by John Helmer, Moscow
  @bears_with

The presiding judge in the trial of murder in the downing of Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17 on July 17, 2014, dropped a bombshell at the end of his 45-minute ruling presented in court in The Netherlands yesterday.   

The Dutch prosecutors are now attempting to cover it up. A press spokesman, Monique Buunk, was asked for a copy of the judge’s ruling. She declined and refused to explain. A summary of the ruling issued by the prosecution press office on Monday afternoon said only: “the court also put a number of questions to the prosecution and counsel for the relatives.” The court has now adjourned until June 8.

Reading from a prepared paper, Judge Hendrik Steenhuis (lead image) ordered the Dutch prosecutors and the Dutch-led Joint Investigation Team, which has provided the evidence for the murder charges, to report to the court whether US satellite data, allegedly showing the firing of a BUK missile to bring down the aircraft, have been provided to the investigation. The judge’s order also requires the prosecutors to explain whether the American satellite evidence can now be released to the court and to the lawyers representing Oleg Pulatov, one of the four men accused in the firing of the missile.

On January 22, 2016, according to Steenhuis , Dutch members of parliament were briefed by a Dutch satellite expert at a parliamentary discussion of the MH17 case that “the US has satellite images of the missile being fired”, and that these images were “shared with Dutch intelligence.” According to Steenhuis, the MP also announced “the US has no objection to declassification”. “Is this correct?” Steenhuis issued an order to the prosecutors for reply. “Is this satellite data to be released?”

The order for disclosure of the US satellite evidence opens in court for the first time the possibility that the Dutch prosecution may not be able to produce the satellite images because the US has not released them;  because a Dutch military intelligence report of September 21, 2016,  says it had received from the US no satellite imagery of a BUK missile launch at MH17; and because the US claim to have the satellite data is a fabrication. 

by Editor - Monday, March 23rd, 2020
No Comments »

by John Helmer, Moscow
  @bears_with

The presiding judge in the trial of murder in the downing of Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17 on July 17, 2014, has dropped a bombshell at the end of his 45-minute presentation in court in The Netherlands on Monday morning.  

Reading from a prepared script, Judge Hendrik Steenhuis (lead image) ordered the Dutch prosecutors and the Dutch-led Joint Investigation Team, which has provided the evidence for the murder charges, to report to the court whether US satellite data, allegedly showing the launch of a BUK missile to bring down the aircraft, have been provided to the investigation. The judge’s order also requires the prosecutors to explain whether the American satellite evidence can now be released to the court and to the lawyers representing Oleg Pulatov, one of the four men accused in the firing of the missile.

On January 22, 2016, according to Hendrick, a Dutch member of parliament claimed in a parliamentary hearing that “the US has satellite images of the missile being fired”, and that these images were “shared with Dutch intelligence.” The Dutch parliamentarian was not named. According to Steenhuis, the MP also announced “the US has no objection to declassification”.

“Is this correct?” Steenhuis issued an order to the prosecutors for answer.  “Is this satellite data to be released?”

The order for disclosure of the US satellite evidence opens in court for the first time the possibility that the Dutch prosecution may not be able to produce the satellite images because the US has not released them;  because a Dutch military intelligence report of September 21, 2016,  says it had received from the US no satellite imagery of a BUK missile launch at MH17; and because the data may not exist at all.

by Editor - Monday, March 23rd, 2020
No Comments »

by John Helmer, Moscow
  @bears_with

At the end of President Putin’s war talks in Moscow with Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan (lead image) on March 5, Erdogan refused to shake the hand of Russian Defence Minister, Sergei Shoigu.

Erdogan’s insult, in the presence of Putin, revealed the Turkish president’s anger at the defeat  his ambitions have suffered on the battlefields of northern Syria, at the hands of the Russian military. By snubbing Shoigu at the farewells, Erdogan was revealing that he blamed the Defence Ministry and General Staff for opposing the terms of troop deployment, reinforcement of arms, and rules of engagement which he demanded, and was repeatedly refused, during the five hours of negotiations.   

Shoigu knows Erdogan knows that he expects him to attempt to break out of the new agreement, just as he has done with the two Sochi agreements of September 17, 2018 and October 22, 2019.  Erdogan hates him for that. Shoigu is content to let Erdogan demonstrate to Putin which of them cannot control himself.

On March 19, when Erdogan, his Defence Minister Hulusi Akar and intelligence chief Hakan Fidan, decided on their breakout along the M4 highway, just as the Russians were expecting, they triggered a new test of Kremlin strategy. 

by Editor - Sunday, March 22nd, 2020
No Comments »

by John Helmer, Moscow
  @bears_with

An attempt is underway to arrange a meeting between President Vladimir Putin and the Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MbS) to restore the agreement on oil production cuts which MbS broke at the March 6 meeting of the Organisation of Petroleum Exporting Countries with Russia (OPEC+).  The Crown Prince is reportedly now ready to agree on a formula for oil production limits along the lines already discussed with the Russians.

His pre-condition is a domestic Saudi one. He is insisting that he will meet President Putin as the Saudi head of state, no longer as Crown Prince. This means that the full and formal transfer of power from his father King Salman bin Abdullaziz will take place “imminently”. 

by Editor - Sunday, March 22nd, 2020
No Comments »

by John Helmer, Moscow
  @bears_with

Russian toilet paper is a national secret – not a state secret, but a commercial one.

This is because production, sales and profits have been growing fast – and this has been for the past five years, before the current toilet paper panic.

Secrecy is also in operation because the major foreign companies would like to keep the lion’s share of the Russian  market boom by out-selling or buying up the competing Russian toilet paper companies. They, in their turn, want to push the foreigners out by consolidating among themselves and lobbying for government measures to do that.  Consolidation of assets and market share is what western market analysts call it. In Russia it can be called asset raiding. This is when one toilet paper company takes over a rival at a price for the assets which is below the real asset value.

In the bum boom, on the hot seat at the moment are Essity, a unit of SCA, the Swedish paper and pulp group group, which is currently the Russian market leader with a third of the market; Hayat Kimya, a Turkish group trying to expand from its base in Tatarstan; and Kimberly-Clark, the Kleenex maker of the US, which is losing market share to the Russian brands. SCA and Kimberly-Clark are stock exchange-listed shareholding companies with public reporting and accounting obligations. The Hayat holding is privately held. About their Russian business they are as secretive as each other. Altogether, the Russians produce just over half the toilet paper sold in the market; the Swedes, Turks and Americans,  just under half. That proportion is about to change. 

by Editor - Thursday, March 19th, 2020
No Comments »

by John Helmer, Moscow
  @bears_with

Defence lawyers for Oleg Pulatov, one of the four men charged by the Dutch government with murder in the downing of Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17, have told the court the prosecutors were acting illegally in the case they have presented so far.

A lawyer for the 298 victims killed on board the aircraft, and their next of kin, also accused the prosecution of unlawfully keeping the evidence in the case file secret. No reporters for the international or Dutch media have published this part of the trial.

by Editor - Monday, March 16th, 2020
No Comments »

by John Helmer, Moscow
  @bears_with

The Defence Science and Technology Laboratory (DSTL) at Porton Down, the principal chemical warfare testing unit of the British Ministry of Defence, has acknowledged it was producing and testing the organophosphate nerve agent Novichok from 2014.

This is four years before Sergei Skripal, the retired double agent for the UK’s Secret Intelligence Service (MI6), and his daughter Yulia, were incapacitated by a nerve agent in Salisbury on March 4, 2018. The British Government has called that nerve agent Novichok. According to the British Prime Minister, Theresa May, speaking to the House of Commons on March 12, 2018, “it is now clear that Mr Skripal and his daughter were poisoned with a military-grade nerve agent of a type developed by Russia. This is part of a group of nerve agents known as ‘Novichok’…the Government has concluded that it is highly likely that Russia was responsible for the act against Sergei and Yulia Skripal.”

The admission of British Government testing of Novichok since 2014 came from DSTL in a letter of last week, dated March 11, 2020. This was the laboratory’s reply to a Freedom of Information Act (2000) request for details of testing of organophosphate chemicals on monkeys.  The reply said the testing programme between 2014 and 2019 was a “Home Office project”. Its purpose was “development of medical countermeasures for nerve agent exposure”. Regarding the testing of Novichok on monkeys in this period, DSTL said “no other organophosphate compounds have been tested.”

The admission appears to contradict the official narrative of the British Government that Novichok was produced in Russia and brought to the UK by Russian military intelligent agents on a mission to kill Sergei Skripal. The Defence Ministry, through DSTL, appears now to be  admitting  its own secret chemical warfare operation in breach of the international Chemical Weapons Convention.   In consequence, this would have been of particular interest to Russian and many other military intelligence agencies.

In Salisbury, which is close to Porton Down and to the headquarters of the British military’s chemical warfare command centre, Skripal had been living among British intelligence officers and Wiltshire police since mid-2010; this followed his release from a Russian prison in a spy exchange. He was subjected to an unusually lengthy period of testing by British security agents to determine whether he was a triple agent still loyal to GRU, the Russian military intelligence agency he had been convicted in Moscow for betraying. If Skripal subsequently obtained information about the top-secret Novichok programme at Porton Down, he may have been judged by the British counter-intelligence service MI5 to represent a serious threat of disclosure.

by Editor - Monday, March 16th, 2020
No Comments »

by John Helmer, Moscow
  @bears_with

Lesions in the frontal lobe of a normal human being will cause deficits in the executive mental capacities; things like organizing data, planning action, archiving for memory, controlling anger, and the ability to make inferences about the intentions of others. Neurological trials have proved this beyond reasonable doubt.

The lead images present the frontal lobes and the faces of the three principal prosecutors in the Dutch trial of murder in the downing of Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17 six years ago. Their names are, from left to right, Thijs Berger, Ward Ferdinandusse, and Dedy Woei-A-Tsoi.

Analysis of every word they have spoken on the second day of the MH17 trial, March 10, reveals so many mistakes in Dutch criminal law and procedure that the medical condition of their frontal lobes is, to independent specialists, suspect. The resulting risk is for the defendants they are prosecuting – three Russians and a Ukrainian; and also the Russian state, which Berger accused of  “a disturbing pattern of active involvement on the part of Russian security services, specifically the GRU and the FSB in murders in other countries.”

The prosecutors did not speak off the cuff. They read scripts which their brains, and also those of their supervisors at the Public Prosecution Service and the Ministry of Justice, had drafted, reviewed, corrected, edited, and authorized in advance.  The pathological evidence presented, therefore, is of more than three individual frontal lobes, but also of the frontal lobe of the Dutch judicial system.

Only if that is tested according to the Dutch Criminal Code and the Dutch Code of Criminal Procedure can this trial commence lawfully for the four accused of intentionally murdering 298 passengers and crew on board MH17 when it was shot down on July 17, 2014. So everything the prosecutors have said has been extracted, weighed, and dissected. Here are the neurological and jurisprudential results of the examination.  

by Editor - Sunday, March 15th, 2020
No Comments »

by John Helmer, Moscow
  @bears_with

In the first two hours of the first day of the Dutch trial of allegations of murder in the shooting-down of Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17, Hendrik Steenhuis, the presiding judge, revealed that the judgement for  Dutch court jurisdiction for the case to proceed is inevitable. He did that three months before he has scheduled a hearing on the question. Steenhuis also revealed that a judgement of guilt against the three Russian and one Ukrainian defendants is not less inevitable.

Judgements in a trial scheduled to run for at least twelve months, issued before lunch was served to the judges on their first day, are the makings of a show trial.

by Editor - Wednesday, March 11th, 2020
No Comments »

by John Helmer, Moscow
  @bears_with

Russia is not the initiator of the war on the oil front which is now under way. Not Russian Energy Minister, Alexander Novak (lead image, right), but Mohammed Bin Salman (left), the Saudi Crown Prince and chief executive of the sheikhdom.

This is war propaganda from the Financial Times : “ ‘There was a consensus among Opec [to cut production]. Russia objected and has said that from April 1 everyone can produce whatever they like. So the kingdom too is exercising its right,’ said one person familiar with Saudi oil policy.”

This is more lying from the New York Times: “Moscow refused to accept production cuts to offset the effect of the coronavirus outbreak”

What is true is that the war started with the US Government; its spetsnaz, the shale oil producers;  and their offensive to capture  market share from the traditional producers, the member states of the Organisation of Petroleum Exporting Countries led by Saudi Arabia, plus Russia (OPEC+). Pressing this attack when oil demand started falling, as the corona virus damaged the global economy, obliged the defenders to agree between themselves on tactics. The Russians argued for holding the current position, and let the virus, the demand dynamic, and the elapse of time damage the Americans. The Saudis argued for a break-out, a counter-offensive. Between lower-risk defence in place, and a higher-risk sally, it’s impossible to do both at the same time. Three things happened next.

They illustrate the lesson the Russian command will now teach Mohammad Bin Salman, as last week’s lesson was taught on the Syrian war front to Tayyip Recep Erdogan, Turkey’s President. Defence in depth will usually defeat offence, even surprise attack, when it runs beyond the lines of supply and reserve.

by Editor - Monday, March 9th, 2020
No Comments »