Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 31

Thread: Victor Bout

  1. #1

    Default Victor Bout

    Viktor Bout



    ?????? ??????????? ???
    Viktor Anatolyevich Bout
    Born 13 January 1967 (1967-01-13) (age 42)
    Dushanbe, Tajik SSR, Soviet Union Other names Victor Bout, Viktor Butt, Viktor Budd, Victor But, Victor Anatolievitsh, Boris, Vadim Markovich Aminov, Viktor Bulakin Known for Arms trafficking Viktor Anatolyevich Bout (Russian: ?????? ??????????? ???) (born 13 January 1967 near Dushanbe, Tajik SSR, Soviet Union) established a myriad of air cargo companies and is famous for being a suspected arms dealer.
    A former Soviet military translator,[1] Bout made a significant amount of money through his many air transport companies,[2] shipping cargo mostly in Africa and the Middle East during the 1990s and early 2000s.[citation needed] Just as willing to ship cargo for Charles Taylor in Liberia as he was for the United Nations in Sudan and the United States in Iraq,[2][3] Bout may have facilitated huge arms shipments into various civil wars in Africa with his private air cargo fleets during the 1990s.[4]
    While claiming to have done little more than provide logistics, he has been called a "sanctions buster"[2] by former British Foreign Office minister Peter Hain, who described Bout as "the principal conduit for planes and supply routes that take arms... from east Europe, principally Bulgaria, Moldova and Ukraine to Liberia and Angola."[5]
    Peter Hain has also called Bout a "merchant of death,"[6] and an eponymous book by Douglas Farah and Stephen Braun details investigations of Bout by the US and others.[7] Douglas Farah, when interviewed by Mother Jones, said, "It is important to note, as we do in the book, that much of what Viktor Bout does is, while reprehensible, not illegal."[8]
    Bout has never been prosecuted for arms trafficking[9] and while he has shipped flowers, frozen chicken,[2] UN peacekeepers, French soldiers and African heads of state,[10] it has never been shown that his aircraft moved weapons of any kind.[citation needed]
    Viktor Bout has always professed his innocence.
    History

    A UN document, and Bout himself, state his birthplace as Dushanbe, USSR (now, the capital of Tajikistan),[10][11][12][13] possibly on 13 January 1967.[10][13] But a few other birthplaces have been suggested;[11] a 2001 South African intelligence file listed him as Ukrainian in origin.[14][15]
    Soviet military service

    There is confusion regarding Bout's military career, although it is clear he served in the Soviet Union's armed forces. He graduated from the Military Institute of Foreign Languages,[13][16] and is said to be fluent in six languages[17] including Russian, Portuguese, English, French and Arabic.[12] His personal website states that he served in the army of the Soviet Union as a translator, holding the rank of Lieutenant.[1] Other sources state he rose to the rank of major in the GRU, an arm of the Soviet armed services that combined intelligence agents and special forces,[2] or that he was an officer in the Soviet air force,[3] or that he was KGB.[10]
    Africa

    Bout served in Angola, part of the Soviet contingent of a 1987[16] peacekeeping operation there.[13][16] Bout has said he was in Angola for only a few weeks.[10]
    He began an airfreight business in Africa around the time of the collapse of the USSR.[12]
    Customers

    As well as some more controversial customers such as Charles G. Taylor, the French government,[10] the UN and the US have also paid for his services.[8][15][18]
    Suspect shipments

    The nickname, 'Sanctions Buster' is due to Bout having been implicated in facilitating the violation of UN arms embargoes in Angola, Liberia, Sierra Leone and the Democratic Republic of Congo.[19]
    Eastern European arms to Angola

    A 2000 United Nations report states that, "...Bulgarian arms manufacturing companies had exported large quantities of different types of weapons between 1996 and 1998 on the basis of (forged)[13] end-user certificates from Togo."[20][21] And that, "...with only one exception, the company Air Cess, owned by Victor Bout, was the main transporter of these weapons from Burgas airport in Bulgaria."[20][21] These weapons may have been destined for use by UNITA[20][21] viz. Uniao Nacional para a Independencia Total de Angola, one faction in Angola's 1975–2002 civil war.[citation needed]
    Another suspected arms dealer, Imad Kebir, is said to have employed Bout's aircraft during the mid-1990s to transport weapons to Africa from Eastern European states.[22] The cargo supposedly had Zairean end user certificates, but the true end-user was UNITA.[22]
    From 1993 Angola was under an UN embargo prohibiting the importation of arms.[23]
    Afghanistan

    Soon after the beginning of the 2001-present war in Afghanistan al Qaeda is said to have moved gold and cash out of the country, and "credible reports" state that some of the planes used to do this were linked to Bout.[22]
    Bout says he has been to Afghanistan "many times,"[11] and while openly stating that starting in 1994[24] he had made shipments for the pre-Taliban government which later became the Northern Alliance, as well as having known Ahmed Shah Massoud, an Afghan Northern Alliance commander,[10] he denies any dealings with al Qaeda or the Taliban.[24] Author Douglas Farah, in an 2007 interview, stated Bout had customers in both the Taliban and the Northern Alliance, however.[18]
    Interpol notices

    Constantly moving location, owning numerous companies and frequently re-registering aircraft[2][20] made it hard for authorities to make a case against Bout. He has never been charged for the alleged African arms deals to which he owes his notoriety.[9]
    Belgian request

    The Belgians requested that Interpol issue a notice for Bout on charges of money laundering and in 2002 an INTERPOL Red Notice on Bout was issued requiring his provisional arrest with view to extradition.[8] Bout's website states a Belgian warrant (not the INTERPOL notice) for his arrest for failing to appear in court was issued, but later cancelled.[1] And the site has a document in Dutch to support the claim that the Belgian case against him was dismissed.[25]
    US request

    The day of his Bangkok arrest, an INTERPOL red notice requiring his provisional arrest with view to extradition was requested by the US against Bout. The reason being conspiracy to provide material support or resources to a designated foreign terrorist organization.[26] His wanted poster can be viewed here.
    CAR trial

    Charged in 2000 with forging documents in the Central African Republic, Bout was convicted in absentia and the charges were later dropped.[16]
    Thai arrest and extradition trial

    Bout was arrested on an INTERPOL red notice and is facing extradition to the US where a formal indictment against him has been made. He will be prosecuted if extradited.
    Arrest

    Viktor Bout was arrested by Royal Thai Police in Bangkok on March 6, 2008,[26] the culmination of a sting operation set up by US Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) agents.[3] Bout allegedly offered to supply weapons to what he thought were representatives of Colombian Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) rebels.[2][3]
    Extradition hearing

    After months of delay, Bangkok's Criminal Court on Monday, 22 September, 2008 began an extradition hearing for Bout.[27]
    In February 2009 Members of the United States Congress signed a letter to Attorney General Holder and Secretary of State (i.e. Foreign Secretary) Clinton which expressed their wish that Bout's extradition, "remain a top priority".[28]
    Mr Bout, 42, had been in prison in Bangkok for over a year when on Tuesday 11th of August 2009 the court ruled in favour of Mr Bout. US officials expressed their surprise by this decision while a spokesman for Russia’s foreign ministry stated that Russia was ”satisfied by the decision and we hope that Viktor Bout will return to his homeland in the near future.”[29]
    US indictment

    The day after his Bangkok arrest the U.S. Department of Justice charged Bout with conspiracy to provide material support or resources to a designated foreign terrorist organization,[30] conspiring to kill Americans, conspiring to kill US officers or employees and conspiring to acquire and use an anti-aircraft missile.[27] On August 11, 2009, Thai Court ruled in favor of Viktor Bout, denying the US its request for extradition based on the lack of legal basis and political motivation behind the case.[31] Therefore, he will not face prosecution for the American charges.
    Executive Order 13348

    Incidentally, due to Bout's close association with Charles Taylor's Liberia the United States froze Bout's, along with many other's, US assets in July 2004 through Executive Order 13348, which specifically mentions him as a "businessman, dealer and transporter of weapons and minerals" in the annex.[32]
    In the media

    The 2005 film, Lord of War is thought to be based, in part, on stories of his alleged gun-running.[2][33]
    In 2007 Stephen Braun and Douglas Farah published a book about Bout entitled Merchant of Death: Money, Guns, Planes, and the Man Who Makes War Possible.[7]
    See also



    References


    1. ^ a b c Victor Bout's Personal Website, FAQ
    2. ^ a b c d e f g h Flying Anything to Anybody The Economist, Dec 18th 2008
    3. ^ a b c d Revealed: trap that lured the merchant of death 'The Observer, Sunday 9 March 2008
    4. ^ 'Lord of war' arms trafficker arrested, The Guardian, March 7, 2008.
    5. ^ BBC Profile, Viktor Bout
    6. ^ 'Merchant of Death' still on the run BBC News Africa
    7. ^ a b Merchant of Death - book's official website ISBN 978-0470048665
    8. ^ a b c "Meet Viktor Bout, the Real-Life 'Lord of War'" - MotherJones, September 13, 2007
    9. ^ a b Arms suspect faces charges in US BBC, Friday, 7 March 2008, 13:36 GMT
    10. ^ a b c d e f g Arms and the Man New York Times, Aug. 17, 2003
    11. ^ a b c Meeting Viktor Bout, the ‘Merchant of Death’ BBC Channel 4 Snowblog, 16/03/09
    12. ^ a b c Victor Bout's Personal Website
    13. ^ a b c d e [http://www.un.org/Docs/sc/committees/Angola/363e.pdf Addendum to the final report of the Monitoring Mechanism on Sanctions against UNITA] S/2001/363
    14. ^ Foreign Policy: The Merchant of Death
    15. ^ a b Douglas Farah and Stephen Braun: "The Merchant of death"
    16. ^ a b c d Who is Victor Bout? The Christian Science Moniter's Global News Blog, Elizabeth Ryan | 10.22.09
    17. ^ Viktor Bout arrested The Economist, March 13 2008
    18. ^ a b Douglas Farah on The Daily Show
    19. ^ Stop Ruthless Arms Brokers that Fuel Deadly Conflicts Amnesty International USA
    20. ^ a b c d Main Page for S/2000/1225 - Final report of the Monitoring Mechanism on Angola Sanctions
    21. ^ a b c Copy of the text of S/2000/1225Final report of the Monitoring Mechanism on Angola Sanctions
    22. ^ a b c For A Few Dollars More Global Witness, April 2003
    23. ^ UN Security Council Resolution 864, 1993
    24. ^ a b Transcript of American Morning with Paula Zahn Aired March 4, 2002 - 04:13 ET]
    25. ^ A Legal Document in Dutch Victor Bout's Personal Website
    26. ^ a b INTERPOL media release, 07 March 2008
    27. ^ a b Russian 'arms dealer' trial opens BBC, Monday, 22 September 2008, 09:20 GMT
    28. ^ A letter to Secretary of State Mrs. Clinton regarding Bout extradition Victor Bout's Personal Website
    29. ^ [1]
    30. ^ [http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/pr/2008/Mar..._03062008.html International Arms Dealer Charged in U.S. with Conspiracy to Provide Surface-to-Air Missiles and other Weapons to a Foreign Terrorist Organization] US Department of Justice
    31. ^ "Thailand rejects Bout extradition". BBC News. 11 August 2009. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/8194824.stm. Retrieved 2009-08-11.
    32. ^ United States Executive Order 13348 Blocking Property of Certain Persons and Prohibiting the Importation of Certain Goods from Liberia, July 27, 2004
    33. ^ Thailand holds 'top arms dealer' BBC, Thursday, 6 March 2008, 14:40 GMT


    External links


    "I think it would be a good idea." Mahatma Gandhi, when asked what he thought of Western civilization.

    The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways; the point is to change it.
    Karl Marx.

    "Well, he would, wouldn't he?" Mandy Rice-Davies, 1963, replied Ms Rice Davies when the prosecuting counsel pointed out that Lord Astor denied an affair or having even met her.

  2. #2

    Default

    Victor A. Bout Who is Victor Bout
    Victor Bout is a Russian businessman who became one of the world’s famous on the basis of fictitious tales and stories which were generated from one source -- a corrupt United Nations contractor who was generously paid for the UN contracts he arranged with the help of others for Victor’s companies, and then became mad for vengeance when Victor refused to continue paying him. All you know about Victor Bout is traceable to Johan Peleman’s report, a report that was written as a novel and made Peleman an expert, a hero, and a very wealthy man.
    Victor Bout is a dynamic, charismatic, spontaneous, well-dressed, well-spoken, and highly energetic person who can easily communicate in several languages including Russian, Portuguese, English, French, Arabic, among several others. He is a born salesman with undying love for aviation and eternal drive to succeed.
    Victor was born in the Soviet Union, the city of Dushanbe, in an average home and an average family. His father and mother were both employees in the administrative and accounting fields respectively. Victor went to schools in Dushanbe, the city where his parents were employed, prior to returning to Moscow. There he was drafted to do the mandatory military service as a translator serving in the Soviet Union and abroad, and that was how he got introduced to Africa.
    Upon the collapse of the Soviet Union Victor decided to leave the military service and start his own aviation business, the field he was always fascinated by. And with some help from his family and his wife, Victor was able to purchase four Antonov-8 cargo aircraft that became the core and starting point of his fleet and his business.
    Venturing into Africa was a matter of necessity rather than choice. Victor who had already invested all he had into the purchase of the AN-8 had no other choice but to operate in Africa, and particularly, Angola which was the first and only country to grant a certificate for civilian operations to the Antonov-8 which was only certified as military freighter until then. Pictured here is one of the AN-8 that started the fleet of Aircess.
    The low cost of acquisition of aircraft and the required crew, and the availability of capacity in a highly diverse fleet provided Victor with unparalleled competitive advantage. And until the demise of his operations in Africa there was not any operator capable of competing with Victor Bout. Victor's operation turned the western European competitors to bitter enemies, and that was the major reason behind the unified efforts to drive him out of Africa, and the whole world. The stories of arms trafficking then became a snow ball, a huge matter that had no core; however, it got bigger with every roll, and plenty of rolling was added over more than 10 years.
    Welcome to the Internet age, and to the time that any story can become a reality without evidence or proof as long as the story can circulate long enough, with a help of those benefitting from it.
    Victor Bout's Business
    About the Business of Victor Bout
    Few months after the UN report of December 2000 was published, Victor Bout became a public figure and his business became the matter for debate by almost everyone. Prior to that day he was just a normal businessman striving for success.
    The report invented the arms trafficking story, and the illusion of a massive business empire that spanned the globe. The centerpiece of that image was an aviation company by the name of Aircess, and Victor Bout was the illusive person who owned that empire. The expertise that needed to make the delusion credible was aided by inserting the name of Richard Chichakli in the report. The manufactured picture was intriguing, mysterious, and timely, so it explained the reason behind all the misery in Africa. That was, and still is is the way most of the world picture Victor and his business. Of course, the story was further branched into politics, and developed throughout the years to fit whatever hot topics in the news.
    The public heard those who knew nothing about Victor and his business making outrageous claims and raising illogical allegations, without ever questioning it. People were more interested in mysterious scandals rather than naked truth; facts and logic were not part of the story. Peleman, the inventor of Victor Bout myth claimed that Victor purchased 60 aircraft in one year! The number is 60, as in five aircraft per month, and he stated that in public interview and reported the same in the UN report. The world wanted to believe that although it cannot be true, believable, or acceptable logically. Had anyone seen an airline buying five aircraft per month? The answer is no, never happened in the world history, but the media made it believable.
    Politicians and opportunists found great material in the story to further their careers, an unrecognized UK minister of state found fame after calling Victor "the merchant of death", and a "freelance" reporter became rich and famous turned into expert after announcing that he was an expert in Victor Bout's business. Then, and as the Internet chat rooms crowd started using the name of Victor Bout to make their WebPages visible on search engine, the story of Bout's business became an animal of its own.
    In reality Victor Bout is not, and never was an arms dealer, nor had he a business empire that spanned the globe. So what was the actual business of Victor Bout, and how many aircraft did he own, who were the employees, and where did the business operate? Here're the facts about Aircess, and the other ventures of Victor Bout.
    Legal Issues
    The Legal Issues of Victor Bout
    On March 6th, 2008, Victor Bout was accused by the American government of "conspiring to provide support to FARC, to an entity placed under sanctions by the Bush administration." The text of the indictment filed by US government can be downloaded in the documents page, and more information about this case can be found in the US case page.
    That is the accusation against Victor Bout. For a matter of fact, all of what you've been hearing and reading about Victor since forever was never-ever substantiated or found to be true by the numerous investigations carried out by law enforcement worldwide. Victor's name was introduced to the UN in a report prepared by a corrupt UN contractor, and since then, it was used over and over, snow-balling to the size we see now. Victor was an easy target that never fired back, and the story became the only source of income for the self-proclaimed "experts" like Peleman, Farah, and other opportunists who made living for years out of the story they invented.
    The question is why did all of the experts fail to pursue any government to bring charges against Victor Bout for arms trafficking despite all of the alleged evidence they claim to possess? The answer is they do not have any evidence because it never existed. Victor may have violated some laws somewhere, just like we all have done sometime; however, he was not that arms trafficking man presented to the public by the propaganda jockeys through the media. The idea of a person that is been watched and traced by the world's law enforcement not to be caught defies logic.
    Ten years ago, the person who created the story of Victor Bout, a Belgian person who studied 14th century poetry, started a carrier as a private investigator after failing to join the Belgian police. That person was Johan Peleman, and the place was Ostend where Victor had an office which was managed by a Belgian pilot named Ronald De Smet. Ronald knew Peleman, and Peleman who was writing about the questionable operations in Ostend airport saw the opportunity. From there, what started as a mutually beneficial relation, turned later into the story of the "merchant of death" and you know the rest.
    Prior to the current legal issue Victor is facing, there was another issue that developed immediately upon the break of Bout-Peleman relation. Of course, that had to happen in Belgium where Peleman has some people to influence. The issue did not involve any arms business or arms trafficking, and the case was closed and dropped after the statute of limitation expired without finding any evidence to support the accusation. See the Belgian case for more details.
    Documents Download Documents

    US Gov. Documents
    US Politics Documents
    Belgium Documents
    US government complaint filed on March 6, 2008
    US government modified complaint Feb/2009, rejected by the Thai court
    US Government Request to arrest Viktor
    US Government request for extradition
    US Congress' pressure letter over Thailand
    State Dept. report to US Congress
    Bush's executive order 13348
    US Gov. press release concerning Bout's arrest

    The Belgian Court decision in favor of Victor Dutch English
    Communication regarding Victor's project in Belgium
    UN-Peleman Documents
    UN Non-Peleman Documents
    Stories and Fairytales
    UN Security Council report S/2000/1225 establishing Victor Bout as an Arms dealer in Angola
    UN Security Council report S/2001/363 amplifying and capitalizing on Angola report
    UN Security Council report S/2001/1015 copying the previous Angola report for Peleman's new contract in Liberia
    UN Security Council report S/2003/1035 on Somalia chaired by Peleman; Victor never had business in Somalia but Peleman cannot make a report without using Victor Bout
    UN Security Council report S/2002/1146 for Congo, no mention of Victor Bout here
    UN Security Council report S/2003/1027 also for Congo, no mention of Victor Bout here either


    Peleman disputing all UN reports on Congo because they did not mention Victor Bout
    LA Times' Stephen Braun with Al-Qaida theories
    Douglas Farah built his fame and career on myth he invented about Victor Bout. This is his testimony before the US congress. Under oath Farah committed perjury, none of what he said is true or can be proven
    This is Farah's recent testimony few months after the arrest of Victor. Farah is the only person used by the Bush administration to testify in connection with Victor affairs
    Thai Court Documents
    FAQ Frequently Asked Questions

    For the last 10 years the media reported too many allegations against Victor Bout for being the largest arms dealer in the world, what do you say to that?
    Victor Bout is reported to be the largest arms dealer in the world for more than 10 years now; however, nobody during all of these years was able to show evidence to support this allegation or to bring charges against Victor.

    But isn't it true that the American government has charged Victor Bout for alleged conspiracy to sell arms to Colombian rebels?
    It is true that the Bush administration brought charges against Victor for an alleged conspiracy to sell arms; however, the US government has failed to substantiate these allegations in Thai court, and therefore, failed to have Victor Bout extradited to the US.

    The American government stated that Victor made a deal through Andrew Smulian with undercover DEA agents whom are referred to as CS1, CS2, and CS3. Is that true?
    No that is not true. All the people the US government is relying upon are "Paid Informants" as stated in the official US government complaint pages 3-5. See documents page.

    Isn't it true that Johan Peleman, the UN expert on arms trafficking stated in his report to the UN Security Council that Victor indeed is an arms trafficker, and provided charts and copies of evidentiary documents in each of the reports he submitted to the United Nations?
    Johan Peleman made hundreds of allegations against Victor Bout in his reports to the UN; however, neither his allegations were proven to be true, nor his alleged evidence were genuine. All the material presented in the UN reports was reinvestigated and proven false, and that is why it was never used to bring charges against Victor.

    Was Victor on any "wanted" list, or was there any outstanding warrant of arrest issued for him prior to March 2008?
    No, Victor was not wanted by any entity anywhere in the world, nor was there any outstanding warrant of arrest for him prior to March 2008.

    Is it true that Victor's arrest in Thailand is being challenged for being illegal because the Americans acted without the knowledge or authorization of Thai authorities?
    Yes, this is true. Victor was arrested without a warrant or any legal grounds. The US warrant against him was issued 4 days after his arrest. The American agents acted without the knowledge or authorization of Thai authorities. Thai police was called into the scene by the hotel management, and they arrived and took control of the situation as the American agents were trying to kidnap Victor Bout to the US.

    The media report that Victor had a warrant of arrest against him prior to March 2008, is that true?
    No, that is false. A warrant that was issued once for Victor by a Belgian court for failing to appear before the judge to testify was cancelled and dropped by the same court because the allegations against Victor were groundless.

    Was Victor Bout a Major in the KGB?
    No, Victor served as a Lieutenant in the army of the Soviet Union as a translator.
    News and Updates
    No case, no evidence, did not win ... The us solicit Colombia to help!
    Having lost the extradition case, the United States government made the government of Colombia write a letter to the government of Thailand begging to allow the extradition of Victor Bout to the United States. That is right, Colombia is asking Thailand to extradite Victor to the US by trying to put the FARC on trial.
    The tactics that was used by the United States government to gain the dismissal of the case brought against the Bush administration by Richard Chichakli, is now being used again as a final attempt to force Thailand to extradite Victor to the US. In the case of Chichakli, as the US government failed to prove any wrongdoing against Richard they tried to place Victor on trial instead by filing 1,000 page of invented stories about Victor Bout. Now, and at the order of the United States government Colombia is being used to turn the extradition hearing of Victor Bout to a trial for FARC by officially "begging" the government of Thailand, on behalf of the US government, to accept the US request for extradition and filing 300 pages of documents related to its own affairs with the FARC.
    We have always said this case is nothing but politics, and this is yet another set of evidence to affirm that this is a political case. The US government lied in everything it alleges against Victor and the lies were exposed after the US failed to show evidence. Who could have imagine that Colombia will be pimping for the United States? The "confidential" letter signed by the Colombian Minister of Foreign Affairs is here in English and Spanish for your amusement.
    The US government is so desperate to block facts, they ordered Google to block this website!
    As a last resort to conceal and obscure facts in and about the matter of Victor Bout, the United States government ordered Google to block access to this website from within the search result in Google search. We are delighted to see this happening because it provide us, yet with another proof that this case is nothing more than US political conspiracy.

    Video Download Video Clips about Victor Bout


    Victor's birth place
    OFAC's $6 billion dollar man
    Peleman's "Sexy report" and "Secret Witness"
    The politics motivating the US against Victor Bout
    http://www.victorbout.com/



    "I think it would be a good idea." Mahatma Gandhi, when asked what he thought of Western civilization.

    The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways; the point is to change it.
    Karl Marx.

    "Well, he would, wouldn't he?" Mandy Rice-Davies, 1963, replied Ms Rice Davies when the prosecuting counsel pointed out that Lord Astor denied an affair or having even met her.

  3. #3

    Default Meet Viktor Bout - Mother Jones

    Meet Viktor Bout, the Real-Life 'Lord of War'

    Journalist Douglas Farah, co-author of a new book on Viktor Bout, tells how the Tajik-born arms dealer forged a lucrative career skirting U.N. embargoes to sell weapons and air transport services to warlords and despots?not to mention the U.S. military and its contractors in Iraq.

    —By Laura Rozen
    Thu September 13, 2007 12:00 AM PST
    Former Soviet military officer Viktor Bout, the inspiration for Nicholas Cage's character in the Lord of War, remade himself as an international arms dealer and blood diamonds trafficker following the break-up of the USSR. Using his air charter business to smuggle weapons into the world's conflict zones (circumventing U.N. embargoes), Bout traveled the world with a precious gems expert and accountant in tow, supplying arms to a notorious clientele: Liberia's Charles Taylor, a cast of Congolese warlords, and the Taliban, among others. More surprising, journalists Douglas Farah and Stephen Braun report in their new book on Bout, Merchant of Death, is that the shadowy Tajik-born arms dealer has also provided his services to the U.S. military and several U.S. contractors in Iraq, including Halliburton parent company Kellogg, Brown & Root. Laura Rozen interviewed Farah via email.

    Mother Jones: How did Viktor Bout get his start as an international supplier of arms, ammunition, and transport services?
    Douglas Farah: Viktor Bout was a unique creature born of the end of Communism and the rise of unbridled capitalism when the Wall came down in the early 1990s. He was a Soviet officer, most likely a lieutenant, who simply saw the opportunities presented by three factors that came with the collapse of the USSR and the state sponsorship that entailed: abandoned aircraft on the runways from Moscow to Kiev, no longer able to fly because of lack of money for fuel or maintenance; huge stores of surplus weapons that were guarded by guards suddenly receiving little or no salary; and the booming demand for those weapons from traditional Soviet clients and newly emerging armed groups from Africa to the Philippines. He simply wedded the three things, taking aircraft for almost nothing, filling them with cheaply purchased weapons from the arsenals, and flying them to clients who could pay. His background is difficult to ascertain. He is said by U.S. intelligence officials to be the product of an "immaculate conception." He was not, and then he was. He has provided no stories of his youth, very few personal details. He was, according to his multiple passports, born in 1967 in Dushanbe, Tajikistan, the son of a bookkeeper and an auto mechanic. He graduated from the Military Institute on Foreign Languages, a well-known feeder school for Russian military intelligence, and is known to have a true gift for languages.
    MJ: What is the evidence of a relationship between Bout and Russian military intelligence, the GRU?
    DF: It is highly unlikely he could have flown aircraft out of Russia and acquired huge amounts of weapons from Soviet arsenals without the direct protection of Russian intelligence, and, given his background, the GRU seems the most likely candidate. He was providing not solely AK-47s and massive amounts of ammunition, as his competitors were, but attack helicopters, anti-aircraft systems, anti-tank mine systems, sniper rifles, and items that are much harder to acquire. The clearest, most recent direct tie came through an obscure investigation in the United States carried out by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms. Last year the ATF was investigating sales of $240,000 worth of night vision scopes and paramilitary gear from a small sporting goods store in Pennsylvania, and discovered that the items had been illegally shipped to a company that is controlled by an elite Russian intelligence counterterrorism group. The money was paid through a Bulgarian holding company controlled by Bout.
    MJ: Your reporting indicates that Bout has supplied not only the Taliban, Liberia's Charles Taylor, and Congolese warlords, but the U.S. Army and its contractors as well. Can you describe how the U.S. government and U.S. contractors have responded to revelations about who they are doing business with?
    DF: The U.S. government response to revelations of the use of Viktor Bout to fly for government contractors in Iraq (not just a few flights, but hundreds, and perhaps a thousand) has been mixed. Bear in mind most of these flights occurred after President Bush had signed an executive order making it illegal to do business with Bout, because he represented a security threat to the United States. The State Department, under a congressional inquiry initiated by Senator Russell Feingold, found it had used Bout companies, acknowledged it, and stopped. Paul Wolfowitz, while at DOD, did not respond to queries for nine months, then acknowledged that DOD contractors had subcontracted to Bout companies. Despite the public revelation, the congressional inquiry, the executive order, and a subsequent Treasury Department order freezing the assets of Bout and his closest associates, the flights continued for many months, at least until the end of 2005. The Air Force cut him off immediately, but other branches of the military continued to use him.
    MJ: Any evidence that Bout is authorized by governments to play this murky role because he is as useful as he is dangerous?
    DF: Bout, through an intermediary, approached the CIA and FBI immediately after 9/11, and offered his services in helping to oust the Taliban if he were paid tens of millions of dollars for his efforts. Negotiations were serious and lasted several months, but we do not know what, if any, parts of the deal he offered were accepted. There is no doubt he has benefited from the schizophrenic policies of the U.S. government (the Treasury and State departments going after him, while DOD pays him money to fly), but it is difficult to say whether that is the result of calculation or just sloppiness.
    MJ: Is he actually under indictment anywhere?
    DF: There is an Interpol Red Notice on Bout issued in 2002 requiring his arrest, requested by the Belgians for money laundering. The Russians have not honored it.
    MJ: Where does he reside and how easily does he move around? What countries' passports does he travel on?
    DF: He resides in Moscow and travels abroad with some frequency, despite being on a U.N.-sanctioned travel-ban list. He has had five different passports we know of, all from the USSR or Russia, but there could be more.
    MJ: What does it mean that he can operate through a string of front companies so successfully?
    DF: Bout's ability to continue to function shows primarily that the post-Cold War, state-centric view of the world and transnational threats has been rapidly and totally outstripped by the rapidly changing world. Intelligence services and law enforcement agencies are operating in the 20th century, while Bout and those like him are operating in the 21st. With the ability to register aircraft on line, move money electronically in the blink of an eye, and set up proxy shell companies around the world, he will remain far ahead of efforts to stop him unless he gets sloppy.
    MJ: What does it say about the larger system, which does not rein him in?
    DF: Bout's operations tell us that demand for important commodities, particularly weapons, is at a premium. He could arm different sides of the same conflicts because he was efficient and reliable. That is why they called him "the mailman," because he always delivered. With the rapid proliferation of failed and failing states across the globe and the rise of religious and economic militias, guns have become a vital commodity. One of the biggest dangers is that, given Bout's network, access, and capabilities, is that he would be ideally situated to move nuclear material or other highly dangerous weapons or components that could inflict huge damage.
    MJ: You mentioned that Bout was supplying Hezbollah, presumably with authorization from the Russian government. Do you believe this indicates a kind of proxy war between the U.S. and Russia in Lebanon via Israel and Hezbollah, or that it is just a reflection of Russian defense manufacturers seeking a profit outlet for their supplies?
    DF: I think it is both. Russia has long had an interest in Hezbollah and has given the group support, which it continues to do. It is clear from the large stockpiles of new armor-piercing Russian missiles that Hezbollah used last year. But such activities both project Russian power, at a time when the Putin government is desperate to project Russian power across the world, as well as provide outlets for the sale of Russian weapons.
    MJ: What is the difference between the gray arms market and the black market?
    DF: It is important to note, as we do in the book, that much of what Viktor Bout does is, while reprehensible, not illegal. For example, it violates international norms to break U.N. weapons sanctions on a given country, but there is no penalty attached to those violating the sanctions regime. What specific crime was committed in what country? If a weapons merchant uses a forged End User Certificate to purchase weapons, should the country selling the weapons be penalized, should the merchant be punished, or should the country of the forgery be pursued? The answer, of course, is none of the above. No one is penalized, although the law was broken numerous places. This is the grey market, where one may know the weapons are destined for Liberia, but the EUC says it is for Rwanda, and the Bulgarian company selling the weapons, while knowing the EUC is likely a forgery, proceeds with the sale anyway. The black market is selling weapons in a clearly illegal and punishable way.
    MJ: What's been the reaction in U.S. government circles to your book? Is there more U.S. and international resolve to constrain Bout, or the same half measures?
    DF: There has been no official reaction. Treasury and those who went after Bout are happy; there are some in the Pentagon who are chagrined. The embarrassment factor for dealing with Bout is pretty high now, at least in the U.S., and there are greater efforts to make sure he is not paid with U.S. taxpayer dollars. But no pressure has been brought to bear on Russia to turn him over or rein him in, and, like the United States, much of the rest of the world wants to pretend he doesn't exist.
    http://www.motherjones.com/politics/...-life-lord-war
    "I think it would be a good idea." Mahatma Gandhi, when asked what he thought of Western civilization.

    The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways; the point is to change it.
    Karl Marx.

    "Well, he would, wouldn't he?" Mandy Rice-Davies, 1963, replied Ms Rice Davies when the prosecuting counsel pointed out that Lord Astor denied an affair or having even met her.

  4. #4

    Default PBS Frontline: Documentary on Gun Runners


    By Matthew Brunwasser

    Victor Bout is the poster boy for a new generation of post Cold War international arms dealers who play a critical role in areas where the weapons trade has been embargoed by the United Nations.
    Now, as FRONTLINE/World reports in "Gunrunners," unprecedented U.N. investigations have begun to unravel the mystery of these broken embargoes, many of them imposed on African countries involved in bloody civil wars. At the heart of this unfolding detective story is the identification of a group of East European arms merchants, with Victor Bout the first of them to be publicly and prominently identified. The U.N. investigative team pursued leads that a Mr. Bout [pronounced "butt" in Russian] was pouring small arms and ammunition into Angola, Rwanda, Sierra Leone and the Congo, making possible massacres on a scale that stunned the world.


    Despite being pursued for years by a flinty group of private and government arms investigators, a positive visual ID of this United Arab Emirates-based arms merchant only became available when two Belgian journalists ran into him at an airstrip in remote rebel-held Congo. And it was only recently that his name became familiar in the United States, following press reports of his role in arming the Taliban regime in Afghanistan five years ago. If not for this link to Afghanistan, it is probable that Bout would still be a low-profile character in the clandestine world of illicit arms trading.
    That accusation and the heat it generated in the media eventually flushed Bout into the open. From the apparent safe haven of Moscow, he gave CNN and the Associated Press, among others, on-the-record, on-camera interviews rebutting the allegations against him.
    The case of Victor Bout personifies the exceedingly difficult task of keeping small arms out of the world's bloodiest and most destabilizing conflicts. Perhaps most striking is the fact that while Bout has been accused by U.N. investigators, the press and intelligence sources, no government has yet charged him with gun-smuggling.
    Since the U.N. has no law enforcement powers - its investigators cannot subpoena, detain or arrest - the work of the expert panels investigating the illegal arms trade depends on "naming and shaming" individuals and governments to change their activities. Using the diplomatic prestige of the United Nations, they publicize the results of their international detective work, hoping the bad publicity will prod governments into action.
    Media coverage has been vital to that effort, and coverage has increased with the release of each new U.N. report. The story is huge. It spans several continents and involves a large network of shady individuals, front companies and government officials; clunky old Soviet cargo planes; corrupt African bureaucrats and thieving East European military officials.
    An in-depth examination of the media's coverage of one of these arms dealers --Victor Bout -- from an obscure aviation company owner, known only to arms control activists, to a "businessman" helping Angolan UNITA rebels rearm, and finally into the leader of what some officials are now calling "the world's largest arms-smuggling network" -- shows how international priorities are changing following September 11. In fact, intelligence sources close to the hunt for Osama Bin Laden and his Al Qaeda associates say they are beginning to turn their attention to clandestine arms traffic as a way to learn what the terrorist network and its allies are up to.
    BOUT'S EXPLOITS
    Embargo Busting

    "Landing heavy cargo planes with illicit cargoes in war conditions and breaking international embargoes such as the one on Angola requires more than individual effort. It takes an internationally organized network of individuals, well funded, well connected and well versed in brokering and logistics, with the ability to move illicit cargo around the world without raising the suspicions of the law or with the ability to deal with obstacles. One organization, headed, or at least to all appearances outwardly controlled by an Eastern European, Victor Bout, is such an organization." U.N. Angola Report, December 21, 2000

    Little was known publicly about Bout before he became a regular international media item, commonly called "the elusive Victor Bout." On August 25, 1995, Agence France Presse reported that an Aerostan plane leased by Bout's company Transavia was forced to land in Kandahar, Afghanistan by a Taliban jet fighter. Taliban officials impounded "30-odd tons of AK-47 small arms ammunition" meant for government forces in Kabul. At the time, the Taliban had captured 10 provincial capitals, but had not yet taken Kabul, and little more was heard about the event until after September 11.
    In 1997, Business Day in South Africa reported that Bout's company Air Cess was opening an office in Swaziland. And two years later in March 1999, the U.K. Observer wrote about a British pilot regularly violating the arms embargo against Sudan, who had used the "services of former KGB major Viktor Bout, whose fleet of Antonov aircraft has been delivering arms to African war zones for many years."
    The first time Bout was mentioned in the context of embargo-busting was in January 2000 when UK Foreign Minister Peter Hain publicly named him as one of three "businessmen" helping re-arm Angolan UNITA rebels, despite a U.N. arms embargo. The civil war that followed Angola's independence in 1975 is one of the oldest and most intractable in Africa, leaving up to 1.5 million people dead. It is a conflict now largely fought over territory, diamonds and other valuable resources, and prolonged by illicit arms imports.
    Blood Diamonds
    The U.N.'s Angola Report issued December 21, 2000 first brought the issue of the "conflict diamonds" trade to the world's attention. It detailed how, in many regions in Africa, civil conflicts have turned into turf battles over diamond-mining territory. The proceeds from the diamonds are then used to buy illicit weapons and deepen the conflicts. Many human rights activists and organizations have been working for years to eliminate these so-called "blood diamonds" from international markets. A combination of the Angola Report, media coverage of the trade and the sordid story of arms merchant Victor Bout has elevated its position on the international agenda.
    Bout is often mentioned in the press as being "paid in diamonds" although there appears to be no hard evidence for this. Part of what makes Bout so hard to pin down is that he creates layers of companies and individuals between himself and any alleged criminal activities. There are, however, many known links between "blood diamonds" and some of his associates. There is also certain knowledge that his clients fund their arms budgets from diamond sales.
    The Angola Report includes reports of attempts to set up a diamond-cutting factory in Kigali, Rwanda, where Bout had an operational base. Such a factory would have seriously undermined controls on "conflict diamonds," since only uncut diamonds can be traced. Individuals involved in the plan were said to be linked to Bout. The Liberia Report mentioned that Bout's close associate Sanjivan Ruprah - now in jail in Belgium, and a major source of information for US officials about Bout's Taliban connections - owned diamond mines in Liberia and also sold arms.
    Afghanistan
    Before September 11, Bout's involvement in Afghanistan was mentioned in the press only occasionally in passing. Western intelligence officials or anonymous investigators were quoted as saying Bout started off there, arming the government forces fighting the Taliban and other rebels groups. On January 1, 2002, the Washington Monthly took Bout's Afghan connection one step further, saying that he switched sides and started selling to the Taliban while negotiating for the release of his plane and crew in 1995. This assertion was based on a quote from a source familiar with his activities who said, "He's a very enterprising person. When his plane was detained, he used the opportunity as a business introduction to the Taliban."
    A few weeks later, on January 20, the Los Angeles Times reported on the key role played by the United Arab Emirates in hosting money laundering and arms trafficking operations for Al Qaeda and the Taliban, a result of loose government oversight. The article reported that Bout teamed up with Afghan-based militants in the emirate of Sharjah, where, as recently as early 2001, a company called Flying Dolphin, flew shuttles twice a week to the Taliban headquarters in Kandahar. Its owner, Sheik Abdullah bin Zayed al Saqr al Nahyan, was the UAE ambassador to the U.S. from 1989 to 1992, and was described by the U.N. as a business associate of Bout.
    Afghan and U.A.E. air industry sources reported a meeting between "two Russians" and the United Arab Emirates representative of Ariana, the Afghan national airline, in which it was agreed that Bout's Air Cess would provide wheels, tires and other military goods for the Taliban air force. Flying Dolphin would provide charter flights when Ariana was unavailable.
    The Afghan permanent representative to the United Nations, citing Afghan and American intelligence reports, said Ariana flights from Sharjah had transported chemical poisons to Kandahar: "cyanide and other toxic substances purchased in Germany, the Czech Republic and Ukraine." He said the Taliban "had nothing to do with this. These chemicals were for Bin Laden and his people. It was some of the chemicals they were using in experiments." Earlier, the US had reportedly pressured the U.A.E. to clamp down on Bout's operations, which simply resulted in his moving to a neighboring Emirate.
    On January 31 of this year, the Center for Public Integrity (CPI) in Washington, D.C., published further links between Bout and Afghanistan, largely based on Belgian intelligence documents. According to these documents, Bout profited some $50 million from weapons sales to the Taliban in the late 90s. This information was independently verified by another European intelligence source as well as by intelligence documents from an unnamed African country, which said he had sold the guns "on behalf of the Pakistani government." The documents were all from before September 11 and did not specify the type or amounts of weapons sold to the Taliban, other than the fact they were from the stockpiles of the former Soviet Union.
    The CPI report clearly stated that it had established no direct links between Bout and bin Laden, but that Taliban ties to Al Qaeda would have enabled weapons shipped to Afghanistan to make their way to Bin Laden's forces. It also said Bout left Belgium after details of the shipments were reported in the local media.
    The story developed much more rapidly after February 8, when Belgian police raided 18 homes reportedly part of Bout's network. Police said they found invoices from sales to UNITA rebels in Angola and passes from Bagram airport in Afghanistan. Seven were arrested, three of whom were detained, including Sanjivan Ruprah, the most important source of evidence thus far on Bout's operations.
    Ruprah, a Kenyan national, appears in the U.N.'s Sierra Leone and Liberia reports as a major operative on arms deals to embargoed African states. According to these reports, he collaborates closely with "the highest authorities in Liberia" and is a "close business associate of Victor Bout." He holds Liberian diplomatic passports under different names and is Deputy Commissioner for Maritime Affairs - Liberia is one of the world's main "flags of convenience" for easy ship registration. He is also an arms dealer, was directly involved in the operations of Leonid Minin's arms sales to Liberia, and owns diamond mines in Liberia.
    Belgian police charged Ruprah with involvement in a scheme to print fake Congolese Francs and acquire fake passports, according to a March 26 report in Le Monde. Clearly, these charges were not as important to Belgian judicial authorities as his connections to Victor Bout. Belgian authorities indicted Bout a week later on money laundering charges, almost certainly based on Ruprah's testimony. In late February, The New York Times quoted a spokesman for the Belgian judge-prosecutor's office, saying Bout used Ostend airport "as his western air-smuggling hub, flying planes from there to central Europe to load up with arms, and then to Africa or Afghanistan."
    The Largest Arms Trafficking Network in the World?
    News organizations around the world, pressing hard to break new stories about Al Qaeda, along with western officials eager to be seen as fighting terrorism may be inflating Bout's significance in describing him as heading "what some officials call the largest arms trafficking network in the world." Such claims were never made before evidence emerged linking Bout to the Taliban. And even if true, the mandate of the U.N. arms investigations - limited to violations of country-specific embargoes - and the nature of the illicit arms trade make it impossible to confirm. Most experts would agree that he is the largest known illicit trafficker in Africa. Beyond that, the extent of his activity is very difficult to pin down.
    What is certain is how the power of these allegations brought Bout out of invisibility and into a Moscow radio station on February 28 for a live two-hour interview. An Inter-Fax news bulletin arrived during the interview and was read over the air:
    "The Russian bureau of Interpol has announced that it has been seeking Victor Bout, suspected of having supplied weapons to the Al-Qa'ida organization, for four years. Spokesman Igor Tsiroulnikov declared: 'Today we can say with certainty that Victor Bout is not in Russian territory.'"
    On March 4, the Russian Federal Security Service issued a short correction: "There is no reason to believe that this Russian citizen has committed any illegal actions." Bout described the accusations against him as "the plot of a Hollywood action movie in which it is so interesting to find a Russian trail."
    INDEX
    THE STORY
    Synopsis of "Gunrunners"
    GALLERY OF ARMS DEALERS
    Web-exclusive report on key players in the small arms trade
    UKRAINE: CASHING IN ON ILLEGAL ARMS
    Source of Black Market Weapons

    INTERVIEW WITH JOHAN PELEMAN
    U.N. Investigator

    INTERVIEW WITH TOM OFCANSKY
    Former State Department Analyst

    LINKS & RESOURCES
    Gunrunning, Cold War Stockpiles, and Conflict Diamonds

    MAP
    http://www.pbs.org/frontlineworld/st...eone/bout.html
    Video of 'Gun Runners' here: http://www.pbs.org/frontlineworld/st.../thestory.html

    Matthew Brunwasser is a freelance journalist based in Bulgaria. He worked as field producer on FRONTLINE/World's "Gunrunners" story.

    "I think it would be a good idea." Mahatma Gandhi, when asked what he thought of Western civilization.

    The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways; the point is to change it.
    Karl Marx.

    "Well, he would, wouldn't he?" Mandy Rice-Davies, 1963, replied Ms Rice Davies when the prosecuting counsel pointed out that Lord Astor denied an affair or having even met her.

  5. Default Bout to be extradited to US

    From http://sbinvestigator.blogspot.com/2...ut-monaco.html




    VIKTOR BOUT & MONACO



    Thailand has ordered the extradition of notorious Russian arms dealer Viktor Bout to the United States.

    Robert Eringer, the spymaster of Monte Carlo, targeted Bout for investigation in late 2002, soon after being retained by Prince Albert II.

    Eringer had reason to believe that, between 1996 and 2001, members of the Russian criminal underworld passed eight hundred million dollars through Pastor International.

    Much of this revenue was generated by illegal arms sales. A key figure in these sales was Viktor Bout a.k.a. “The Lone Wolf” and “The Death Merchant of Africa” and “The Bill Gates of arms Dealing.”

    These laundered funds were then invested into real estate in France, Spain, and Switzerland, with significant amounts invested in hotels throughout Europe and Asia.

    Through his private airline Air Cess, Bout supplied the Taliban in Afghanistan with an air fleet: five Soviet-made Antonov 12s. Pastor International allegedly laundered the funds paid to Bout by the Taliban.

    Pastor International also laundered between thirty-to-fifty million dollars emanating from the sale of heavy artillery, Kalashnikov rifles, aerial bombs and BM-21 rocket batteries to the Taliban and Al-Qaeda.

    Born in 1967 in Dushanbe, Bout was a former GRU officer who had served in the Soviet military in Angola.

    Most people familiar with Bout’s activities believed him to be a private arms dealer. However, Eringer knew that Bout had been co-opted by the Russian external intelligence service (SVR).

    Although Bout had been based in United Arab Emirates, he then moved to Moscow, protected by Russia’s internal security service (FSB) despite negative media and an arrest warrant from Interpol.

    The most relevant literature regarding what happened since September 11, 2001 is George Orwell's "1984".

  6. Default Russia not amused

    From http://ibnlive.in.com/generalnewsfee...on/248773.html




    Russia condemns Thai decision on Bout''s extradition

    PTI Vinay Shukla Moscow, Aug 20 (PTI) Russia today summoned Thai ambassador here to express displeasure at a Thai court ruling to extradite an alleged Russian arms dealer Viktor Bout, dubbed as the "merchant of death" on terrorism charges, saying it will seek his repatriation from Thailand.Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov qualified Thai court's verdict as 'unlawful and politically motivated'.Foreign Ministry spokesman Vladimir Kozin told Ekho Moskvy radio that Thai court decision to extradite 44-year old Viktor Bout, called by the US as "merchant of death", was politically motivated and Moscow will render all possible assistance to its citizen.Earlier today speaking in Armenian capital Yerevan Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said Russia will seek the repatriation of Bout from Thailand. According to RIA Novosti, Meanwhile, the US Justice Department's acting Deputy Attorney General Gary G Grindler said the United States was pleased with the verdict. "We are extremely pleased that the Appeals Court in Thailand has granted the extradition of Viktor Bout to the United States on charges of conspiring to sell weapons to a terrorist organisation for use in killing Americans. We have always felt that the facts of the case, the relevant Thai law and the terms of our bilateral extradition treaty clearly supported the extradition of Mr. Bout on these charges," he said in a statement on the department's website. Grindler said the prosecution of Viktor Bout was of "utmost priority to the United States." Former Russian army officer Viktor Bout, 44, was arrested in March 2008 under a request from the United States, which accuses him of illegally trading arms.He has repeatedly denied the accusations.In August 2009, the Bangkok Criminal Court ruled in Bout's favour, denying the US extradition request due to a lack of evidence and because it believed the case to be politically motivated. However, the United States appealed the ruling and filed new charges against him. The lawyer said Friday's ruling was solely on the merits of the extradition case and did not consider whether Bout was innocent or guilty of the charges filed in the United States. The Court of Appeal has the final say on extradition cases in Thailand so there is no avenue to appeal the ruling.PTI VS
    The most relevant literature regarding what happened since September 11, 2001 is George Orwell's "1984".

  7. #7

    Default Daniel Estulin interviews Dimitri Khalezov in Bangkok 14 October 2010

    Daniel Estulin interviews Dimitri Khalezov in Bangkok 14 October 2010

    From Wikispooks
    Arms Trafficking, Stolen Missiles, Soviet Submarines, Nuclear Detonations and 9/11


    Screen capture from interview video


    Dimitri Khalezov is a former Soviet commissioned officer of the “military unit 46179”, otherwise known as “the Special Control Service” of the 12th Chief Directorate of the Defense Ministry of the Soviet Union. [2] He has agreed to this exclusive interview and it is our pleasure to be able to offer readers of www.danielestulin.com another quality first. Dimitri is a crucial piece of the puzzle in the case of Victor Bout. It is safe to say that had it not been for Dimitri´s dedication to helping Mr. Bout, his incorruptibility and brilliance, Victor, might very well have found himself today behind bars in some high-profile American prison. Dimitri is the first man to see Mr. Bout after his world famous arrest in Bangkok and he is the man who has given more headaches to the United States government than anyone else in the world. Furthermore, Dimitri Khalezov is the first person in the world to have uncovered the true reasons for the United States government’s dogged pursuit of Victor Bout. Mr. Bout´s arrest is directly linked to 9/11, and Mr. Khalezov, because of his unique vantage point as a former member of the Soviet “atomic” and later “nuclear” intelligence says that he knew about the in-built so-called “emergency nuclear demolitions scheme” of the Twin Towers as long back as early 1980´s, while serving in the Soviet Special Control Service.
    How did you get involved in the case?
    Both Victor Bout and I are Russian. We are both former Soviet military officers. Moreover, we actually come from the same village. I think, these are good enough reason to try and help him with his case, considering that Victor was arrested in Bangkok and I happened to have been living in Bangkok at the time of his arrest. Furthermore, I have extensive experience with the Thai legal system, especially when you consider that the United States government has tried to have me arrested and extradited to America too in connection with 9/11. It happened back in 2003. So, I have enough motivation to try to help Victor.

    Victor Bount in Bangkok jail



    • In March 2008, Victor Bout was Osama bin Laden´s equal as far as notoriety on the world´s stage. How did you manage to see Victor Bout on the very first day of his detention in Bangkok?

    Under the Thai Criminal Procedure any person under arrest has his or her undeniable right to be visited by friends while under arrest. Victor Bout, despite being the so-called “Merchant of Death” and the so-called “Lord of War”, was not excluded from the provisions of the Thai Criminal Procedure Code. I simply came to the police station where he was detained and requested to visit my friend. They had to let me see him as much as it might have pained them. In fact, the police went out of their way to help. They seated both of us on a sofa in the corridor and let us chat nicely. Usually they only allow visitors to talk to detained persons through bars of a detention cage, but for Victor and me they made an exception to this rule.

    • Is there a link between your case, 9-11 and Victor Bout?

    Apparently yes. I was wanted by the United States allegedly in connection with 9/11, and with the 2002 Bali bombing (which was a mini-nuke bombing), while Victor Bout is apparently wanted by the Americans in connection with 9/11 and in connection with the 2003 El-Nogal bombing. Incidentally, El-Nogal is known to have been a mini-nuke bombing – at least known to appropriate security officials. As you can see there are a lot of similarities.

    • Who are the main players: US and Bout’s camp?

    It might appear that a certain alleged ‘Bout camp’ exists, it is a totally false impression. The so-called ‘Bout camp’ consists of Victor Bout, his wife, his brother, his mother, his daughter, me (Dimitri Khalezov), a couple of Victor’s personal friends from the Soviet Union, his Thai lawyer – Mr. Lak Nittiwatvicharn, his Russian lawyer, of course, Daniel Estulin, and, perhaps, a few journalists who came to know Victor and his family during their investigation of the case. If you can call this rag-tag army “Bout´s camp”, then yes, there are two main players – “Bout’s camp” and the US camp. Aside from the US government, however, there are quite a few other powerful players who have positioned themselves against Victor.

    • Who are these powerful players and why have we not heard anything about them?


    One branch of the Russian Secret Service: FSB


    First of all, the Russian Government (at least certain powerful individuals within the Russian Government), and the Russian secret service.

    • What? Are you serious? You have just accused the Russian government of working against Victor Bout when the entire world is convinced that had it not been for Putin and Medvedev, Victor Bout, most likely would have been extradited to the United States a long time ago!

    You will not be able to hear anything about them, because they are not so stupid as to show off. They would rather show you something entirely opposite – that they are allegedly “helping” Victor Bout. But make no mistake – from the very beginning of this unprecedented set-up, the Russian side was heavily involved with the Americans in the entire operation in framing Victor and in luring him to Bangkok. It was conceived and conducted by both – the Russian and the American secret services working together. In addition to the Russians, other players were involved as well. Primarily, the Israeli secret services – the Mossad and Sayaret Matkal. They have keen interest in this case, too. It was demonstrated by the unprecedented Sayaret Matkal’s involvement in the case of one of the FARC leaders – Raul Reyes and “his” weapon-grade Uranium that was planted by “someone” around his camp in the Ecuadorian jungle. Don’t miss this point – Raul Reyes was murdered on March 1, 2008, while Victor Bout was scheduled to be lured to Bangkok on March 4, 2008, in direct connection with the FARC and Uranium affairs, while all legal paperwork that requested the Thais to arrest him has been submitted to the Thai side by the Americans in the last day of February – that is BEFORE the murder of Raul Reyes.

    Raul Reye


    And, please, note that it was the Israeli Sayaret Matkal (a highly tailored organization that deals exclusively with nuclear weapons of enemies and with nothing else but that) involved in the actual murder of Reyes and in the “discovery” of “his” Uranium. Don’t miss to notice also that Victor Bout arrived in Bangkok not alone, but in a strange company of his alleged “friend” – a certain colonel from the Russian FSB, who was initially arrested with Victor and then strangely released and sent back to Moscow on the first available flight. To understand how improbable it is, try to imagine the following situation. Let´s say that a certain secret service (the French, for example) arranged to lure Osama bin Laden to Paris, promising the Saudi terrorist that he will meet in Paris with his Muslim brothers and in the meeting they will discuss how to demolish the Eiffel Tower with a stolen Soviet mini-nuke. But Osama bin Laden arrives to the meeting in Paris not alone, but accompanied by a certain colonel from the Taliban counter-intelligence service who decided to travel together with Osama just for the occasion – to have a chance to see the Louvre, and the Eiffel Tower (before it is nuked).

    Osama bin-Laden


    The French secret service arrests both – Osama bin Laden and the colonel from the Taliban. Except that the French realize that the one they want is Osama bin Laden, and not the colonel from the Taliban’s counter-intelligence who indeed came to Paris to see its attractions and who simply kept his friend Osama bin Laden company on the flight to France´s capital. So, the French police decide to release the colonel and send him back to Kabul on the next available flight, detaining only Osama bin Laden, because ONLY he was the target of their sting-operation. Does this version sound believable to you? Just as “believable” sounds the explanation why the Thai police and the U.S. DEA so quickly released Victor Bout’s casual companion – the FSB colonel – who strangely arrived with the infamous “Merchant of Death” and “Lord of War” on the same plane and in the same taxi and checked into the same hotel, but in reality did not want to help the latter to sell “portable anti-aircraft missiles” to the blood-thirsty narco-dealers from FARC – he only wanted to see Bangkok and to have a chance to try the famous Thai massage.
    Of course, this FSB colonel arrived to Bangkok by “mistake”, so this “mistake” was promptly corrected by the honorable and honest Thai police who quickly realized that the friend of the “Merchant of Death” was innocent and sent him back home immediately. Do you believe this nonsense? I don´t. At least four countries were heavily involved in Victor Bout´s frame up: Russia, United States, Israel and Thailand. There is plausible evidence that other nations were involved in this disgusting frame-up, but involved to a lesser extent than the abovementioned four. It appears that the Danes, the Dutch and the Romanians were involved too; at least, it appears so from the legal paperwork available in Victor’s case-file at the Thai Criminal Court.

    • The entire world has the impression that the Russian government and Russian Embassy in Thailand have gone above and beyond the call of duty to help Mr. Bout? In fact, the United States government has bitterly complained publicly about the apparent behind-the-scenes pressure Putin and Company are allegedly applying on the Thais to release Mr. Bout.

    Unfortunately, this is one of the biggest mistakes to think that the Russian Government is allegedly involved in Victor Bout’s extradition case in the Thai court on the side of Victor. Indeed, the “official line” in many hysterical publications in the Western and even in the Russian press imply that the Russian officialdom is allegedly “trying hard to help Victor” as Victor could, allegedly, implicate “certain Russian politicians” in some alleged “wrongdoings”.
    This impression is somehow supported by the fact that Russian Embassy officials regularly attended Thai court during Victor’s extradition case hearings, and also as a result of a number of statements coming from the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs. But this leaves one with a false impression. Russian Embassy officials visiting Victor Bout and attending court hearings are nothing but a regular consular assistance to a Russian citizen; be it to a citizen named Victor Bout or an unknown Sergei Ivanov.

    Putin in Navy dress


    That said, I can assure you that even though the Russian Consul attended every court hearing, the Thai judges were not “pressured” by the Russian delegation. It is normal for consuls to attend hearings of foreign defendants and the judges are used to it. So by no means the fact that the Russian Consul has diligently performed his duties could be considered as a kind of an “extrajudicial assistance” to the Defendant Victor Bout in the courtroom.
    When it comes to the apparent statements of unflagging support made by the Russian Foreign Ministry they should not mislead you either into believing that the Russian officials are allegedly “helping Victor Bout”. They were not and are not helping him at all, but are rather doing their best to harm his position in the Thai court. It sounds strange to a lay Westerner, but you have to understand some peculiarities when it comes to the Russians. First of all, besides Putin, Medvedev and Co., there are other political powers in Russia – so-called “patriots” led by Vladimir Zhirinovsky, for example, or “communists”, just to mention a few. Some of the “old Russians” sincerely believe that the United States government must not be allowed to arrest a Russian citizen abroad, especially in a third country. Because if allowed to do so with impunity, it will set a dangerous precedent. Today they dare to frame and arrest an alleged “Merchant of Death” who knows no government secrets. But tomorrow, they might arrest a real colonel from the Russian Strategic Missile Forces who decided to spend his holidays in Thailand. The United States government can accuse this colonel of “planning to annihilate the United States as an entity with a massive thermo-nuclear strike” and to demand his extradition to America. What´s more, such a hypothetical accusation would in fact be correct – because such a colonel could indeed plan to annihilate the US due to his service duties.
    Please understand, a great majority of Russian citizens as well as Russian Armed Forces, are extremely unhappy that the United States can arrogantly claim their alleged jurisdiction over territories that are not part of the United States and they are especially annoyed when such bullying directly affects Russian citizens. Medvedev, Putin and Company are aware of this and they have to take it into account when making their public statements.

    Medvedev and Putin


    Hence the public pledges of support from the Russian Foreign Ministry which sound like they really care about Victor Bout and his case in Thailand. But nobody should be fooled by these tearful pledges of support. They are nothing but a publicity stunt. In reality, they are no more harmful to the Americans and their cause than barking of stray dogs around the Criminal Court in Bangkok. All these actions of the Russian Foreign Ministry are merely intended to appease Russian population by creating an impression that the Russian Government allegedly “works for Russia” and still “constitutes a challenge to the US hegemony in the world”. However, neither of these is true in reality. Moreover, if the Russian Government did nothing at all to help Victor Bout fight his extradition case in the Thai courts, he would have had a much better chance at winning his case.

    • Does the United States want Victor Bout for being an arms merchant as he is portrayed by the UN and US journalist Douglas Farah or is there more to his case?

    In reality, Victor Bout is not wanted for being an alleged “arms merchant” as he is portrayed and as he is perceived by the people who put more stock into a newspaper article than they do into facts. If Victor was really wanted for what you suggested, then the Americans would not wait until March 2008 to arrest him – they would have initiated criminal proceedings against Victor Bout back in the ‘90s, or, at the latest, at the very beginning of the new millennium. The problem is, Victor is NOT wanted for being the “arms merchant”, at least in the sense he is portrayed in the infamous movie or described in the irresponsible UN report by a former United Nations weapons inspector, Johan Peleman. Victor is wanted for something totally different, but, perhaps, we will discuss that further in more detail.

    Johan Peleman



    • How strong of a case does the United States government have?

    From the judicial point of view, US government’s case is very weak and Victor could easily have won it. Can you imagine that the accusers (US government) failed to bring to the Thai court even a single “portable anti-aircraft missile” that Victor was alleged to have been illegally selling to “the highest bidder”? But the main problem was that the Russian Government and the Russian secret service did their best to harm Victor’s position in the Thai court, to force him to defend himself in the wrong way from the judicial point of view, to make false promises that would dull his vigilance, and, moreover, to deprive Victor of funds, so that he would have simply no money to conduct his defense in the Thai court in an effective manner. If the Russian Government were indeed concerned about Victor’s defense as believed by most people, then it would have at the very least subsidize his legal expenses. It would be normal to expect for the Russian Government to at least provide the best legal experts from the Russian side free of charge and contribute a couple of millions US dollars to cover the legal expenses on the Thai side. At least, it is logical to expect it. What is the two million US dollars for the government of a country with over 150 millions populations that sells gas and oil and brandishes nuclear weapons capable of destroying the Earth a hundred times over? Such petty cash is a small price to pay for Mother Russia to defend its famous citizen in such a notorious case, isn’t it?

    President Obama and Russian President Medvedev this past June at Obama's favorite 'Burger Joint'


    But in reality not only the Russian Government did not pay anything either openly or covertly (in disguise through a “private donation”) to Victor Bout and his family; the Russian secret service did their best to force Victor’s brother and Victor’s wife into absolutely unnecessary expenses that drove them into total bankruptcy. Instead of helping them financially, the Russian Government indeed sucked out their last savings. If you also add that it was the Russian officials who advised Victor to conduct his defense in the Thai court in the most wrongful manner and if you add that one of Victor’s lawyer – a proven shill for the American DEA – was also recommended by the Russian officials, you will understand the travesty and injustice and treason involved. Let me say it again, the Russian Government, from the very beginning was secretly, but very efficiently working with the Americans to get Victor Bout to the United States to stand trial, and at the same time, to create an impression that Russia is still “great” and could still “defend its citizens”.
    Let´s go over the basic facts of the case. First of all, the Russian secret service managed to convince Victor and his wife Alla, not to conduct the defense in the Thai court by proving the fact that there were no actual portable anti-aircraft missiles available to be sold to the FARC. Solely based on this evidence alone, the case should have been dismissed. The Russian officials proposed, instead, to conduct the defense by proving to the Thai court that the case was allegedly “political”, because the FARC is a political organization, the Communist party. This was a suicidal method of defense if looking at the case through the eyes of a professional lawyer. By proving that the case was “political” Victor automatically proved that he agreed with the existence of the actual “case”, that is missiles and such. This case could have been easily won by proving that there were “no case at all” and as such a non-existent “case” can not be “political” because there was nothing to be “political”.

    Russia's Foreign Ministry has thrown a lifeline to Viktor Bout


    Instead, Victor and his wife agreed with the proposal of the Russian officials and limited the defense in the Thai court by claiming that the case of dealing with the FARC was “political” without challenging the actual “case” whatsoever. The most important point of the entire case – that there was not even a single alleged “portable anti-aircraft missile” captured – was not voiced in the court-room. And no questions have been asked by Victor’s lawyer from the witnesses of the prosecution as to WHY the arresters failed to go after the alleged “missiles” in order to seize them and to deprive the so-called “Merchant of Death” of his deadly arsenal. Therefore, from the way Victor´s lawyer conducted the actual defense, it appeared to the judges that Victor was indeed selling the missiles, but the matter to consider was only if the FARC was a terrorist organization (as claimed by the Americans) or a political one (as claimed by Victor). As you may expect, the court eventually disagreed with such an interpretation and ruled that the case was NOT political, while Victor and his then lawyer (who was a shill for the Americans) did absolutely nothing to prove to the court that there were no case, no missiles, and no FARC – instead of proving that so-called “FARC” was represented by the US citizens while the “missiles” was merely a product of their sick imagination and existed only in their bogus paperwork, Victor and his then lawyer managed to prove by default that the actual accusations of the Americans had some grounds.

    F.A.R.C. Rebels


    Secondly, the Russian secret service promised Victor and his wife that if Victor conducted his defense in the Thai court in the abovementioned manner (by proving that the case was “political” without challenging the actual claims and the total absence of any evidence of the Americans) then the Russian Government would guarantee that Victor would win the case and the guarantee allegedly comes from the “close personal relations” between Putin and the Thai Queen. As you may expect this promise and this “guarantee” was just a cheap ploy invented by the Russian secret service in order to blunt his vigilance and to ensure that Victor would lose his case in the Thai court despite total absence of the alleged missiles and despite an absolute presence of abundant evidence that the entire “case” was merely a frame-up by the American DEA.
    Furthermore, Victor’s wife, at my insistence made a very efficient complaint against her husband’s illegal detention (because the actual detention of Victor was indeed illegal due to technicalities and during the entire extradition hearings in the Thai court Victor must have been freed, and not behind bars). Submission of such a complaint by Victor’s wife caught all Victor’s enemies – the Thais, the Russians and the Americans – virtually with their pants down. The problem was that the detention of Victor was indeed technically illegal and he must have been released immediately – the technicalities of the illegality of the detention were obvious, if not to say self-evident, and were presented in the written complaint by Alla Bout in such a clear manner that they could not have been challenged even by the best lawyers in the world. The only way left to the judges was to consider the case and to rule to release Victor Bout from unlawful custody and to continue the extradition hearings with him released from prison. Apparently, it was not an option for the Russians, Americans and Thais who worked too hard to get Victor arrested, thrown behind bars, and deprived of any income. But what could they do in this situation? Unfortunately, they found a way out: the “trusted guys” from the Russian secret service approached Victor’s wife and convinced her to voluntarily withdraw her complaint against her husband´s illegal detention (claiming that it puts the Thai court in a difficult position and the court does not like this at all – which was indeed true) in exchange for the deal: once the complaint is withdrawn, the “grateful” Thai court would immediately rule to release Victor on bail – as a kind of a “settlement” that allows everyone “to save face”.
    Victor and his wife again put their faith in the Russian government and agreed to withdraw the complaint. Except that the “grateful” Thai court never released Victor on bail as promised. This is just another example of how the Russian officials actually “helped” Victor Bout. The list of their “help” is very long, but I don’t want to make it too long and too boring. I would mention that on the recommendation of the Russian secret service, Victor’s brother has paid U.S. $120,000 for Victor’s bail, but the money was stolen, the bail has never been granted and the money was never returned. Again, on the recommendation of the Russian secret service, Victor’s brother paid $250,000 dollars allegedly for an “out of court settlement” whereas Victor would be released before conclusion of the case. According to the promise of the Russian officials, if the 250 thousand USD were paid, Victor Bout will be freed by May 1, 2008. The money was paid as demanded, but nothing happened in the Thai court – the case just continued and nobody bothered to return the money or take responsibility for the false promise.
    As a result of this despicable behavior on the part of the Russian officials, “Victor Bout’s camp” as you call it, ran out of money to such an extent that when it became necessary to translate several important court documents from Thai to English in order to understand what the Thai witnesses said in court, Victor could not afford to pay the 2,000 USD for the translation and till today, some of the important papers from the case-file remain only in Thai language. I hope this is more than enough to establish how the Russian Government is actually “helping” Victor Bout to lose his extradition case in the Thai court.

    • Then, why is the Russian government working against Victor Bout?


    Hole in Pentagon wall on 9/11


    Because of the Russian, to be more exact the Soviet-made missile that hit the Pentagon on 9/11.

    • What? I think you better explain that and, please go slowly.

    The Americans, understandably, demand from the Russians to find a fall guy or a patsy (or a group of fall guys) who is/are responsible for the missile that was found in the middle of the Pentagon. Considering that the missile was actually nuclear-tipped (with a half-megaton thermo-nuclear warhead that is more than 25 times the size of the Hiroshima bomb) you can imagine that the Americans are quite insistent with their demands to the Russians to find, at last, the culprit and to surrender him to the US Justice.
    It is indeed serious. But when it comes to the Russians, they can not admit the truth – that the “Granit” missile with its thermo-nuclear warhead was stolen from the sunken “Kursk” submarine, because Putin back in 2000 solemnly declared to the world that there were no nuclear weapons on board of the sunken submarine.

    • What is a “Granit”?

    The P-700 “Granit” missile (also known by its NATO classification as “Shipwreck” or “SS-N-19” – where “N” apparently stands for “Navy”) is the most advanced Soviet-era Navy missile. It is intended to be fired from submarines in submerged position and is primarily intended to destroy the US aircraft-carrier battle-groups. This is a highly sophisticated and highly “intelligent” missile. The “Granit” missiles could be used to strike battle-groups and other ship orders while fired in swarms of 12 missiles in one salvo, but could be as well used in single shots – fired against single naval targets, as well as against stationary ground targets (as was demonstrated in the case of the Pentagon strike on 9/11). Each “Granit” missile weighs about 7 tons, has length of about 10 meters, could fly up to 625 km at the supersonic speed at 2.5 Mach. Each missile is typically equipped with a standard “Navy-type” 500 kiloton thermo-nuclear warhead; conventional warheads for this missile even though exist in theory, are never used in reality – so that all without any exception “Granit” missiles in service are nuclear-tipped.

    Granit missiles


    This missile deems to be totally indestructible, because NATO lacks any means to shot down this missile even if they detect it in advance. In fact, it was demonstrated in the case of the Pentagon attack on 9/11 – NORAD managed to detect the upcoming “Granit” missile at least 6 minutes before it struck the Pentagon. NORAD’s operational officers managed to ring the atomic alert, scramble the so-called “Doomsday plane” in response, but were not able to prevent the actual strike – the missile managed to successfully approach Washington DC and hit the wall of the Pentagon despite being detected by NORAD 6 minutes in advance. Make you own conclusions – as to the danger of this weapon. I would also like to note, that according to the Soviet and Russian strategic plans, the submarines armed with the “Granite” missiles could be used as a “back-up” option for the retaliatory nuclear strike against the United States (while the primary role in such a strike belongs to strategic intercontinental- and submarine-launched ballistic missiles, of course).
    For the reason of possible usage in the retaliatory strike the “Granit” missiles are also designed to produce airbursts above the US cities – so they are equipped with special non-contact detonators for such reason, in addition to the usual contact detonators. I should mention also that the “Granit” missile has a very advanced inertial guidance system that also has a list of pre-loaded most important NATO targets. While flying above the ocean the “Granit” missile will scan and reconnoiter the operational theater and try to distinguish ship orders and especially aircraft-carrier battle-groups and to select the most important targets in the ship orders and to strike them in automated manner. If flying above the territory the missile will reconnoiter it too and will try to detect the most important stationary targets by comparing their coordinates with those pre-loaded in its warhead. Once encounter such targets the missile’s on-board computer will immediately select the most important target by the order of priority and the missile will strike it. So, once the missile was fired towards Washington D.C. it compared the two most important targets – the White House and the Pentagon and “preferred” to strike the latter one as being in its “opinion” the more important target. Perhaps I should mention that this is the most heavily armored missile in the world – it is made from very thick steel and in fact it could be compared with a flying tank or with a giant bullet. Due to its tremendous speed, weight and strength of its body this missile managed to penetrate six capital walls of the Pentagon building when it struck it on 9/11.

    Pentagon walls - 9/11



    • Ok, please continue.

    You have to understand that now Putin can not afford to take his noble presidential words back and to admit that he was outright lying to the world community and that all nuclear missiles from the “Kursk” were indeed stolen. Some other solution is badly needed to meet the US demands for the “culprit” behind the Pentagon attack. And this “solution” was eventually found. The problem is that all “Granit” missiles, despite being made in the Soviet days, could only belong to Russia and to no other former Soviet republic.

    • Can you prove this?

    Absolutely. The ‘Granit” is the Navy missile; it is not used by anyone except the Navy. In the Soviet Union there were four Navy fleets – the Arctic Fleet, the Pacific Fleet, the Baltic Fleet, and the Black See Fleet. Out of the four Russia inherited in its entirety the three fleets – the Arctic, the Baltic, and the Pacific ones. Only the Black See Fleet has been divided between Russia and Ukraine. However, the “Granit” missiles were in service only on the Pacific Fleet and on the Arctic Fleet; so such missiles could not have ended up in the hands of Ukrainians, even theoretically. All the “Granits” must have been inherited by Russia alone. However, to shift blame away from Russia for the Pentagon strike, the Russian officials had no chance than to blame that some “Granit” missiles were allegedly a part of the Black See Fleet and for sometime they were allegedly in the temporary possession of the Ukrainians during the turmoil caused by the Soviet Union collapse and by the consecutive dividing of its property (nuclear weapons and the Black See Fleet inclusive). For this reason the Russian secret service concocted a bogus back-dated paper-work which “revealed” that one of the heavy cruisers of the Black See Fleet was allegedly scheduled to be re-armed with the “Granit” missiles and for that reason in the last years of the Soviet rule several “Granit” missiles were allegedly transferred to the Black See Fleet and were kept there and eventually they allegedly ended up with the Ukrainians after the break up of the Soviet Union. And, from these Ukrainians these “Granit” missiles were allegedly “stolen” and thus ended up with the terrorists (who eventually fired one of such missiles into the Pentagon on 9/11). This version is ridiculous because even if you imagine that several “Granit” missiles were indeed kept in Ukraine, intended for the re-armament of that heavy-cruiser, as claimed, these missiles would never be kept in storage with their nuclear warheads attached. In accordance with the rules, in the Soviet Union, missiles were kept in one place, while the nuclear warheads were kept in another location, moreover, under control of a different department of the military. Only lay people who know nothing about the Soviet Armed Forces and their rules could believe such a version that it was allegedly possible for the “reckless Ukrainians” to lose the missiles and the nuclear warheads at the same time. The missiles with the attached nuclear warheads could only be stolen from one place – from a submarine in service. However, it seems that some responsible security officials believe (or “pretend to believe”) this ridiculous version with the “Ukrainian trail” which seems to successfully exonerate the Russians.

    Kursk Submarine


    In this case the Russians are not guilty at all. Some “bad guys” who stole the missiles from Ukraine (and not from Russia) are allegedly guilty. Now they need the actual “bad guys”. Who, do you think, fits the bill? You guessed it, the infamous “Merchant of Death” and the “Lord of War”, thanks to the fact that his personality has been demonized long ago and everyone would easily believe that it was indeed Victor Bout who sells not only weapons, but NUCLEAR and even THERMONUCLEAR weapons to the highest bidder. That is exactly why the Russians and the Americans got into this seemingly strange agreement – to frame Victor Bout. It is not so strange in reality, if you try to analyze the actual circumstances – because both parties badly need to close the Pentagon case and they simply can not find any one better than Victor Bout for the role of the scapegoat who could sell such a missile to the terrorists. There is simply no one else in the world who could fit this role.

    • Let´s move to Bout´s alleged partner in the FARC deal, Andrew Smulian, who was arrested along with Victor. What happened to him?

    The so-called “co-conspirator Smulian” was Bout´s former friend and a former business-partner. But in this particular case, Smulian was a “co-conspirator” of the DEA agent-provocateurs who framed Victor, rather than a Victor Bout “co-conspirator”. Unlikely you can be a “co-conspirator” to the one who is innocent. This is a clarification of terminology usage, if you don’t mind me being pedantic with such a correction. Andrew Smulian was the one who visited Victor in Moscow several times and presented him with business offers – particularly, he promised to find good customers for the last plane in Victor´s possession, still parked in UAE and which Victor dreams to get rid of in exchange for badly needed cash. As an aside, keep in mind that Victor was totally broke even before his arrest in Bangkok and to sell his last aircraft was a big deal for him.
    Eventually Smulian lured Victor to Bangkok – to finally negotiate with the prospective buyers. During the negotiations, according to the US government documents presented in his case, Smulian introduced Victor to several people who allegedly looked Latin American and who allegedly spoke Spanish. These people were alleged to be from a Colombian revolutionary organization named FARC – which is basically a Marxist guerilla movement fighting the capitalist government of Colombia for decades. The deal to sell the plane was held in the hotel business-center. A few minutes after the meeting began, the Thai police and the American DEA agents from the US local Embassy barged in and arrested everyone – Victor Bout, his “friend” from Moscow (who was found to be an FSB colonel), and Andrew Smulian. Out of the three only Victor was naturally arrested and detained. Victor’s FSB colonel friend was immediately released, put on the first available flight and appeared in Moscow the next morning.
    Andrew Smulian allegedly escaped (i.e. escaped from the custody of the Thai police) and disappeared. Keep in mind, he allegedly escaped from a locked down hotel guarded by over 150 Thai commandos. Then, without anyone noticing his disappearance, he alleged flagged a taxi to the airport, with his hands handcuffed behind his back. Once at the airport, he allegedly bought a ticket with no money and no passport to the United States, the only country in the world that if arrested, he would be looking at 30 years to life in prison. This is the American version of the events. Mr. Andrew Smulian suddenly “appeared” in America and was arrested in New York for being an alleged “co-conspirator” of Victor Bout. There is confirmed information that Andrew Smulian has been turned to be a prosecution witness who would testify against his former friend. Smulian is not in jail in America – he is in a “protective custody”.

    • What is your opinion of Bout’s two lawyers: Lak and Chamroen?

    Lak has been my lawyer for many years and naturally, I know him very well. I am the one who recommended him to Victor for his case in the first place. Lak was introduced to Victor on March 7, 2008 when Victor was first brought to the police station, i.e. before he was first brought to the court. When he was brought to the court Lak was there and the first defense statements – both spoken and written – were made by Lak. Lak was also the one who managed to get back Victor’s passport and all his personal belongings – mobile phones and Victor´s personal computer, even though the Americans demanded these items to be transferred to the United States. Lak managed to make a good deal with the local police to get all of these invaluable items back almost immediately to the United States government’s chagrin and disbelief. Later Lak was also working hard on Victor’s further defense in the criminal case and also on the extradition case, as well as on Victor’s own complaint for illegal detention. However, thanks to clandestine efforts of the Russian secret service, Lak was dismissed from the case and replaced with a new lawyer – Chamroen.

    Viktor Bout wearing a bullet-proof vest amid concerns for his safety.


    Chamroen was a shill for the American DEA and was introduced to Victor through a long chain of people who worked for the DEA as unofficial agents. But make no mistake – Chamroen, being a 100% proven shill for the Americans, was introduced by none other than the Russian secret service officials who were well aware of what they were doing: the Russians who introduced Chamroen to Victor KNEW FOR SURE that he was the American shill and, DESPITE this KNOWLEDGE, they still introduced him to Victor and highly recommended to use his services. Chamroen was the one who resisted and blocked all positive attempts to defend Victor and who conducted Victor’s defense in the extradition case in the most wrongful manner. He managed to make Victor to technically lose a 100% winnable case. In addition, Chamroen did his best to prevent what you called above “Bout’s camp” from submitting to the Thai court documents that might clarify the ridiculousness of the US charges and to serve as a real defense for Victor.
    As you might sincerely expect, Chamroen was not cheap either – he cost Victor well over 100 thousand US dollars which is an absolutely fabulous amount of money by Thai standards. During the time when lawyer’s work was important – i.e. during the time the court of first instance was hearing witnesses and accepting documents – the case was under control of Chamroen. I was able to re-introduce Lak back to the case by a strange trick: he was no longer a lawyer of Victor, but a lawyer of Victor’s wife Alla, who submitted to the court an additional complaint against the illegal detention of her husband that was joined with the main extradition case.
    In this capacity, Lak managed to get back to the case at the last moment; however, it was too late by then – the case was effectively lost by Chamroen, who intentionally failed to call right witnesses for the defense and who sabotaged cross-questioning of the witnesses of the prosecution. Despite being only Alla’s lawyer and not Victor’s, Lak, nonetheless, managed to somehow turn this case into something more favorable in the very last moment: instead of making Alla only a witness in the illegal detention’s case, he managed to make her the most important witness in the extradition case, despite all efforts of Chamroen to the contrary.
    Alla’s testimony was probably the most powerful evidence ever added to the extradition case, thanks to Lak. Furthermore, Lak managed to object to the latest set of new “evidence” that the Americans attempted to submit to the judge at the last moment, when the hearing of the case was almost over. The Americans actually submitted the last set of new “evidence” under the silent approval of Chamroen, but Lak managed to stand up and loudly voice his objections (despite actually being a lawyer in a different case – i.e. technically having no right to do so) and thus the most dangerous addition to the case by the Americans was not accepted by the Thai court. So, you can make you own conclusions what is Lak and what is Chamroen. And eventually when Victor lost the case and was about to be extradited to America, Chamroen simply disappeared and it was Lak who managed to prevent Victor from being immediately extradited to the United States.

    • Just to clarify, did the jet actually arrive to Bangkok or did it turn back shortly after taking off from the United States?

    The actual jet with the armed US court marshals arrived, but, thanks to Lak, went back empty.

    A US jet waits at the Don Mueang air force base to fly Vikor Bout to America.



    • What you are saying is absolutely shocking. Not as much for the treason of both the Russian government and Victor´s lawyer, but for the collective stupidity of people involved in the case. Why on Earth didn´t you say something and how is it possible that Victor and his wife didn’t realize what was being done to them? I am sorry, but this sounds utterly implausible.

    For me it also sounds implausible and I could only wonder how could it happen that way. But, taking into consideration purely psychological aspects of the problem and also the fact that Victor and his wife are not seasoned criminals, but merely innocent people, it could be explained. The problem is that Victor does not know that he is the one who allegedly “sold” the missile that hit the Pentagon to the “terrorists”. It seems that only now, when he lost the case in the Court of Appeal (as I told him would long time ago), he began to slowly realize what really happened with him and who stood behind the entire affair with this frame-up. But before, he was confident that he was winning the case because his vigilance was effectively lulled by the false promises and by the irresponsible assurances of the Russian officials, which Victor, nonetheless, took seriously. Just imagine yourself in his shoes. You are behind bars and you are being constantly assured by officials from your country that everything is “OK” and everything is “under control”, moreover, you wife also constantly conveys you similar messages from the Russian officials in Moscow who promise the same things (don’t forget that while in Moscow Alla Bout was always invited by high-ranking government- and secret service officials and the mere fact that such “big guys” condescended to talk to her and, moreover, to assure her that everything was allegedly “under control” created the desired effect). Just imagine yourself in such a situation: would you doubt when the secret service officials and the government officials promise you all help possible and they promise it on behalf of the president of the state and all of it is being accompanied by corresponding public statements of the Foreign Ministry. Wouldn’t such a performance blunt your vigilance too?

    Alla Bout and Dimitri Khalezov organizing press kits with documents relating to Viktor Bout right before they were handed out to the media.


    Victor and his wife had simply no reason to suspect the Russian officials in any wrongdoing in those days. You must be a cynic to be able to suspect the Russian officials in this situation, but Victor is simply too nice and too innocent for this. Furthermore, the Russians appointed to harm Victor’s position in the Thai court were professionals from the secret service and they know their job very well. They know how to make their lies sound plausible and convincing. It is difficult to deal with this type of the professionals when you yourself are simply an innocent person who has no criminal background, no previous convictions, not even encounters with the legal system prior to this, and no experience with the inner workings of the secret service. When you are an innocent person you simply can´t realize how dirty the actual world of the secret service is. Add here that neither Victor, nor his wife are lawyers and therefore the ridiculous method of defense that the Russian officials enforced on them might look quite “reasonable” for them and they failed to notice the dirty game behind it.

    • You know more about this case than anyone else. USG knows how dangerous you are. So does the Russian government. Have these governments tried to buy your silence or threaten you?

    Yes, they have. The Americans on several occasions tried to either threaten me with the prospect of being arrested and charged with something or with some offers of cash. At first, they promised me an undisclosed amount of money if I would help them to get Victor to America by secretly harming his case in the court – in the same manner Chamroen did. When I refused, they said that they could still pay me for doing nothing, as long as I withdrew from this case, stopped visiting Victor in prison, stopped attending the court hearings and giving Victor and his wife advise. I refused that as well.
    But when it comes to the Russian Government, they did not dare to offer me any money or to try to threaten me, because it would be just too dangerous for their own story. Don’t forget that while the Americans were open enemies of Victor, the Russians were openly “Victor’s friends”, so while the Americans could afford to offer money or to try to threaten someone who helps Victor and it would look natural, the Russians could not afford doing so, because otherwise they would betray themselves.
    The Russians have never showed their dissatisfaction with my activities openly, they rather tried to harm my reputation by spreading vicious rumors about my alleged “cooperating with the Americans” and “Dimitri can not be trusted” and so on. In fact, these efforts yielded some result in the initial stage of the case – at one point I noticed that Victor’s wife suddenly stopped trusting me, and also as I have said that the Russians managed to get Lak dismissed and replaced with a new lawyer based on the same thing.

    Alla Bout, family friend and de-facto lawyer Dimitri Khalezov and lawyer Lak Nittiwattanawichan.



    • How valuable is Victor Bout to the United States?

    If you mean that Victor Bout is allegedly “valuable” to America as an alleged “Merchant of Death” and a “Lord of War” you are dead wrong. Many people, who believe Western propaganda, think that Victor Bout is allegedly wanted in America for his involvement with illegal weapons trade as alleged by the Hollywood film, the book, and by hysterical Western publications. It is not true at all. You have to understand that Victor has never sold any weapons, whether legally or illegally, in Africa, in Asia or anywhere else. In his entire life he has never sold even a single Makarov pistol or a single AK-47, not to mention large quantities of Soviet-made or any other weapons. Yes, on several instances airlines controlled by Victor Bout and by his brother Sergei Bout indeed transported weapons, munitions, and even armed troops, but the problem is that these were NOT THEIR weapons, these were weapons of THEIR CUSTOMERS. Moreover, all of such customers were LEGAL CUSTOMERS. Wherever Victor’s or Serguei’s airlines transported weapons or armed troops it was ALWAYS governmental troops and the weapons always belong to the governments! Not once, did Victor Bout´s or his brother Serguei´s aircraft transported weapons of any illegal customers!
    But people seem not to realize this obvious fact. Victor Bout can´t be turned into “an illegal weapons trader” by the hysterical Western media. Only the court verdict could do this. But not once during all these years has Victor Bout receive a summons to any court of law whereby someone sued him for being an illegal weapons dealer. There was not even a single attempt by any government, or by any public prosecutor, or by UN, or by any other organization, or by even a private individual to sue Victor Bout for his being an alleged “Merchant of Death”.
    Why not, you ask? The answer is very simple: because no solid evidence exists that could be admissible in a court of law. The image of Victor Bout being an alleged “Merchant of Death” is based exclusively on the Hollywood movie, on Douglas Farah’s book, and on the bogus “UN report” concocted by a certain unscrupulous inspector, Johan Peleman. A number of Mr. Peleman´s former associates are willing to come forward and testify in the court of law that in every UN report, Victor Bout´s name was added to the final version of the report and that his name was absent in every preliminary UN report on arms trafficking. You simply can’t sue Victor Bout for being an illegal weapon trader based on the evidence compiled by the shameless Johan Peleman or bring to court the movie “Lord of War” as a substitute for the evidence. That is exactly why the Americans do not want Victor Bout for any illegal weapons trade as appears to many people around the world. If they really wanted him for that they would have done it long time ago. The evidence is simply not there.

    Lord of War film poster


    The Americans wanted Victor for something else. And for this “something” his apparent Hollywood-inspired image of the “Merchant of Death” was not enough due to this being legally inadmissible in the American court of law. Certain REAL and PROVABLE charges must have been created in order to get him arrested for real. And the American officials found nothing better than to employ the DEA (Drug Enforcement Administration) for that reason. Since the DEA area of operations are drugs and drug dealers, their modus operandi is corresponding – to plant drugs on a victim and thus, to get the victim arrested. The very same approach was used in Victor Bout’s case: the DEA agent-provocateurs created a certain provocation that looked perhaps “normal” for a typical drug-policeman, but ridiculous to anyone else. The DEA sent their agent to meet Victor Bout. This agent, turned out to be Bout´s former friend, Andrew Smulian, who offered him a deal. But, instead of planting drugs on Victor Bout, the DEA planted bogus documents and falsified “intercepts” of alleged e-mail exchanges and alleged telephone conversations claiming that Victor Bout allegedly: 1) had in his possession portable anti-aircraft missiles; 2) was willing to sell them to FARC rebels in Columbia; 3) in doing so he was planning of- and willing to participate in murdering (sic) the US citizens/US officials working in Columbia.
    Despite the fact that compared to the typical planting of real heroin on their clients the DEA failed to plant any actual anti-aircraft missiles on Victor, this ridiculous case was judged by the DEA superiors to be “solid” enough to be brought to court. And only after THIS provocation of the DEA, the US officials dared, at last, to arrest Victor Bout and to pass this matter to the court of law. Before that, they have simply nothing in their hands that would be admissible in the court-room. Therefore we can not even talk about alleged former “criminal activities” of Victor Bout in Africa or elsewhere in connection with his current case in the court. The current case is purely about his alleged attempt to sell the alleged “portable anti-aircraft missiles” to FARC in Columbia and nothing else besides that.
    This is the official “open” part of the story. However, there is also an official but “secret” part of the same story. Victor Bout is not really wanted in America for these absurd and non-existent portable anti-aircraft missiles. This ridiculous frame-up could never be successfully won by the US government in the US court. Victor, in reality, is wanted for something far more serious that can not be made public and can not be discussed in the courtroom in any open proceedings. I mean you can compare it with the case of the infamous nuclear bomber Timothy McVeigh who was openly indicted of using the Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD, but in a form of the Ryder truck loaded with cheap fertilizer) against US citizens, but whose case was strangely conducted behind closed doors. The same thing is with Victor Bout’s case.
    Of course, the US officials and especially those US officials responsible for legal matters are apparently reasonable enough to realize that they would never be able to win the ridiculous case against Victor based on the proceeds of the abovementioned DEA provocation primarily because no actual anti-aircraft missile have ever been found and not even an attempt to find such missiles has been made by the DEA.

    • Why do you think that is?

    Because they knew that the entire story was invented and no missiles would be found anywhere. That is why they did not even attempt to go after the missiles. The real cause of the extradition attempt against Victor Bout is not these non-existent portable anti-aircraft missiles. The real cause is that the US Government in collaboration with the Russian Government secretly blamed an individual named “Victor Bout” for selling to the terrorists a Soviet-made “Granit” missile that struck the Pentagon on 9/11. And THIS is the real truth behind Victor’s case. And THIS secret part of the case the American legal experts plan to win in the US court behind closed doors. Because it appears that the Russian FSB has secretly concocted some “plausible” evidence that implicates Victor Bout in that alleged deal and the US officials appear to be gullible enough to believe the Russian colleagues and to believe that such “evidence” would lead to the successful conclusion of the still pending 9/11 Pentagon case. In addition, Victor is being secretly accused of selling portable nuclear weapons – known as “mini-nukes” or “suite-case nukes” to various terrorist organizations, ranging from the Columbian FARC to Osama bin Laden´s Al-Qaeda. Apparently, several recent real and alleged mini-nuclear bombings are secretly being blamed on Victor Bout. The most important of them is the infamous “El Nogal” nuclear bombing in Bogotá that was presented to the uninitiated as a “car-bombing”, in which, according to the US security officials, the same type of a mini-nuke was used as in the 1995 Oklahoma bombing.

    The 1995 bombing of Oklahoma City



    • Dimitri, you are a former nuclear intelligence officer of the 12 Chief Directorate of the Russian armed forces. Public Prosecutor’s August 26, 2009 appeal stated that BOUT conspired to provide GUIDED BALLISTIC MISSILES to the FARC. Are they suggesting that BOUT is involved in nuclear terrorism?

    Yes. This is just a slip of the tongue. The Freudian syndrome. In the official paperwork of Victor Bout’s case in the Thai court, as well as in the official (a/k/a “public”) part of the US extradition request they do not talk about any “guided ballistic missile”. They talk about “portable anti-aircraft missiles” (that are small enough to be launched from one’s shoulder). However, behind closed doors, the US officials tried to convince their Thai colleagues that while the anti-aircraft missiles provocation against Victor Bout was indeed very crude and ridiculous, the real cause of the extradition for which Victor is wanted are far more serious, but, unfortunately, can not be disclosed to the general public or discussed in the court-room in open proceedings.
    So, the US officials in order to convince the Thais to accept the extradition case despite total lack of evidence and despite numerous violations of Thai law, had no choice but to reveal the “awful truth” to at least some of the Thai officials. Therefore high-ranking Thai police and security officials, as well as a select few amongst Thai public prosecutors, know very well that Victor is wanted not for selling the small portable anti-aircraft missiles, but for selling the cruise missile with an unexploded 500 kiloton thermo-nuclear warhead that hit the Pentagon on 9/11 and narrowly missed incinerating the entire Washington D.C. thanks to its broken detonator.
    But since Thailand is a non-missile and non-nuclear state, the Thais don’t see much difference between a cruise missile and a ballistic missile, so the public prosecutor mistakenly believed that the Pentagon was hit by a ballistic missile with a thermo-nuclear warhead, while in reality it was hit by a cruise missile with a thermo-nuclear warhead. But it is forgivable for the Thais to make such a mistake, because it is not really a big difference in this sense. However, there is a big difference when you compare a portable shoulder-launched anti-aircraft missile that weighs just a few kilograms with a tens-of-meters-long ballistic missile that weighs many tons. While it is forgivable for a Thai public prosecutor (who is a military officer, by the way) to confuse the first two, considering that he is Thai, it is not forgivable for him (considering that he is a military officer) to mistake the second two with each other.

    RA-115 Suitcase mini-nuclear device


    In the Security Council of Thailand there was a discussion that Bout is being blamed for the entire Pentagon attack on 9/11 – for both the missile and its thermo-nuclear warhead. Apparently, the public prosecutor picked up this idea from them and as a slip of the tongue, when he composed his appeal, he accidentally mentioned the “guided ballistic missile” instead of the “politically correct” “portable anti-aircraft missile(s)”. To answer the second part of your question – yes, Victor Bout is apparently wanted for nothing less then NUCLEAR TERRORISM. He is being secretly blamed for at least: 1) selling the Soviet-made “Granit” missile with the half-megaton thermo-nuclear warhead to the terrorists who later launched it against the Pentagon on 9/11; 2) selling at least 3 or more Soviet-made mini-nukes known as “RA-115” and “RA-116” to terrorists prior to 9/11 (at least so it appears from the “El-Mundo” newspaper’s article as of 16 of September, 2001, and also from John D. Negroponte’s [the former director of the US National Intelligence] official communiqué released right after Victor Bout’s arrest in Bangkok in March, 2008 – available here [3]; and 3) selling of weapon-grade enriched Uranium to terrorists – as appears from the actual course of actions against the FARC and particularly against Raul Reyes’ group in the Ecuadorian jungle only 5 days before Victor was actually lured to Bangkok to be arrested there.

    • For our readers’ benefit, can you explain the difference between ballistic missile with the thermo-nuclear warhead and cruise missile with the thermo-nuclear warhead.

    A ballistic missile is launched vertically and it travels with speeds comparable to the first cosmic velocity well above the Earth atmosphere on a ballistic trajectory – meaning its engines bring the ballistic missile into what we call “space” and then its warhead falls towards its target from space in the same manner as would a meteorite. You can roughly compare a trajectory of a ballistic missile with a trajectory of a football when a goalkeeper strikes it from his area into the other half of the football pitch. A cruise missile is much slower when compared to the ballistic missile – its speed is just sub-sonic or slightly super-sonic and a missile travels to its target (and delivers its warhead to it) in the atmosphere – in the same manner as would do a typical jet-fighter. In the case of particularly the “Granit” missile which is very expensive and very advanced, its speed is about 2.5 Mach while traveling in the cruise altitude and it is decreased to only 1.5 Mach when the missile descends and sets itself to the final path of attack – that is parallel to the ground (exactly as it was demonstrated in the actual 9/11 Pentagon strike). But when it comes to the actual thermo-nuclear warhead there is no difference. You will not feel any difference when a half-megaton thermo-nuclear warhead suddenly produces a blinding white flash and in the next few milliseconds incinerates you with its intensive thermal radiation. It does not matter if such a half-megaton warhead was delivered by a ballistic missile falling from space, or by a horizontally flying cruise missile. The effects of the actual thermo-nuclear explosion and the destruction caused by it will be undistinguishable.

    • Victor Bout’s name is often mentioned along with the alleged sale of X-55 missiles to Iran and China. Can you tell us more?

    This is a kind of “controlled leak of information” that was afforded on purpose in order to create some “grounds” and so to convince some officials who are not entitled to know the full truth, but who could be fed some half-truth. The story with the X-55 illegal sale was just a cover-up story that was concocted to distract attention from the real culprit – the awful “Granit” missile. To talk about the “Granit” missile that hit the Pentagon is TABOO. It is off limits. Only very few high-ranking US security officials (as well as high-ranking security officials of Russia and of some highly-trusted US allies) are entitled to know that it was the “Granit” missile. For the rest, it is taboo to know this word. But many people know that it was the missile (and many also know that it was a certain Russian- or Soviet-made missile) that hit the Pentagon. But the problem is that those who know or suspect the awful truth are much more than those who are entitled to know it in full detail. Therefore to feed the “half-truth” for those not entitled to know the full truth, the story with the alleged X-55 has been concocted.

    The Soviet-era Kh-55 missiles – also known as X-55s


    Secondly, even from the technical point of view the story with the X-55 can not be true – that missile is not technically capable of penetrating 6 (six!) capital walls of the Pentagon as was demonstrated in the 9/11 attack. Only one missile in the world – the “Granit” – could achieve such a penetrating feat. That is to say that the Americans and the Russians together are trying hard to cover up the real truth behind the Pentagon attack, while trying in the same time to apprehend and to bring to justice someone [allegedly] responsible for the actual attack. Hence the persecution against Victor Bout. Hence the ridiculous stories about the alleged illegal deal with the X-55 missiles (that are also nuclear-capable, by the way – don’t miss this point: the fact that X-55 missiles are nothing less than “nuclear-capable” is always being diligently mentioned along with the claims that Victor Bout and his companions allegedly sold these missiles from Ukraine to Iran).

    • I understand that the first question the DEA asked Bout during their interrogation of him is the name of the cruise missile he had sold to Iran. Why would they ask him that?

    Yes, it is true. The first question asked of Victor after his arrest was not about the ridiculous deal with the non-existent shoulder-launched anti-aircraft missiles that were allegedly intended for the Columbian FARC. The first question was about the alleged cruise missile Victor allegedly sold to Iran. This was because those mid-ranking DEA operatives were low enough not to be entitled to know the full awful truth – about the “Granit” cruise missile, but were fed by their superiors the half-truth – about the alleged “X-55” cruise missile that was discussed in the previous question.

    • A great deal of effort has been made by mainstream US and European press to link Bout with FARC and uranium. What do they have to do with Bout?

    The US security officials have a double task actually. One: they have to close the case with the missile that hit the Pentagon on 9/11. Two – they also have to close several cases where mini-nukes were really or allegedly used in disguise of the so-called “suicide” and “non-suicide” “car-bombings”. The most important – the case of nuclear bombings of the US Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998 on an anniversary of Hiroshima bombing, the 1996 Khobar Tower nuclear bombing, the 1995 Oklahoma nuclear bombing, the 2002 Bali nuclear bombing, the 1993 first nuclear bombing of the World Trade Center in New York, several recent nuclear bombings in Iraq, Pakistan, Algeria and Saudi Arabia that were reported to the gullible plebs as “car-bombings”, and also the El-Nogal nuclear bombing in Bogotá in 2003, as well as the previous nuclear bombing in Bogotá in November 1999, both blamed on the FARC. As not too many specialists in nuclear weapons are available for consultation, it is possible to present to the lay people a notion that it is allegedly possible to produce a self-made low-caliber nuclear bomb made out of Uranium (while in reality all mini-nukes are made exclusively out of Plutonium and have nothing to do with any Uranium).

    • Well, is it possible to produce a homemade low-caliber nuclear bomb?

    Thanks to the general ignorance of the people (many security officials and high-ranking politicians inclusive) in regard to the nuclear weapons, the abovementioned mistaken belief is widespread: indeed many security officials and politicians sincerely believe that it is possible to obtain 50 kg (single critical mass) of highly-enriched Uranium-235 on the black market and to make a mini-nuke out of it. In reality it is impossible to make any “mini-nuke” out of Uranium even in an industrial process, not to mention in the cottage industry, but many gullible folks believe to the contrary. Therefore a few unscrupulous individuals who really stood behind those nuclear “car- and truck-bombings” shamelessly exploit such gullibility. In the particular case with the FARC group led by Raul Reyes they planted on them almost 50 kg of weapon-grade Uranium-235 that was hidden around Reyes’ camp in the Ecuadorian jungle, then they murdered Reyes and additionally created some bogus computer files planted into Reyes’ computer where it was claimed that Reyes and his group were allegedly responsible for the 2003 nuclear bombing in Bogotá and were also seeking more weapon-grade Uranium. The gullible security officials who understand little about the real nuclear weapons technology would not miss the point as was suggested – when they encounter the 50 kg of REAL weapon-grade Uranium around Reyes’ camp while knowing for sure that both – 1999- and 2003- bombings in Bogotá were indeed mini-nukes bombings. However, this theater should not mislead serious people: both bombings in Bogotá, as well as 1995 Oklahoma bombing and the rest of well-known and little-known nuclear “car-bombings” was made with mini-nukes made out of PLUTONIUM and NOT URANIUM, and so the 50 kg of Uranium-235 planted to Reyes’ camp should not dupe any serious person into believing otherwise.
    When it comes to Victor Bout if you carefully review available public sources you will find out that: 1) Victor Bout’s alleged connection with the FARC was mentioned in the same list of “evidence” allegedly “found” in Reyes’ computer right next to Reyes’s attempt to buy 50 kg (single critical mass enough to make one atomic bomb of Hiroshima yield) of weapon-grade Uranium-235 and alleged Reyes’ responsibility for the El-Nogal “car-bombing” (that is known to be nuclear to any and every security official); and 2) Alleged “international channels” by which the alleged “portable anti-aircraft missiles” of Victor Bout were allegedly transported – namely: Russia-Armenia-Romania-Denmark-Netherlands’ Antilles-Columbia strangely coincides to the country with the alleged rout of transportation of the weapon-grade Uranium that was obtained by Reyes and indeed found around his camp after Reyes was murdered by the Americans on March 1, 2008 – just 5 days prior to Victor Bout’s arrest in Bangkok. Anyone is welcome to make his own conclusions.
    Add here that the US officials actually exploit two levels of the “truth” in regard to the WTC demolition during 9/11 events. Just imagine that there are quite a lot of mid-ranking security officials and politicians who are advanced enough to know that kerosene can not “melt steel” into fluffy microscopic dust and that “ground zero” in pre-9/11 English language had no other meaning than “a place of a nuclear explosion”. Therefore these types of people would not swallow the plebeian version of the “planes brought down the towers 9/11 truth”. Some “higher” and more plausible version of the “truth” needed to be invented to satisfy them. So according to the intermediate level of the 9/11 “truth” (that is intended to satisfy the mid-ranking security officials and mid-ranking politicians both in America and abroad), the Twin Towers of the WTC, as well as the building #7 of the WTC, were demolished by 3 mini-nukes that allegedly belonged to Osama bin Laden’s operatives. You can find a confirmation of what I mean in the article “Mi Hermano bin Laden”, published in the Spanish daily, El-Mundo, on September 16, 2001. However, once you claim that the WTC was demolished by the three Soviet mini-nukes allegedly bought by Osama from Ukraine, then, being a responsible security official, you should also find Russian or Ukrainian nationals who first stole these mini-nukes for the Soviet nuclear arsenals and who actually sold such awful weapons to the terrorists. Isn’t’ it? Hence another attempt of the Americans – to implicate Victor Bout into trading in mini-nukes and in weapon-grade nuclear materials, in addition to the missiles with half-megaton thermo-nuclear warheads that usually fly around and strike pentagons. It appears that Victor Bout was made a scapegoat just for everything that is nuclear. Add here is where the Americans began their unprecedented persecution against Victor Bout only after 9/11 and in an apparent connection with 9/11. Read the “nuclear” communiqué of John D. Negroponte [3] that was released immediately after Victor’s arrest in Bangkok in March 2008 and that was directly connected to his arrest and moreover, entirely devoted to his arrest. And compare that communiqué by John D. Negroponte with the abovementioned “El Mundo” article about the 3 mini-nukes bought by Osama from Ukraine and allegedly used for destroying the three WTC buildings on 9/11 and surely you will not miss the main point. There are two more additional moments that could clarify the alleged “nuclear” connections of Victor Bout, FARC, and actual so-called “car-bombings” and “truck-bombings” (spots of which are being strangely called by the strangest nuclear name “ground zero”). First of them occurred soon after Victor Bout’s arrest.

    ground zero


    About two weeks after his arrest there was a video published on YouTube showing Russia Today footage titled “Merchant of Death denied bail in Bangkok”. As you know, anyone registered as a YouTube user could post a comment under a video. Guess what was the very first comment published by some alleged “Victor Bout’s friend” under that video? This is what the comment said: “180 Compact Russian Nukes are missing, soon US will get a nuclear apocalypse up its ass”. How do you like the comment? Or you prefer to believe in coincidences? In the world of intelligence there is a saying: There are well made and badly made operations. Coincidences do not exist. Especially when soon after this comment appeared, a real nuclear explosion occurred in Dubai on March 26, 2008 – in the city where Victor Bout was kicked from and where he lost all his former airline business. You can see details of this nuclear explosion on YouTube [4] or you can read (between the lines) here [5] – please notice words such as “mushroom cloud” and “civil defense” in that article. By the way – when I noticed that YouTube provocation and compared it against the mini-nuke’s explosion in Dubai a few days later I immediately complained about this to the security official at the local Russian Embassy in Bangkok. And what do you think happened? The next day the provocative comment/promise about “180 stolen mini-nukes” and the “nuclear apocalypse” was removed from YouTube.
    Luckily, I made a screenshot of the YouTube web page with that comment still there, so I still have it. Oh, I almost forgot it. Since I was involved with Victor Bout’s legal defense here in Bangkok right from the next day following his arrest – i.e. from March 7, 2008, I understandably attracted a lot of attention from the US side. The local DEA officer – Mr. Derek Odney, responsible for Victor’s apprehension in Bangkok on March 6, 2008, invited me to drink coffee and to “discuss something” around mid-April. Since I was curious to know what they would ask me about Victor and also perhaps I could have a chance to ask them something that would clarify the mystery of the case I agreed “to drink coffee”.

    Marble inscription in CIA HQ lobby


    Derek showed up with someone who appeared to be from another department, perhaps from the US military intelligence or may be from the CIA. The conversation began in a roundabout way and with no mention of Victor Bout. They asked me to help the DEA to catch certain drug dealers in Bangkok. On the surface it may seem logical, considering what the DEA does, but certainly not normal, considering the actual circumstances – I was helping Victor Bout and his case had nothing to do with drugs. Anyway, this discussion about the drugs and drug-dealers slowly moved on to something different: Derek´s companion asked me if I knew anything about a black market nuclear materials, particularly enriched Uranium and how much, in my opinion, such weapon-grade Uranium could cost on such a black market. Out of politeness I expressed my humble opinion on the subject, adding that it is only my humble opinion, but I don’t know the exact figures, because I am not involved in illegal trade in nuclear materials.
    In turn, I asked them if they were asking me this question because of highly-enriched Uranium that was found around Reyes’ camp in the Ecuadorian jungle? They told me that yes, they wanted to know the answer to that question for exactly that reason, because the US Government took that matter very seriously. The most laughable was that no alleged “portable anti-aircraft missiles” were mentioned during that conversation, but only the FARC Uranium alone (and neither any “portable anti-aircraft missiles” in connection with Victor Bout were mentioned in Reyes’ computer, but only the weapon-grade Uranium purchase deal and the FARC responsibility for the nuclear “car-“bombings…) This was my first conversation with Mr. Derek Odney. The most provocative, prohibited and proven 9/11 video.

    The Real Truth about 911 - Dimitri Khalezov



    • Let´s fast forward to today, Dimitri. Where is Victor at and what´s left for him as far as his defense options.

    Victor Bout is still in Bangkok, to be more exact in Nonthaburi province (on the outskirts of Bangkok) inside the high-security Bangkwang prison, known to many people as “Bangkok Hilton” thanks to the famous movie of the same name. He was transferred there from the Bangkok Remand Prison on August 20, the day his court verdict which ordered the extradition was read.
    To answer the second part of your question is not so easy. Several defense options are available but I would prefer not to disclose them publicly, because the Americans will read this interview with great interest and they might take certain countermeasures. But surely something is pending when it comes to the legal means to defend Victor Bout. His lawyer, Lak, is still there and he is working hard on his defense. Despite Victor´s extradition case appearing to be “final” after the Appeals’ Court verdict, it is not so “final” in reality. Many things can still be done, God willing.
    https://wikispooks.com/wiki/Document...ezov_Interview
    original http://www.mathaba.net/news/?x=625029
    "I think it would be a good idea." Mahatma Gandhi, when asked what he thought of Western civilization.

    The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways; the point is to change it.
    Karl Marx.

    "Well, he would, wouldn't he?" Mandy Rice-Davies, 1963, replied Ms Rice Davies when the prosecuting counsel pointed out that Lord Astor denied an affair or having even met her.

  8. Default Bout extradited from Thailand to US

    From http://english.aljazeera.net/news/as...574110120.html
    Viktor Bout, a suspected Russian arms dealer, has been extradited to the United States after Thai authorities cleared the transfer days before his detention was due to expire.
    Bout was flown out of Bangkok on a special US jet on Tuesday, Thai police said.
    He faces charges of terrorism linked to the trafficking of weapons to conflict zones in Africa, South America and the Middle East.
    Abhisit Vejjajiva, Thailand's prime minister, told reporters earlier on Tuesday that his cabinet had agreed to uphold a court decision to allow Bout, alleged to be one of the world's biggest arms dealers, to be sent the US to face trial.
    The 43-year-old former Soviet air force officer, dubbed the "Merchant of Death", was arrested in Bangkok in March 2008 as part of a US-led sting operation.
    Bout runs a network of air cargo companies in the Middle East, Africa, Eastern Europe and the US.
    US officials allege Bout has used this network to move weapons around the world since the 1990s.
    According to the UN and the US treasury department, he has sold or brokered arms that have helped fuel wars in Afghanistan, Angola, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Liberia, Rwanda, Sierra Leone and Sudan.
    He is accused of conspiring to sell weapons to the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (Farc), that country's largest rebel group and considered a terrorist organisation by the US.
    Bout has denied the allegations against him, and his dentention has been a bone of contention between US and Russian authorities.
    Moscow has repeatedly suggested that proceedings against Bout are politically motivated and has called for him to be repatriated.
    Moscow's aggressive lobbying for his release has fuelled speculation he was receiving protection from Russian authorities who had made no apparent attempt over the years to interfere in his alleged operations.
    Bout, who was inspiration for Nicholas Cage's character in the 2005 movie Lord of War, has been held in a Thai maximum-security prison since his arrest.
    The most relevant literature regarding what happened since September 11, 2001 is George Orwell's "1984".

  9. #9

    Default

    Thailand Buckles Under Intense US Pressure–Viktor Bout Flown to US

    16 11 2010 Extradition of ‘arms dealer’ Viktor Bout goes ahead


    Heavy security surrounded Mr Bout as he was transferred from prison to the airport
    Alleged arms dealer Viktor Bout is on his way to the United States from Thailand after being extradited.
    He was flown out of Bangkok shortly after the Thai cabinet backed the extradition request after months of legal wrangling.
    Mr Bout was arrested by US agents posing as Colombian Farc rebels after he allegedly tried to sell them weapons in a Bangkok hotel in 2008.
    The Russian national now faces trial for conspiring to sell weapons.
    If convicted, he faces a maximum penalty of life in prison.
    Mr Bout, who is 43, spent more than 15 years allegedly running guns to African warlords and Islamic militants.
    He was dubbed the Merchant of Death by a British politician.
    But he denies being, or ever having been, an arms dealer – and Moscow also insists he is innocent.
    Thai dilemma

    Mr Bout’s wife Alla rushed to the prison in a bid to see him – but found she was too late
    Mr Bout was flown out of Bangkok on a charter flight hours after Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva said the Thai cabinet had backed an appeal court ruling which cleared the way for his extradition.
    Dozens of police officers watched over the operation as Mr Bout was transferred from a maximum-security prison to the airport.
    His wife, Alla Bout, who has been a frequently tearful figure at Mr Bout’s court hearings over more than two years of detention since he was arrested, appeared outside the prison in an apparent attempt to see her husband before he left – but she was too late.
    Mr Abhisit has faced a difficult dilemma over Mr Bout’s case, says the BBC’s Vaudine England in Bangkok: Whether to co-operate with long-standing ally the United States or to appease Russia which has a growing tourist and business presence in Thailand.
    The courts went back and forth, promising and then delaying the extradition.
    A Thai court ruled in August that the extradition should go ahead within three months.
    The US even sent a plane to pick him up – but that move proved to be over-confident, our correspondent says.
    The courts delayed the extradition again, saying that other charges of money laundering and fraud, earlier laid by US prosecutors, had to be examined.
    In October, the court decided to drop those charges, clearing the way for extradition.
    But Moscow has been demanding his release, saying that Mr Bout is an innocent businessman and criticising the extradition moves as politically motivated.
    ‘Illegal’
    Both Mr Bout’s wife and the Russian embassy have expressed surprise at the sudden nature of Mr Bout’s removal.
    “Nobody knew about this [the extradition], neither I nor the lawyer,” she told Russia’s Rossiya Television.
    “I came to the prison but Viktor was no longer there. This is clearly a decision that has been lobbied for by the US and taken under US pressure because only several days remained till Viktor’s term was up and, under the law, he was supposed to be freed because from the legal point of view, from the point of view of legality, we had every ground to win this case.”
    Moscow says Mr Bout is the victim of a politically motivated campaign
    In remarks quoted by Russian news agency Interfax, Mr Bout’s attorney Viktor Burobin alleged the extradition was illegal “because the Thai court never reviewed the second US extradition request”.
    A Russian embassy official told the BBC that the Russian consul had also been unable to see Mr Bout.
    Mr Bout, a former Russian air force officer, is thought to have knowledge of Russia’s military and intelligence operations.
    Diplomats fear the revelations Mr Bout might make in open court, our correspondent says.


    Comments : Leave a Comment »

    Categories : The Most Moral Army In the World?, image of the beast

    ####

    Lavrov: extradition of Bout – the result of US pressure

    16 11 2010 Lavrov: extradition of Bout – the result of US pressure


    Bout has denied Washington

    The Russian Foreign Ministry called the extradition of Viktor Bout to the US illegal and vowed to take measures to protect a Russian businessman, accused by US authorities for smuggling arms to terrorist group.
    On Smolenskaya Square said that the extradition of Russian businessman Washington contradicts “the two decisions of the Criminal Court of Thailand, to confess Bout unproven.”
    Directly to Foreign Minister Hon Sergei Lavrov Said the issue Bout, Being a working Visit to Kenya. At a Press Conference in Nairobi, He Said That the actions of the Thai Authorities Are the result of Political pressure, US and “Model of a blatant injustice. “
    Booth Tuesday exported from Thailand, the United States to be accused of arms trafficking.
    “Contrary to the two solutions Criminal Court of Thailand, to confess Bout unproven, that a Russian citizen after more than two years of detention in a Thai prison, gave US law enforcement agencies. These actions, according to Thai media, made with the approval of the Government of Thailand – says the Russian Foreign Ministry statement. – In terms of law has occurred may not have a rational explanation and justification. “
    On Tuesday, Prime Minister Hon of Thailand Abhisit Vejjajiva Announced Plans for the immediate extradition of Russian Businessman. According to HIM, the Cabinet Approved the request to the Appropriate US Authorities. Thus, the last Obstacle to the extradition of Bout’s US, HAD Been withdrawn.
    As stated earlier the Russian service Bi-BBC head of the consular department of the Russian embassy in Thailand Andrew Dvornikov or wife of Victor Bout, nor consul meet today with no avail.
    Bout has denied Washington’s main of which – the supply of arms to Colombian guerrillas from the group FARC, which the US declared a terrorist organization.
    In Russia, the 43-Year-Old Businessman, Nothing is Charged, and the Russian Foreign Ministry Has repeatedly protested Against thePressAttempts to reach HIS deportation to the US.
    Hard decision
    August 20 the Highest Court in Thailand Clickauthorized the Issuance of Victor Bout , Who WAS the supposed to Happen Within three months.
    Later, the court again postponed the extradition of Thai, citing the need to consider the second charge against him of the American prosecutors.
    However, in October a court in Bangkok allowed to withdraw a second request for the grant of U.S. Buta, check the extradition on the first request.
    If a Russian citizen is found guilty, under U.S. law he could face life in prison.
    As the correspondent of BBC in Bangkok Vodin England, the decision to extradite Mr. Bout was not easy for the government of Thailand.
    Viktor Bout, a former served in the Soviet military transport aircraft, may have information about the Russian military and intelligence activities.
    Analysts believe that Moscow might have feared that he would testify at the trial in the U.S. and tell us more than we would like the Russian leadership.
    Lord of War?
    Bout was arrested in March 2008 in Bangkok, where he was lured out of U.S. intelligence agents posing as FARC rebels.
    In the U.S., Belgium and some other Western countries Bout was suspected of fueling bloody conflicts in countries such as Sierra Leone, Angola, Rwanda and Sudan.
    He is considered the prototype of the hero of Hollywood movie “Lord of War”, played by Nicolas Cage.
    This film and press coverage “demonized” Mr. Bout in the eyes of American public opinion, which excludes the possibility of a fair trial in the U.S., said in a recent interview with the BBC’s wife Russians Alla Bout.
    Victor Bout himself says that his business was limited to the transport carriage.




    Comments : Leave a Comment »

    Categories : image of the beast

    ####

    Lavrov: extradition of Bout – the result of US pressure

    16 11 2010 Lavrov: extradition of Bout – the result of US pressure


    Bout has denied Washington

    The Russian Foreign Ministry called the extradition of Viktor Bout to the US illegal and vowed to take measures to protect a Russian businessman, accused by US authorities for smuggling arms to terrorist group.
    On Smolenskaya Square said that the extradition of Russian businessman Washington contradicts “the two decisions of the Criminal Court of Thailand, to confess Bout unproven.”
    Directly to Foreign Minister Hon Sergei Lavrov Said the issue Bout, Being a working Visit to Kenya. At a Press Conference in Nairobi, He Said That the actions of the Thai Authorities Are the result of Political pressure, US and “Model of a blatant injustice. “
    Booth Tuesday exported from Thailand, the United States to be accused of arms trafficking.
    “Contrary to the two solutions Criminal Court of Thailand, to confess Bout unproven, that a Russian citizen after more than two years of detention in a Thai prison, gave US law enforcement agencies. These actions, according to Thai media, made with the approval of the Government of Thailand – says the Russian Foreign Ministry statement. – In terms of law has occurred may not have a rational explanation and justification. “
    On Tuesday, Prime Minister Hon of Thailand Abhisit Vejjajiva Announced Plans for the immediate extradition of Russian Businessman. According to HIM, the Cabinet Approved the request to the Appropriate US Authorities. Thus, the last Obstacle to the extradition of Bout’s US, HAD Been withdrawn.
    As stated earlier the Russian service Bi-BBC head of the consular department of the Russian embassy in Thailand Andrew Dvornikov or wife of Victor Bout, nor consul meet today with no avail.
    Bout has denied Washington’s main of which – the supply of arms to Colombian guerrillas from the group FARC, which the US declared a terrorist organization.
    In Russia, the 43-Year-Old Businessman, Nothing is Charged, and the Russian Foreign Ministry Has repeatedly protested Against thePressAttempts to reach HIS deportation to the US.
    Hard decision
    August 20 the Highest Court in Thailand Clickauthorized the Issuance of Victor Bout , Who WAS the supposed to Happen Within three months.
    Later, the court again postponed the extradition of Thai, citing the need to consider the second charge against him of the American prosecutors.
    However, in October a court in Bangkok allowed to withdraw a second request for the grant of U.S. Buta, check the extradition on the first request.
    If a Russian citizen is found guilty, under U.S. law he could face life in prison.
    As the correspondent of BBC in Bangkok Vodin England, the decision to extradite Mr. Bout was not easy for the government of Thailand.
    Viktor Bout, a former served in the Soviet military transport aircraft, may have information about the Russian military and intelligence activities.
    Analysts believe that Moscow might have feared that he would testify at the trial in the U.S. and tell us more than we would like the Russian leadership.
    Lord of War?
    Bout was arrested in March 2008 in Bangkok, where he was lured out of U.S. intelligence agents posing as FARC rebels.
    In the U.S., Belgium and some other Western countries Bout was suspected of fueling bloody conflicts in countries such as Sierra Leone, Angola, Rwanda and Sudan.
    He is considered the prototype of the hero of Hollywood movie “Lord of War”, played by Nicolas Cage.
    This film and press coverage “demonized” Mr. Bout in the eyes of American public opinion, which excludes the possibility of a fair trial in the U.S., said in a recent interview with the BBC’s wife Russians Alla Bout.
    Victor Bout himself says that his business was limited to the transport carriage.




    Comments : Leave a Comment »

    Categories : image of the beast


    [As Bout is extensively discussed in "Shadow Masters" and there are suggestions of linkage to both Oklahoma City and 9/11, and as Oklahoma City is brushed by in the book "The Last Circle", it'd be interesting to have a panel discussion with Estulin and Cheri Seymour. That will be featured in the first annual Deep Politics Forum virtual conference which will be announced shortly after I win the lottery.] :eating:


    "Where is the intersection between the world's deep hunger and your deep gladness?"

  10. #10

    Default

    Now this is one STRANGE story.....with its mix of truth, likely truth, lies, misdirections, false-flags galore, multiple intelligence agencies, weapons of all kinds and sizes, and mini-nukes, perhaps! But, while it was almost certainly a missile that hit the Pentagon and matters little who made it, but who was in control of it....I really do doubt it had a nuke on board...or if it did, it was certainly not detonated.....but used as a warning [?!]. None of the 3 WTC, IMO, were demolished with mini nukes, but with something more like multi-multi-placed nanothermite beforehand. Oklahoma City was not a homemade fertilizer bomb and not nanothermite, but what it was I don't know. As all evidence to date, IMO, shows that 9-11 and perhaps Oklahoma City and other such were inside jobs made to look like outside non-state terror, and since elements of Russian Intel now work hand in glove with US Intel, I think much of this story, as told to Estulin, was to further hide the real sponsors of those events with more confusion and new sponsors - much as the endless sponsors and shooters offered up for Dallas. Some truth might be in the story, however.....and it is not going to be easy to pick through this one.....but I sense it is in part designed to explode in the face of the 911 Truth movement. Beware.
    “If there is no struggle there is no progress. Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will.” - Frederick Douglass
    "Let me issue and control a nation's money and I care not who writes the laws. - Mayer Rothschild
    "Civil disobedience is not our problem. Our problem is civil obedience! People are obedient in the face of poverty, starvation, stupidity, war, and cruelty. Our problem is that grand thieves are running the country. That's our problem!" - Howard Zinn

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •