointed the finger of blame at anti-coup Ukrainians and Russia. Understandably, corroboration was being sought.

Like Kerry’s presentations on the Sunday talk shows of July 20, 2014, however, much of the “Government Assessment” was derived from postings on “social media.” The July 22, 2014 briefing addressed, inconclusively, the key issue of who fired the Buk anti-aircraft missile widely believed to have downed the airliner on July 17, 2014.

No update to that five-day-after “Government Assessment” has been provided over the past year. Are we asked to believe that one year later the intelligence community still cannot adduce evidence that goes beyond insinuation regarding the Buk missile?

The July 22, 2014 briefing also suggested that the missile might have been fired by a Ukrainian “defector.” Has there been no clarification on that point? It is, frankly, very hard for us to believe that the U.S. intelligence community has been unable to expand its understanding of these key issues over the past year.

To be sure, there has long been a tendency in Washington to “fix the intelligence around the policy,” to quote the Downing Street memo relating to the inglorious start of the Iraq War. More recently, we note the claim repeatedly made by Secretary of State John Kerry on August 30, 2013, that “we know” the regime of Bashar al-Assad was responsible for the chemical incidents near Damascus nine days before.

In that case, Kerry also cited a “Government Assessment” to support his charges. We saw the introduction of this unique genre of “assessment,” instead of the normally required “Intelligence Assessment,” as evidence that honest intelligence analysts were refusing to go along with the preferred narrative. In fact, Kerry’s accusations turned out to have been based on false and even fabricated intelligence provided by opponents of the Syrian government.

Choosing to Reveal the Truth

If the White House has concrete, probative intelligence regarding MH-17, we strongly suggest that the time is right to approve it for release before the “blame Russia” narrative becomes completely dominant. The American people are perfectly capable of judging for themselves what took place but they need to have all the information presented without bias and without any attempt to evade unpleasant conclusions. And it should be done even given the risk of compromising “sources and methods,” as the broader issue of war or peace with Russia is something that should be of paramount concern to every American.

What is needed is an Interagency Intelligence Assessment – the mechanism used in the past to present significant findings. We are hearing indirectly from some of our former colleagues that the draft Dutch report contradicts some of the real intelligence that has been collected. Resorting to another “Government (not Intelligence) Assessment” to sidestep the accountability issue is not appropriate and is itself an insult to the integrity and professionalism of the intelligence community.

Mr. President, we believe you need to seek out honest intelligence analysts now and hear them out, particularly if they are challenging or even opposing the prevailing groupthink narrative. They might well convince you to take steps to deal more forthrightly with the shoot-down of MH-17 and minimize the risk that relations with Russia might degenerate into a replay of the Cold War with the threat of escalation into thermonuclear conflict. In all candor, we suspect that at least some of your advisers fail to appreciate the enormity of that danger.

The courtesy of a reply is requested.


For the Steering Group, Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity

William Binney, former Technical Director, World Geopolitical & Military Analysis, NSA; co-founder, SIGINT Automation Research Center (ret.)

Thomas Drake, former Senior Executive, National Security Agency

Daniel Ellsberg, former State Department and Defense Department Official (VIPS Associate)

Philip Giraldi, CIA, Operations Officer (ret.)

Matthew Hoh, former Capt., USMC, Iraq & Foreign Service Officer, Afghanistan (associate VIPS)

Larry Johnson, CIA & State Department (ret.)

John Kiriakou, Former CIA Counterterrorism Officer

Karen Kwiatkowski, former Lt. Col., US Air Force (ret.), at Office of Secretary of Defense watching the manufacture of lies on Iraq, 2001-2003

Edward Loomis, NSA, Cryptologic Computer Scientist (ret.)

David MacMichael, National Intelligence Council (ret.)

Ray McGovern, former US Army infantry/intelligence officer & CIA analyst (ret.)

Elizabeth Murray, Deputy National Intelligence Officer for Middle East (ret.)

Todd E. Pierce, MAJ, US Army Judge Advocate (Ret.)

Coleen Rowley, Division Counsel & Special Agent, FBI (ret.)

Peter Van Buren, US Department of State, Foreign Service Officer (ret.) (associate VIPS)

Kirk Wiebe, former Senior Analyst, SIGINT Automation Research Center, NSA

Ann Wright, Col., US Army (ret.); Foreign Service Officer (resigned)

Obama Is Surrounded by War Mongering Psychos: He Could Have Dumped The Left-Over Neocons As Soon As He Was Elected — He Didn't

Obama Surrounds Himself With Neocons and Other Hawkish Lunatics

Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs Victoria Nuland. The
neocon helped engineer the overthrow of an elected government in Ukraine and helped
hand-pick the leader of the post-coup government. (State Department Photo)

By John Rachel
People often don't see the obvious.

I constantly get criticized for maintaining that Obama is a warmonger. The president's actions are proof positive: His escalating of the war in Afghanistan, his engineering the destruction of Libya, his manufacturing the crisis in Ukraine, his demonizing Putin and resurrecting the Cold War with Russia, his infamous kill lists and callous use of drones in countries like Pakistan and Yemen.

RELATED: The Neocons — Masters of Chaos - They Didn't Go Away With Bush. They're Thoroughly Embedded in the Obama Administration

Most recently, there was his request for unlimited war powers, a new AUMF, a shrewdly and deceptively worded legislative authorization which allows him to attack any country, anywhere on the earth, targeting individuals, groups and nations which he alone decides are deserving of some tough love __ aka annihilation by military force.

If this weren't incriminating enough, just look at the people he is surrounded by.

First, the hard-core psychopaths . . .

Ashton Carter is Obama's new Secretary of Defense. He wants confrontation with Russia; advocates a "preventive war" on North Korea, i.e. blow them to kingdom come now rather than later; and thinks we need to mount an aggressive campaign to fight ISIS. I guess he finds it easy to overlook the fact that our other aggressive campaigns created ISIS, that they are using the armaments we introduced into the region for their aggressive campaign, that every aggressive campaign we have mounted in the Middle East has recruited more fanatics and terrorists, a fact which has been verified by our own security agencies. Carter is an unapologetic proponent of projecting America's military across the globe, without respect for the national interests of any other sovereign powers and without patience for the niceties of diplomacy.

RELATED STORY: Welcome to Nulandistan - Obama Neo-Con Victoria Nuland Engineers Bloody Coup Then Handpicks Ukraine's New President - How She Did It (Video)

James Clapper is Director of National Intelligence, and is by any measure Spy-Master-In-Chief. He recently distinguished himself by lying under oath to the U.S. Congress, evidence that he believes that as head of a major law enforcement agency, he himself is above the law. Like other neocon exceptionalists, he believes the U.S. itself is above the law, thus entitled to ignore treaties, international legal precedents, and anything America finds bothersome. He recently threw his flaming hat into the ring of international politics by advocating sending lethal weapons to Ukraine, violating the terms of the Minsk II agreement which is offering some hope for the end of the bloody conflict, and more destructively, antagonizing Russia, which has over the past year worked relentlessly to broker peace there. But why would Clapper want peace? That might end up reducing his bloated share of the federal budget.

Victoria Nuland is Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs and married to Robert Kagan, one of the founders of the neocon Project for the New American Century. She was instrumental in turning the Maidan demonstrations into a full-blown coup, an illegal, violent overthrow of the admittedly corrupt but still democratically elected government. She continues to sabotage any hope for a negotiated solution to the crisis she helped to orchestrate and create. She is virulently anti-Russian and militantly in favor of dismembering the country to expedite the control and plundering of Russia's abundant natural resources, as well as those of the Ukraine, for the benefit of American-backed banks and corporations.

General Philip M. Breedlove, is the current Supreme Allied Commander Europe (SACEUR) of NATO Allied Command Operations. He has had a remarkable career indeed, but his recent detachment from reality and delusions of grandeur have made him the major proponent for war on Russia in the E.U. theater of command. His constant spewing of venomous anti-Russian rhetoric and wild claims have made him both a laughingstock and a thorn in the side of the saner members of the European community, who for some reason don't want Europe to become an incinerated pile of rubble in service to the American dream of world hegemony. If Russian troops and equipment had invaded Ukraine as many times as General Breedlove has claimed __ against all evidence to the contrary __ half of the Russian military would be set up in vast emplacements visible from the moon with a cheap pair of binoculars. But you know those cagey Russians! They made everything invisible! They're there! Really. Just ask Breedlove.

U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine, Geoffrey Pyatt is a California guy with a very shallow, checkered career in the diplomatic services, which makes him the perfect tool to go about the business of spreading propaganda, sidling up to chocolate king Petro Poroshenko __ current President of Ukraine __ for photo ops and general glad-handing, and promoting the depraved neocon agenda, unburdened by a comprehension of the complexities of international relations, indifferent to the human suffering being inflicted on citizens in the East of the country, and cavalier about the potential for nuclear war the machinations of the U.S. is creating. Snatching war and death from the jaws of peace and harmony? All in a days work!


Then, there are those without official neocon credentials but who embrace undisguised bullying and unrestrained militarism.

Samantha Power, U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, seemed over the course of much of her career to have her heart in the right place. She cared so much about victims of genocide, she even wrote a Pulitzer Prize-winning book about it, A Problem From Hell: America and the Age of Genocide. She has stood strong for religious freedom, human rights, women's and LGBT rights, and campaigned against human trafficking and for protection of refugees and religious minorities.

Read More

MH17 Coverup — The Shoot Down of 'The Malaysian Boeing': 260 Die But Big Media Blackout On Ukraine Military Involvement

Meet The Pilot Who Shot Down Malaysian Boeing MH-17

Vladislav Volochine

"The Plane Was In the Wrong Place at the Wrong Time"—Vladislav Voloshin

By Dmitry Steshin, Nicholas Varsegov, Vladimir Sungorkin
A “secret witness” has appeared in the “Malaysian Boeing” case; his evidence drops all the charges against the opolchenye – militias and Russia. And also explains the mysterious behaviour of Western experts.

This man came to the Кomsomolskaya Pravda Editorial office on his own. We checked his papers – he is not an actor, nor a straw man. We cannot yet reveal the real data provided by the witness –his relatives are still in Ukraine and he is afraid of retaliation and blackmail. Judging by the facts Alexandr told us (let us name him so) – his concerns are quite real. Here is the transcript of our conversation almost without any cuts.

Bomber returned without missiles

Where were you on July 17, 2014, onwards, the day when the Malaysian Boeing was shot down?

I was on the territory of Ukraine, in the city of Dnepropetrovsk, Aviatorskoe settlement. That is a usual airport. At that time, there were fighter jets and helicopters. Air jets performed regular flights, bombed; the Su-25 hedgehoppers bombed Donetsk, Lugansk. This went on for a long time.

Did air jets flew every day?

Daily.

Why did you assume that those aircraft could be related to the loss of Boeing?

For several reasons. Eight aircraft were stationed there, and only two of them had “air-to-air” missiles. They were hanged.

Why? Were there any air battles in the air?

No, the missiles were hanged onto the aircraft to cover themselves in the air. Just in case. Mainly ammo on sling for operation towards earth. Non-guided missiles, bombs.

Tell us about July 17.

The air jets flew on a regular base. Starting with the morning and all day long. By the second half of the day, approximately an hour before the shooting down of the Boeing, three hedgehoppers took off into the air. I do not remember the specific time. One of the three air jets was fitted with such missiles. It was a Su-25.

A “secret witness” appeared in the “Malaysian Boeing case”
(sitting with his back to the screen)

Did you see it personally?

Yes.

Where was your observation point?

In the territory. I cannot say specifically.

Did you have the opportunity to watch specifically what was hung to the air jet pylons? Could you mix up air-to-air and air-to-earth missiles?

No, I could not mix them up. They differ in sizes, empennage, and color. The guidance head. It is so easy to recognize it. Actually, after some time only one jet returned, and two had been shot down. Somewhere in the East of Ukraine, I was told so. Only one jet returned, which had those suspended missiles.

So, did it return already without missiles?

Without any missiles. And the pilot was very frightened.

Are you familiar with that pilot, did you see him?

Yes.

And can you tell us his name?

Voloshin last name.

Was he alone in the aircraft?

Yes. The aircraft is designed for one person.

Do you know his first name?

It was like Vladislav. I am not so sure. A captain.

The aircraft got on a wrong time in a wrong place. Photo: Viktor Guseynov

So captain Voloshin returned. What was next?

He returned with the empty ammunition loadом.

Were there no missiles?

Yes.

“The aircraft, it was not the one”

Tell us, Alexandr, the aircraft returned from the combat mission, you do not yet know about the loss of Boeing, but still you somehow are surprised by the fact that there are no more “air-to-air” missiles. Why?

Those missiles “air-to-air” are not part of the basic ammunition load. They are hung according to a special order. Usually, they tried not to rise into air such jets with such missiles. Because it is not allowed to transport such a missile along in the air.

Only two missiles of this type may be carried by such a jet. And it was never for them to be applied before. They were amortized beforehand. But just a day before, in a week time before this incident (loss of Boeing. - Editor), the use of these missiles has been urgently extended. And they were again delivered as ammunition. They have not been used for many years.

Why?

Their effective resource ended. Too old, yet Soviet production. But it was an emergency order and their resource was extended.

And was it that day when they were hung to the air jet?

They stood all time long with those missiles.

But still they did not fly?

They tried to let them fly as rare as possible – each flight reduces the resource. But this was the day when the jet to departure.

And did it return without them?

Yes. Knowing a little bit that pilot... (quite possible that the other two jets were shot down in front of him), and he had some scared reaction, inadequate. He might be frightened or as a revenge run the missiles into the Boeing. May be he just took it for some other combatant air jet.

Are these missiles with self-guided heads?

Yes.

When he pushed them, did they begin to search for the target?

No. The pilot himself fixes the target. Then he launches the missile, and it flies to the target.

Could the pilot use these missiles at ground targets?

That is pointless.

What else did you remember that day? What did the pilot say?

The phrase he said after he was taken out of the jet: “The aircraft, it was not the one”. And in the evening there was a phrase, a question from a pilot for him, to the same Voloshin: “What about the aircraft?”. And he answered: “The aircraft got on a wrong time to a wrong place”.

“And the departures continued after the tragedy”

How long did that pilot serve there? How old is he?

Voloshin is about 30 years old. His regiment is based in Nikolayev. They were sent to Dnepropetrovsk. Just before that, they had a mission to Chuguev, near Kharkov. And for all that time they bombed Donetsk and Lugansk. Moreover, according to the information from one of the servicemen in the regiment in Nikolayev, they still continue to do that.

Ukraine declared they had no combat missions on the day of the catastrophe
Photo : Viktor Guseynov

Did the pilots have a good combat experience?

Those who were there, they had experience. The Nikolayev regiment was the best regiment of Ukraine for 2013, as I know.

Was the story with the Boeing somehow discussed among the pilots?

All the attempts to discuss were suppressed immediately. And the pilots mainly communicated among them, they are, you know, so ... proud.

After everybody learned of this Boeing, - what happened to that pilot, to captain Voloshin?

Departures continued afterwards. Moreover, the pilots were not changed. There were the same faces.

“There were no flights… but they were shot down”

Let’s try to simulate events. How could they develop? Three aircraft flew on a combat mission. They were roughly in that area, where the Boeing was. Two aircraft were shot down. This captain Voloshin got nervous, was scared, and perhaps he took the Boeing for a warplane?

It is possible. It was a big distance, he just could not see specifically what type of aircraft it was.

Which is the distance these missiles are launched?

They may fix the target from some 3 - 5 kilometers.

And what is the difference of speeds in a warplane and a Boeing?

There is no difference: a missile has a pretty good speed. It’s a very fast missile.

Does it catch up anyway? And what is the height?

He may properly do it at his maximum lift - at 7 thousand meters – quite easy fix the target.

Can reach it upwards?

The Ukrainian authorities are using fakes to put the blame for the collapse of the
Malaysian Boeing on opolchenye     Photo : Viktor Guseynov

Yes. The aircraft cam simply uplift the snoot, and it is not a problem to fix that and launch the missile. The range of this missile is over 10 kilometers.

What is the distance from the target where the missile explodes? Can it hit the hull of the craft and explode?

Depending on the modification. Literally, it can hit the hull from the distance of 500 meters.

We worked at the disaster place and we noticed that the fragments hit the hull very closely. The feeling was that the explosion was literally in some two meters from the Boeing.

There exists such a missile. It is the principle of pellets – the missile explodes and the pellets disperses. Afterwards the main warhead of the missile hits.

Ukraine declared that on that day they had no combat flight missions. We have controlled different consolidated sources on downed aircraft; Ukraine denies everywhere that its warplanes made flights that day.

I know that. Ukraine also stated that the two aircraft were downed on the July 16th, and not on the 17th. And the date was modified for several times. But in reality the departures were on a daily basis. I have seen that myself. Departures had place even during the armistice, however less frequently.

Prohibited bombs

What kind of weapons was on the aircraft from your airport? Were there used phosphorous bombs, incendiary mixtures? Ukrainian artillery used them on ground very actively.

I did not see any phosphorous (bombs). But still fuel-air bombs were used.

Are they prohibited?

Yes. The bomb was specially assigned for Afghanistan. It has been prohibited and they did not use it until recently. It is prohibited by some convention, I do not remember, I will not say. This bomb is unhuman, it burns everything. It burns absolutely everything.

Did they hang them on and use during the combat missions?

Yes. Also there have been the prohibited cluster bombs. Aviation cluster bomb — it depends on the size — can hit a very dimensioned target. One bomb can cover an athletic field. And that is completely, all the surface absolutely, the entire area of two hectares.

Why did they decide to use such weapon?

All of them executed the order. And it was unclear who gave that order.

What is the sense of such a weapon? Intimidation?

A maximum destruction of manpower.

They can beat you for any careless word

Why did you leave for Russia? Why did you take the decision to speak about that? Why, finally, no one knew about that earlier? For you are not the only witness!

Everybody is frightened by the SBU (Security service of Ukraine. – Editor.) and the national guard. People can be beaten for any careless word, arrested for any tiny suspicion of being sympathetic towards Russia or to the opolchenye/militia. While I was from the very begging against this “anti-terrorist operation”. I do not agree with the policy of the Ukrainian state. The civil war is a wrong thing. It is not normal to you’re your own people. And I do not agree initially to participate somehow or be on the side of Ukraine, being partially involved in that!

The reference from Komsomolskaya Pravda

What weapons were used by the Ukrainian aviation in Donbass sky

R60 missile – guided, close-in slugfest “air-to-air”

Developed in 1967. Has a specific empennage and solid-propellant engine. Infrared self-guide head. R60 is equipped with proximity fuzes, the blasting of the missile takes place at a distance of 5 to 2,5 meters from the target. Projectiles – wolfram wire or bars. Practical flight range makes 10 - 12 kilometers. Starting with 1973 used on all the types of fighter jets and on hedgehoppers. For the last 10 years this armament is not in service with the Russian army, the manufacturing of missile is shut, the special pylons for the missile sling are not used and are not manufactured. Delivered for export.

ODAB-500 - Fuel-air aviation bomb

This type of bomb is the most prevailing in the post-Soviet space. It is designed for the damage of manpower, industrial constructions, easy-vulnerable equipment, light engineering construction; for antipersonnel and antitank minefields clearing. Used from heights of 200 - 1000 meters. The bomb contains 193 kilograms of piperylen – a flammable liquid, which in blasting transforms into aerosol and is blasted by a second charge. The effective casualty radius makes 30 meters. It is considered a non-conventional ammunition.

Used as well in hedgehoppers Su-25.

RBK – Single cluster bomb

The most prevailing variant in the post-Soviet space. The representation depends on the type; a container equipped with aircraft bombs of small caliber, which disperses in the blast of the charge combat elements over the target. It is considered a non-conventional ammunition. Used in most types of Soviet and Russian aircraft.
Dmitry Steshin
Nicholas Varsegov
Vladimir Sungorkin

Translation
Anna Dinuts
Source
Komsomolskaïa Pravda

Provided by

Reprinted with permission from Voltairenet

Ukraine's Post-Coup Government Will Launch Services Blockade on Rebel-Held Cities: Will Close Hospitals, Banks, Schools — Further Forcing Eastern Region Toward Russia

Ukraine's post-coup president, Petro Poroshenko. (Photo by Global Panorama)

By Reuters/AFP
Ukrainian president Petro Poroshenko has issued several decrees to withdraw state services, including funding for hospitals and schools, in pro-Russian eastern regions, in a move to cut links with rebel-held territory.

______________________

Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland  could be heard saying 'f*ck the EU'
as she schemed about changing another nation's leader as if he
was a mere piece on a chessboard.

______________________

He has also urged Ukraine's central bank to close down all bank services in the area.

Ukraine cut all state funding to separatist parts of Donetsk and Luhansk regions, after separatists held elections in October.

Mr Poroshenko condemned those elections as illegal and in violation of the September ceasefire agreement.

The rebels said Ukraine violated the deal by moving to revoke a law granting the regions autonomy, putting an already fragile ceasefire in doubt.

RELATED STORY: Welcome to Nulandistan — Obama Neo-Con Victoria Nuland Engineers Bloody Coup Then Handpicks Ukraine's New President - How She Did It (Video)

A decree posted on the president's website said all state companies, institutions and organizations should end their work within a week and "evacuate workers, with their permission, [and] where possible remove property and documents".

The ruling, which formally asked parliament to revoke the "special status" of the regions, also suggested Ukraine's central bank take measures to close down all banking services in certain parts of separatist-held areas, including card operations.

Read More