Russia’s response to Seymour Hersch revelations – negotiations fail Putin will give 72 hours before using nuclear weapons

Russia’s response to Seymour Hersch revelations – negotiations fail Putin will give 72 hours before using nuclear weapons

This story is from WarNews24/7 which can be read HERE.

However, I believe the following to be the original.

I would like to start today’s material with quotes from Shoigu’s statement dated 07.02.2023:

– Combat operations in the area of ​​Ugledar and Bakhmut are developing successfully;
– Russian forces grind up all the weapons supplied to Ukraine and machinery both on delivery routes and in combat positions;
– Ukrainian losses in January amounted to more than 6.500 military personnel, 26 aircraft, 7 helicopters, 341 tanks;
– Soledar, Kleshcheevka, Podgornoe, Krasnopolye, Blagodatnoe, Lobkovoe, Nikolaevka were liberated as a result of offensive actions of the Russian troops.

What you need to pay attention to here is that we have already dealt with the Armed Forces of Ukraine for a year of fighting, now the Russian Federation is demilitarizing NATO military equipment, 341 tanks per month, 26 aircraft, 7 turntables. How many tanks has NATO promised to Ukraine just now? 321? This is for a month of work of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation. We are looking forward to … Looking forward to … Absolutely! Don’t forget to bring planes!

British Defense Secretary Ben Wallace said that London would not transfer fighter jets to Ukraine immediately. The transfer of any combat aircraft could take “months,” he said. Instead, Britain has promised long-range missiles and drones.

The Kremlin believes that the supply of Western weapons to Ukraine testifies to the growing involvement of a number of countries in the conflict and its transformation into a more painful one.

We perceive this as nothing more than the growing involvement of Britain, Germany, France in the conflict between Russia and Ukraine. <…> Such actions lead to escalation, prolong the conflict, make it more painful. Fundamentally, these actions will not change anything.

– Dmitry Peskov, the press secretary of the President of Russia, told reporters on February 9.

And our Kyiv prisoner of narcotic dreams, having hitched off at the end of last year on an American military plane to Washington, and having absorbed the support of his senior comrades there, apparently got a taste and, having returned home, now surfs the expanses of Europe on British military aircraft. Having tasted Foggy Albion on an official visit a couple of days ago, and having torn off the applause of the local parliament there, vowing to say goodbye even to the British monarch, now he made happy with his visit the capital of France, where the local president shook his hand for a long time and, feeling deeply, from his generosity granted him the highest French award – the Order of the Legion of Honor.

I bow to you, dear Vladimir, for your courage and determination

– said Emmanuel Macron, presenting his Ukrainian colleague with the highest award of the Fifth Republic.

Moreover, the chancellor of the FRG “liver sausage” Scholz rushed to the capital of France, leaving everything to meet our hero. And the newly-minted Knight of the Legion of Honor, bursting with a sense of his own importance, in front of his junior colleagues in the fight against the “bloodthirsty aggressor” made a speech, the meaning of which was that he believes in the unity of the free world in its opposition to “Russian infidels”. And the day before, in an interview with the German magazine Spiegel, Zelensky went even further and, hitting his memories, said that he had independently decided to refuse to implement the Minsk agreements, which he once told Emmanuel Macron and Angela Merkel.

I did not see in the [Minsk] agreements a desire to preserve the independence of Ukraine. I understand their [Western countries] point of view: first of all, they wanted to satisfy Russia’s appetites a little at the expense of Ukraine. Procrastination is perfectly normal in diplomacy. You never know when a decision maker dies and everything suddenly becomes easier. <…> I told Emmanuel Macron and Angela Merkel: we cannot do this [meaning the implementation of the Minsk agreements].

I have only one question – what does our hero smoke? (Although I know for sure that he does not smoke, but sniffs). Did anyone understand what he said? Whose death is he talking about? About Putin’s death? Is he delirious? What kind of independence of Ukraine is this creature babbling about? Is she independent now? He cannot take a step without the permission of his senior comrades (he uses their protection, flies on their military aircraft, I think, and goes to the toilet, having previously filled out a permission form). But according to the Minsk agreements, both Donetsk and Lugansk were supposed to remain part of Ukraine. It is for this that our hero has already sacrificed at least 200 thousand of his fellow citizens and is going to sacrifice the same amount more. Only who in Ukraine read these agreements? The Ukrainians themselves chose their share by choosing this “president of the world”, and now they are paying with blood for their choice.

Grandpa Joe’s ears came out of the Baltic Sea

Meanwhile, strange things are happening across the ocean. And I was sure that sooner or later the truth would come out. Well, less than six months later, Grandpa Joe’s ears appeared from the bottom of the Baltic Sea. All versions that behind the blowing up of our Nord Streams were hiding the long arms of combat swimmers from the British Special Boat Service (English Special Boat Service, abbreviated SBS) – a special forces unit of the Royal Navy of Great Britain, formed back in 1940 under the name The “Special Boat Section of the British Army” (eng. Army Special Boat Section) for counter-terrorist operations at sea, which, through the hands of their Ukrainian mercenaries and turned this operation, suddenly collapsed in a strange way, melting like smoke from white apple trees. Yes, and imagine that the brave Ukrainian lads in light diving suits (or even without them), having grunted vodka with lard before diving, go to a depth of 70 meters of the cold Baltic Sea to cut off the oxygen to the damned “aggressive aggressor”, and at the same time to his German underlings, and these damned gas pipelines could be torn off only by overeating fat, infused with hallucinogenic mushrooms, their relatives gone crazy – descendants of the great ukrov who dug out the Black Sea. For the rest, it was clear that the bombers should be looked for among the beneficiaries of this sabotage. And the British, whatever one may say, did not receive a direct benefit from this, since they did not have gas (we will modestly keep silent about the benefits of the Ukrainians, since they are not in this story at all, although they jump out of their shorts, trying to prove that this is a dirty deed – their business hands).

It is indicative in this whole story who took up the private investigation. The sensational information was published on his website by the winner of the Pulitzer Prize (the highest award among journalists) Seymour Hersh. The personality is legendary in the journalistic community. He received the Pulitzer Prize back in 1970 for material exposing the American commandos who massacred the Vietnamese town of My Lai (Song My village community) during the Vietnam War, which he sold to the Service News Dispatch. The world then shuddered from the deeds of the American military (it was a natural massacre, but who will be surprised by this now after napalm and phosphorus bombs?!). In addition, Seymour Hersh is also the recipient of the 2004 National Council of Teachers of English George Orwell Award for “Outstanding Contribution to Honesty and Clarity in Public Language”, two National Magazine Awards, five George Polk Awards, and more than a dozen other investigative journalism awards and prizes. , making it the mastodon of the genre. He is now 85 years old, he comes from Lithuanian Jews who moved to America in the middle of the last century.

He published all his materials on the basis of data from anonymous sources, which he did not disclose. The CIA and the White House have long had a grudge against the freelance journalist who, in an age without blogs or Internet sites, profitably sold his sensational revelations to the leading American media. He wrote about the Watergate scandal, about how the secret services in 1974 were engaged in political investigation, spying on anti-war activists, about the covert CIA war against Chile. At the same time, in 1974, he published material on the secret operations of American intelligence services under water, talking about a secret CIA project to raise a sunken Soviet submarine from the bottom of the Pacific Ocean. Then he promised the director of the CIA, William Colby, who spoke with him, not to publish this material until the end of the operation and kept his word.

What followed was a series of high-profile revelations. So in 2004, it was Hersh who first spoke about the torture of Iraqis in the infamous American prison Abu Ghraib, for which he received an angry reaction from the military and intelligence officers. Then he lashed out at the CIA, which, with the approval of President Bush Jr., used illegal and cruel interrogation methods. And a year later, in January 2005, it was Hersh who accused the United States of covert operations in Iran to identify targets for possible strikes and proved the involvement of Hillary Clinton, then acting US Secretary of State, in this. And even years later, in his ninth decade, Seymour Hersh has not lost his former grip, the first to report on the differences between the US intelligence community and President Donald Trump.

And now, finally, a new “bomb from a reporter” – a detailed story about who organized the sabotage at Nord Stream.

Last summer, Navy divers, operating under the cover of <…> a NATO exercise known as Baltops 22, planted remotely activated explosive devices that destroyed three of the four Nord Stream pipelines three months later.

– the journalist sensationally stated on February 8 in his blog.

According to him, President Joe Biden decided on sabotage on offshore pipelines for more than nine months (the thought of it visited him long before the start of the NWO). One of the main questions that confronted the President of the United States was how to turn the business so as not to leave traces, or to transfer the arrows to another. In this, Biden, according to the journalist, was assisted by his national security adviser Jake Sullivan. The American publicist confirmed the competence of the source who told him the data that formed the basis of the article about US involvement in the sabotage.

This is a man who seems to know quite a lot about what’s going on. Of course, I won’t name him.

– Hersh said in an interview with a correspondent TASS.

According to him, while preparing the material, he also spoke with a representative of the CIA public relations department. At the same time, the journalist believes that the US administration will certainly deny involvement in sabotage.

The White House will certainly want CIA Director [William] Burns to issue a rebuttal

– he said.

Naturally, the White House called the sensational material “an outright lie.”

This perfect lie and complete fiction

– Adrianne Watson, head of the press service of the National Security Council of the White House, told TASS.

But Seymour Hersh is not the first to hear such statements. Critics often reproach Hersh for constantly referring to anonymous sources and certain confidential documents handed over to him. Thus, former US Department of Defense spokesman Brian Whitman said:

This reporter has a solid and well-deserved reputation for making dramatic statements based on unverifiable, anonymous sources.

Once Hersh himself admitted that he was responsible for every phrase from his articles. “Sometimes I change events, dates and places in certain ways to protect people,” he said. “But I can’t manipulate what I write about.” In short, it is already clear that Seymour Hersh is not a random figure here. This is a main gun. It remains only to find out who charged it and in whose interests it works? Nikolai Patrushev, Secretary of the Security Council of the Russian Federation, has already dissociated himself from this information, saying that he does not have information about who could organize these terrorist attacks.

I wouldn’t recommend diving too deep into the Norwegian trail that has surfaced throughout this story. Hersh claims that on September 26, a Norwegian Air Force warplane dropped a sonar buoy that helped activate explosive devices planted by American divers three months earlier. The thing is that Norway, even being a natural gas exporting country (the second in the EU after the Russian Federation), with all its desire, could not replace the falling capacities of the Russian Federation for the supply of blue fuel to Europe due to lack thereof. Their explored reserves of natural gas are running out and they are not able to increase its production – and so they are working at the limit of their capabilities. Therefore, we exclude the Norwegians as the beneficiaries of the blowing up of our gas pipelines – they were taken into action, like a screen, to divert attention from the main beneficiary of these events – the United States.

Now let’s think about why someone activated this case? Who this someone is, we do not know, but we can guess. Undermining international infrastructure in international waters is a casus belli. Americans can shout for a long time that Hersh is a Russian agent, but let them first prove that the facts cited by him are fake. Their unwashed ears have long been sticking out of this dirty story. Now they are overgrown with facts. We can pretend that we do not believe them, as Nikolai Patrushev did, or we can fan the fire by enlisting the affected German side for this. But while we show that we are ready to bargain. We have up our sleeve as an incident of belli also an attack by wards of grandfather Joe on our airfields of strategic long-range aviation, carriers of the air component of our nuclear triad. All this gives us the right to use our nuclear weapons, according to our own doctrine of their use. But we are not doing this yet, trying to break the edges with our opponents in an amicable way. Here I would advise them not to forget the words of the handsome Trump: “Those who do not want it in a bad way, let them take into account that it will be worse in a good way!”.


The game went big on a collision course. Everything that you are now witnessing is an attempt to de-escalate through the escalation of the conflict. The situation on the board is approaching the endgame and the sides lay out their main trump cards, which they saved for the last. It is not a fact that they will be involved, but they will do just fine to improve their negotiating position. The Kremlin is demonstrating its readiness to negotiate, and secret negotiations are underway, you can be sure. But, if an agreement fails, the Kremlin will go to the end, up to the use of tactical nuclear weapons and strategic nuclear weapons. The West does not believe in it. When Moscow gives 72 hours for the evacuation of the population of the zones of the alleged nuclear strike, they will believe it. But no matter how late!

I hope it doesn’t come to that. Your Mr. Z

In mainstream media here

Putin says Russia could adopt US preemptive strike concept

MOSCOW (AP) — Russian President Vladimir Putin said Friday that Moscow could adopt what he described as a U.S. concept of using preemptive military strikes, noting it has the weapons to do the job, in a blunt statement amid rising Russia-NATO tensions over Ukraine.

“We are just thinking about it. They weren’t shy to openly talk about it during the past years,” Putin said, referring to the U.S. policy, as he attended a summit in Kyrgyzstan of a Moscow-dominated economic alliance of ex-Soviet nations.

For years, the Kremlin has expressed concern about U.S. efforts to develop the so-called Conventional Prompt Global Strike capability that envisions hitting an adversary’s strategic targets with precision-guided conventional weapons anywhere in the world within one hour.

“Speaking about a disarming strike, maybe it’s worth thinking about adopting the ideas developed by our U.S. counterparts, their ideas of ensuring their security,” Putin said with a thin smile, noting that such a preemptive strike was intended to knock out command facilities.

He claimed that Russia already has commissioned hypersonic weapons capable of carrying out such a strike, while the U.S. hasn’t yet deployed them. He also claimed that Russia now has cruise missiles that surpass their U.S. equivalents.

While Putin appeared to refer to conventional precision-guided weapons when he talked about possibly mimicking the U.S. strategy, he specifically noted that the U.S. hasn’t ruled out the first use of nuclear weapons.

“If the potential adversary believes that it can use the theory of a preemptive strike and we don’t, it makes us think about the threats posed by such ideas in other countries’ defensive posture,” he said.

In Washington, advisers to President Joe Biden viewed Putin’s comments as “saber-rattling” and another veiled warning that he could deploy a tactical nuclear weapon, according to a U.S. official who was not authorized to comment and spoke on the condition of the anonymity.

The official noted that Russian military doctrine has long stated that Moscow reserves the right to first use of a nuclear weapon in response to large scale military aggression.

John Erath, senior policy director for the Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation, also viewed Putin’s statement as yet another attempt to raise the nuclear threat.

“He doesn’t quite say we’re going to launch nuclear weapons, but he wants the dialogue in the U.S. and Europe to be, ’The longer this war goes on, the greater the threat of nuclear weapons might be used,’” Erath said.

Putin was asked Wednesday at a Kremlin conference whether Russia could commit to forswearing a first strike and responded that such an obligation might prevent Russia from tapping its nuclear arsenal even if it came under a nuclear attack.

“If it doesn’t use it first under any circumstances, it means that it won’t be the second to use it either, because the possibility of using it in case of a nuclear strike on our territory will be sharply limited,” he responded.

He elaborated on that answer Friday, saying Russia’s nuclear doctrine is based on the “launch on warning” concept, which envisions nuclear weapons’ use in the face of an imminent nuclear attack spotted by its early warning systems.

“When the early warning system receives a signal about a missile attack, we launch hundreds of missiles that are impossible to stop,” he said, smiling. “Enemy missile warheads would inevitably reach the territory of the Russian Federation. But nothing would be left of the enemy too, because it’s impossible to intercept hundreds of missiles. And this, of course, is a factor of deterrence.”

Russia’s nuclear doctrine states the country can use nuclear weapons if it comes under a nuclear strike or if it faces an attack with conventional weapons that threatens “the very existence” of the Russian state.

Since sending Russian troops into Ukraine in February, Putin has repeatedly said that Moscow was ready to use “all available means” to protect its territory and has rejected Western criticism of nuclear saber-rattling.

“I understand that ever since nuclear weapons, the weapons of mass destruction have appeared, all people — the entirety of humankind — have been worried what will happen to the planet and all of us,” he said.

Speaking Friday at U.S. Strategic Command, which has responsibility for the nation’s nuclear weapons, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin said Putin’s repeated threats were irresponsible.

“As the Kremlin continues its cruel and unprovoked war of choice against Ukraine, the whole world has seen Putin engage in deeply irresponsible nuclear saber-rattling,” he said in a reference to Putin’s earlier nuclear threats without addressing his latest remarks. “So make no mistake, nuclear powers have a profound responsibility to avoid provocative behavior and to lower the risk of proliferation and to prevent escalation and nuclear war.”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Wordpress Social Share Plugin powered by Ultimatelysocial