Biological & Chemical Weapons: Who is the Bad Guy?
The Skripal false flag operation in Salisbury, UK, and a huge hoax in Duma, Syria, including trained child actors, have stirred fresh debate on those dangerous weapons. That is basically good. However, in case the discussion lacks crucial facts, we are again advancing quickly on the wrong track.
Novichok inventor Vil Mirzayanov, 83, made himself heard in mid-March, while the anti-Russian Skripal operation was in full swing, only Russiacould be behind this poisoning. Fact is: The US are back in that trade to an extent the Soviet Union (let alone: Russia) has never ever reached, issuing "81 recent patentsusing Novichok". Moreover, the respectable aged scientist ventured, only state actors could produce the substance, but was soon contradicted by an American colleague, Cornell University Professor of Organic Chemistry David Collum, who held, that his students were easily and well able to deliver, given an appropriate laboratory. And lists appeared as to who else could in the international assembly of countries... Iranreported possession, several other countries, among them NATO members.
Among them Germany, which obtained material in the sixtiesand Novichok in the nineties, without being authorized to do so.
This is not the only trouble the US faces by employing paid turncoats. Biological and chemical weapons scientist Ken Alibek alias Kanatjan Alibekov turned so smart as a businessman in state fund joggling on exaggerating Russian threats, he dropped from official grace and became a nuisance to his erstwhile sponsors.
But yet another interesting matter is, what happened to the old Soviet-era laboratories - and the maybe not just so astonished public will discover not only adventurous British secret service missions to bizarre places like Vozrozhdeniya Island on the Kazakh-Uzbek border - turned colorful BBC coverage.
And there, the US is in fact not only studying the old Soviet achievements and their network of labs, but has set up a whole new system of its own on top of it. 2015 in Almaty, Kazakhstan, we see US participation in a high-tech bubonic plague laboratory - without a clear image, as to what exactly, the US are up to in this specialized place. In Stepnogorsk, the US is now providing "significant funds supporting civilian research". In Nukus, Uzbekistan, where most of the Novichok research had been carried out, the US is involved since 1999. It has since "also funded research projects to employ former biological weapons scientists."
This does not sound suspicious - but in Tbilisi, Georgia, the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs did voice concern: Auspicious appears the standard line of "disease containment", which can be read and heard at all facilities of this kind surrounding Russia. It may be noted, that "containment" may easily be turned into "spread" of disease at short notice, should the need come up. And it is precisely with small nations on tight budgets, with unstable political situations and economic strategies under challenge, that the US is usually carrying out adventurous policies.
And in Ukraine, where not only all troubles with NATO's advance towards Moscow seem to culminate, but also the western readiness to break all kinds of laws and accept mafia-type businesses, not only the aforementioned Kanatjan Alibekov planned to set up shop. The US have been obviously immensely active - and the likewise obvious objective is, to build up and hold available a vast network of facilities far from the usually harsh and multiple control regulations at home in the US or with European NATO allies, inspectors of international agreement compliance etc. The article on Ukraine lists several incidents of poisoning with hundreds of victims as well as intensive involvement and heavy financing from the US side.
This comes to no coincidence or just by chance: Five major US administrations (ministries) are involved in these undertakings, namely: Departments of State, Defense, Energy, Agriculture and Health. Official actors traditionally just give an umbrella to much larger private enterprise adventures - which in fact suggest an international enquiry and raising the issue to the level of the United Nations Security Council.
And these is not just a challenge on a national basis in one major UN member country. What the world faces in fact, is the incorporation of these enormous US activities into the UN activities proper: By offering "compliance assistance" in the case of the concerned SC resolutions, US personnel gets access to all activities in the fields of interest in other countries - and can proceed with its own US-funded investments in any business or state activity, Washington or secret agencies see fit.
Just as to what exactly Washington sees fit to invest in, may be highlighted by a decision, which Heather Nauert, State Department Spokesperson, made public as recent as June 14, 2018: The US is giving 6.6m US$ to the infamous "White Helmets", a support organization of IS in Syria, active in, according to victims witnesses, rounding up opposition to IS in IS-held areas, prison wards, support to torture procedures, training of child actors in propaganda cases involving unbased accusations of poison gas attacks on the Syrian people against the Syrian government.