Do you believe this ?
The Ukraine war is an elaborate false flag operation by the CIA. The scenes you see on TV of the war are fake. In accord with American policy to incorporate the Ukraine into Europe before moving on to the gradual dismemberment of Russia, the Agency installed biowarfare laboratories in eastern Ukraine and funded Nazi battalions to attack the local Russian population.
Not only are the Americans after Russia’s huge natural resources they also wish to replace this last bastion of Christianity and replace it with a Western Capitalist Total Surveillance Society. To aid their plans and acting on the orders of the World Economic Forum they arranged to have the senile Biden elected even though Trump won the majority of the votes. There followed the demonstration at the White House of Trump supporters staged by the CIA to ensure Trump can never again be elected.
Mr Putin was lured into attacking the Ukraine. What he didn’t know was the intelligence about the resistance he would meet was faulty and planted by American agents within the FSB.
The surprising success of the Ukrainian army is due, not to some miracle of valour, but the provision of highly sophisticated weapons wielded by US advisors. The reason independent mercenaries from the west are not welcome in Ukraine is they would immediately recognise these advisors and blow the whistle.
The war ties in with the Covid 19 virus, created by the makers of the Moderna vaccine to finance a world wide takeover by group of super rich millionaires. The vaccine does not work and has killed more people than the virus. The real aim is profit, and power- control of the world. Advanced thinkers like Piers Corbyn believe that the erection of 5G masts is linked to the vaccine with carries a chip in it that 5G networks can access to obtain control of almost all of us in the west.
Or do you believe this ?
Every atrocity committed in Ukraine by the Russians on TV is an absolute record of what has happened. Without provocation Russia suddenly attacked Ukraine laying waste its villages, towns and cities. Ukrainians fought street by street to stop them, but if in the fighting that meant entire communities were flattened and children killed, whose fault is that ? Russia’s of course. Beside we have corroboration from the BBC known for its high standards of independent journalism, that all the atrocities are Russian.
Russia accuses the west of arming Ukraine’s army with the latest anti tank weapons. What, Putin asks, would the west feel if Russia supplied such weapons to the Basque nationalists or the IRA? There is a difference. The west is objectively morally, politically technologically and socially far superior to Russia’s gangster society. It therefore has a right to rescue nations under threat from countries like Russia.
The far right has consistently accused the EU and the US of interfering in Ukrainian domestic affairs along her border with Russia and thus provoking the war. How can you interfere if you are upholding the sovereign rights of a friendly country against Russian gangs ?
Russia attacked the Ukraine because the latter wants to embrace not only the commercial and security advantages of belonging to the EU and NATO but the advanced cultural standards of western society. The EU – but sadly not Britain which left the EU because it fell under the influence of the far right led by Donald Trump – could not accept the union’s high standards of anti racism. On the other hand Angela Merkel allowed one million middle eastern refugees to become citizens of Germany. One day all of Europe will be diverse. Nor could Britain accept the EU’s democratic voting system. If a member state gets the result of an election wrong, its voters are invited to repeat the vote until they get it right. Few nations have such a choice.
In contrast Russia is a racist authoritarian state. Elections are not free. Look at what they did in Chechen just because the Chechens wanted independence. On the other hand the EU has welcomed people of colour from all over the world, and hopes one day to see a world without borders with the right to settle anywhere for all its inhabitants, Russia keeps to a narrow deluded idea of race loyalty.
The far right likes to point to President Putin’s so called moral values. His speeches holding traditionally Christian beliefs, his recent mockery of the justified exclusion of the anti transgender fanatic J K Rowling from society, his regard for the traditional Russian Orthodox Church. The right to choose what gender you are is a cornerstone of modern society, and what has the Russian Orthodox Church got to offer the west except its medieval ban on abortions, thus infringing on the rights of people of all sexes everywhere., yes all sexes; In the west a man can menstruate and have a baby, in Russia you would be shunned if you suggested it, if not sent to jail. It just shows you how advanced we are and how justified in helping the Ukraine to find freedom in the embrace of the West.
It seems to me that Robert Conquest’s Second Law applies: Both sides are behaving as if they had been infiltrated by their enemies.
I just want the killing and destruction to stop, but it’s clear that neither Boris nor Biden shares my opinion. If Putin is a war criminal, so are they.
For those of you who believe that our media is trustworthy, I encourage you to watch the unedited version of Bret Baier’s interview with Zelensky on Rumble. Baier asked about the Azov Battallion, and Fox edited the video so it was cut before being disseminated. Nevertheless, the entire unedited version was uploaded to Rumble under the title: “Bret Baier asks Volodymyr Zelenskyy about the Azov Battalion”
Zelenskyy said: “they are what they are, they were defending Ukraine, some were prosecuted for atrocities”. Another words, he admits that there are rogue elements within in his own military. By the way, what Zelensky doesn’t tell you is that they were pardoned. The same neo-Nazi thugs in that battalion, who committed war crimes against Donbass residents, are still committing crimes against humanity. Why did Zelenskyy pardon them? Presumably, so they could kill more ethnic Russians.
We are not being told the whole truth. And no, I’m not in love with Putin or a puppet of Russia. I’m not a fan of Putin. But we must put aside personal feelings and focus on the facts of the case.
We surely all know that terrible atrocities occur in war, such as Saddam Hussein’s people-shredders and the Kaiser’s Huns bayonetting Belgian babies, or the German torture equipment submitted by the USSR at Numerberg such as the chair which banged the victim repeatedly on the head with a sort of frying pan or US germ-warfare in Korea, so what is so unexpected about Russians raping Ukrainian girls and cutting out their tongues?
It seems by the comments that I’ve read here that the readers of this organ may have lost their ability to recognise satire. Say it ain’t so.
Yes, it’s clearly satire. It’s odd that so many readers have failed to see that.
I suggest the literary device being used in this post by Dr Harris is juxtaposition.
At a glance, John Glance, can I ask: Where is the “satire”?
Both points of view presented in this post are seriously held – and both with some degree of justice – by those involved.
“Russia accuses the west of arming Ukraine’s army with the latest anti tank weapons.” Is that untrue satire?
“Every atrocity committed in Ukraine by the Russians on TV is an absolute record of what has happened.” Is that untrue satire?
I think the Salisbury Review has gone woke.
“The right to choose what gender you are is a cornerstone of modern society, and what has the Russian Orthodox Church got to offer the west except its medieval ban on abortions, thus infringing on the rights of people of all sexes everywhere.”
“Medieval ban on abortions”. I didn’t know that debating the right to life, and when it begins, was “medieval”. Did they have those discussions in the 10th century? The conservatives in America are not “medieval”. There are two factions within the conservative party. There is one view, which believes life begins at conception. This is predominantly a religious view. And then there is the view that life begins at “quickening”. This view is predominate within states like Texas, where a woman is expected to make a decision within a reasonable time, like within the first three months! Some democrats believe that the right to life doesn’t start until birth. Some democrats believe in infanticide: that is, if the child has a deformity it can be slaughtered like cattle.
I would say the latter is more medieval then the former.
And if the right to choose my gender is the “cornerstone” of “modern society”, then please do leave me out of this society. I’ll happily take my skills to one of those ‘backward societies’ that values free trade, capitalism, and traditional moral values rooted in a bill of rights.
And the entire gender debate is not about “choosing gender”. Conservatives don’t care if you choose to dress as a woman, or choose to have plastic surgery. But they do care about forcing people to use certain language, providing quota’s in business and academy, and placing sexual material in children’s books and children’s shows. It’s a strange form of grooming. There are now liberals who say that pedophilia is acceptable, because it’s just a different sexual taste. If that doesn’t make you sick, you’ve got problems. Conservatives also recognize that woman and men are different. It’s unrealistic to ask a woman to compete with men in sports. Even the feminists are speaking out against this. And they should! It’s an abomination. I don’t think J.K. Rowling is “far right” and I’m proud to stand with her.
Mark. Interesting that you make no mention of the alternative equally crazy view that the Ukraine war is a CIA false flag operation. Maybe you think such mad idea is so true it is unworthy of comment.
I think Mark has a very valid view and I’m sure he has views on other parts of the article but he chose to highlight this particular atrocity. As for the ‘war’ I have family out there and what one is told on the news is NOT the whole story by any means. But then again, BBC has its own agenda and it certainly is not the truth. I watch other channels.
‘Fifty Shades of Grey’ – was Dr Harris a script consultant for it?
Where is the evidence that the UK left the EU because it fell under the influence of the Far Right? Or is this just the author’s opinion?
And what is this European Democratic Voting process you talk of? What proportion of the decision making bodies in Brussels are elected? Is that democratic?
We saw just how ‘together’ the EU countries are with their response to the COVID_19 threat – each and every country responded as an individual nation according to what they saw as the best response for their people – whilst those in Brussels dithered and did nothing (at least nothing in terms of leadership or cohesion). Not exactly a ‘joined up’ response.
Europe is already diverse and has been for centuries – has the author ever visited the countries of Europe? The diversity is apparent across the board.
This is another example of writing about ‘rights’ and a ‘way of life’ that some people feel should be adopted by the whole world, just because it’s their way of life and they like it (well most of it anyway).
The article is full of speculative opinion presented as facts. I really expected more.
The author talks about “far right”. I don’t think a balanced budget is “far right”. I don’t think curtailing the rate of immigration is “far right”. I don’t think smaller government and more democracy is “far right”. Brussels doesn’t want any of those things. And we don’t need to be a part of Brussels to ensure “rights” for our citizens.
But if you want to talk about far right. Take a look at Germany and the EU.
A 93 year old German woman was placed in jail recently for committing a thought crime. Her crime: she denied that the holocaust existed. We all know the holocaust existed, but you don’t put someone in jail because they believe something different – no matter how crazy it might be. That is “far right”!
And the EU is now “warning” China to “Not interfere” and to “condemn Russia”. “Warning”! Uh uh! “Must condemn or else”, hmmm…interesting. Sounds very Fascist!
Apparently the Chinese people no longer have sovereignty. Apparently they can no longer choose who to trade with. They must now listen to their EU fascist masters.
That type of language not only isolates Europe, but it also ensures that the CCP will become more powerful as the more neutral yuan replaces the sanction happy euro. Stealing a persons assets is a very good way to keep investors out of your country.
So cash strapped europe will now be even more cash strapped as global investors hesitate. I’m already pulling my money out. I have three business for sale. I don’t want to be “sanctioned” for committing a thought crime. It’s RU and China today. Tomorrow, Brussels will steal from UK citizens.
Totalitarians never know when to stop.
(Sigh) my colleague is working on a post doc in, of all things, the morality and laws of war (he has a degree both in philosophy and in law) at Oxford, and he explained to me what’s going on. Yes, I know everybody stopped being epidemiologists and began being international law of war experts, but for just this once, he REALLY IS an international law of war expert.
Things are pretty simple really. The Ukraine is not blameless in pissing off Russia, being corrupt, and so on and so forth. But none of what the Ukraine did justifies Russia starting the war. Russia is engaged in aggressive war because it was neither (a) invaded by the Ukraine (of was about to), (b) otherwise attacked (say by missiles) nor (c) preventing genocide or similar crimes in the Ukraine.
Russia is indeed guilty of AGGRESSIVE WAR. This doesn’t necessarily mean it committed WAR CRIMES. Briefly, aggressive war is the leader’s fault, of those who decided to go to war. It is having an unjust GOAL of war. War crimes are the soldiers’ fault, the rank and file. It means an unjust CONDUCT of the war. War crimes mean things like shooting civilians, taking hostages, raping the women, razing cities, etc.
A war can be aggressive without anyone committing war crimes. Conversely, soldiers fighting a just war of self-defense may be guilty of war crimes. The Ukrainian hospital manager who asked to castrate Russian soldiers, for instance, is a war criminal – or rather, would have been if any Russian soldier were in fact castrated on his orders, which seems not to be the case. Since 99%+ of soldiers do not actually have any choice about fighting, it is the case – both legally and morally – that it is NOT a crime to merely fight on the unjust side. A Russian soldier is the war is not a war criminal – or any other sort of criminal – so long as he obeys the laws of war, e.g., not harming civilians unnecessarily and so on.
Hope this clears things up. Yes, the Ukraine did much wrong, but no, it is still an aggressive war on Russia’s Yes, Russian soldiers are engaged in an unjust, aggressive war, but no, that in itself doesn’t make them war criminals.
Is it also unjust to bomb Donbass for seven years? And do those people have a right to autonomy? If so, do they have a right to court RU’s help in aquiring autonomy? Does RU have the right to come to the aid of others? Is it aggressive to invade Iraq and Afghanistan? Is it aggressive to build islands, and sink fishing ships in the south china sea?
Are you living in a fantasy world where you arbitrarily determine what is aggressive, depending of course on the person doing the aggression? If you haven’t noticed, nobody cares about world governance or international law outside of a few globalist thugs residing in the halls of the WEF, MNC’s and a few academies. Power is the name of the game in international affairs, not law. The best way to ensure justice is not to setup international courts, or a creepy world government, but to stop provoking others through sanctions, and to stop using NATO as bully.
International courts are a one size fits all model of values, which not everyone agrees upon. The court will force values upon other cultures, and this mechanism will be abused by the most powerful countries. We’ve seen it already. Russia invades Ukraine, and we rightly complain. But when we invade Iraq, there is nothing but crickets. The next time we invade another country, I want commenters to ask Russia, China, India, and South America to “Sanction us”, and to steal the cash in our bank accounts because we are “aggressors”.
At least, then, we’ll be morally consistent.
So Donbass residents should be bombed for another ten years, because Zelensky has no control over a few insane generals, and because external intervention is considered an act of aggression?
Nobody wants that type of bloodshed on their doorstep. If the Irish people are being slaughtered by a few crazy generals, I do hope we are the “aggressor”. Call me an aggressor in that situation. I’ll wear with a badge of honor.
Of course, the truth is somewhere in the middle.
I don’t believe media reports that Russia is conducting a false flag operation. There is no evidence Putin has been bombing his own ethnic groups in Donbass. The Donbass people also say the bombings are coming from Kiev. I will put my faith and trust in the people who live in that region.
But I don’t think the West is behind the bombings either. I think their are factions in Ukraine, connected to some corrupt politicians in Kiev, who are conducting the Bombings.
There is no doubt the CIA – and probably MI6 – played a role in the 2014 coup. That was designed over a number of years, and a lot of dark money went into that operation. Our countries in the West continue to seek regime change, for the purpose of aligning interests and agenda’s, but more often then not it destabilizes the region. Droning people, invading, and conducting coups are all violations of international law.
For many people, the collapse of the Soviet Union did not ease their fears of totalitarian communism, especially the older generation. If your mother ran from the gulags, and you reside in the UK, then you are probably antirussia! So for many the Russia is a boogeyman that consistently haunts their dreams. For this reason, we overreact to everything. If Putin coughs, we threaten him with a sanction.
But sanctions are a form of totalitarianism. If you don’t believe what I believe, then I’m going to sanction you. I will destroy your economy. I will make you beg to be part of our little club of virtue signalers. I don’t care if your people starve. It’s not my problem. That is a dangerous way to think. And from a policy perspective, backing Russia into a corner economically is akin to backing Germany into a corner. The last time we tried to corner a country it cost millions of lives. How much this time? Hundreds of millions? A billion? How many will it take before we learn our lesson?
The situation in Donbass is complicated. And there is very little difference between Zelensky and Putin. Both are disgusting, corrupt, totalitarians. Just let them fight. If Putin wins, who cares. If he annexes Ukraine, then we know he’s a menace. We won’t have to speculate anymore. But if he removes Zelensky, and returns home, then he did what he said he was going to do. He ended the bombings.
Instead of overreacting with antirussian hysteria, why don’t we just wait and see how things play out. We can give a temporary home for those who want to escape the conflict, and send them back when it’s over. That would be sensible policy.
And in regards to biolabs, there is no reason for the United States to have nine biolabs in Ukraine. I think any sensible person can understand there is more to the story. I’m sure those biolabs are not designing weapons for genocide, but I’m 99% sure they are designing weapons. There is no other rational explanation.
And that is another violation of international law.
But as we can see international law is a joke. Everyone knows that. Because if we followed international law, G.Bush, Obama, Trump, Putin, Zelensky, Xi, and Clinton would all be in jail.
The “biolabs” may have been Disease Control Centers set up like those in the USA.
We are all to some extent at the mercy of the media-controllers, whether state-actors, vested interests, white-noise disinformers and conspiracy believers (not necessarily always wrong). Thorough examination, treble-checking, common-sense and personal reality contacts can help evaluate the data and identify misleading sources. Politicians do not share the instinct for Rankean accuracy and neither do many historians or journalists.
The impact of the WW1 blockade and the pre-WW2 International Boycott of German Goods & Services on German attitudes were factors in the reach for Ukrainian wheat and Romanian oil. Events are interactive.
Shame about “agenda’s” but pedantic or not it says something about the writer. As for the rest of it he doesn’t believe media reports about”false flag operations” but does believe the same media who report about the Donbass region. If we caused WW2 what was Germany’s role in that conflict? Apparently it was our fault because we tried to “corner Germany.”
Graham, German debt was a major factor which led to the rise of Hitler. Germany was indeed, economically cornered. The rhineland was at risk, to repay the debts, and the German people voted for a strong man to represent them. Historians all agree that was a mistake. The writer is not siding with Hitler. He is just stating that sanctions lead to more hitlers, not less. That is the point he’s making. If you corner a country economically, then it will lead to war not peace.
And the writer said he believes the people in that region, not the “media reports”. And that is also a fact. If you go to Donbass and talk to the people, they say the bombings are coming from Kiev. There are two battalions from Donbass fighting alongside the Russians.
You need to read more carefully, and take off the biased lens.
I don’t believe either of these views that I have written, but I hear both all the time.Mainly from the very blinkered
I don’t believe either view, both of which strike me as lunatic. It took me 15 minutes to construct them, again it is interesting that there is little comment about the the war being a CIA false flag op, a really mad view, does that mean the our readers incline toward this view as true?
Abramovich’s chocolates add a footnote to the madness. No wonder Putin “keeps his distance”.
The Czech anticommunist Josef Josten told me how he only just avoided deadly poisoning in comparable circumstances.
Salisbury reportedly is not yet 100% clear.