All Episodes
Previous Next
Dec. 21, 2023 - Jim Fetzer
52:36
NICK KOLLERSTROM – UKRAINE: The Just War
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Well, welcome back for our next speaker, who happens to be...
Another personal hero of mine, he has published so many wonderful books.
He's an expert on Sir Isaac Newton.
He's a professional historian of science.
He's done all this courageous work on breaking the spell related to the Holocaust, where he invited me to write the introduction.
He's published a book about 13 false flags in Europe.
You can find it at Moonrock Books and elsewhere.
He's also the leading expert on the London 7-7 subway attack with his book Terror on the Tube, which is now, I don't know, in its sixth or seventh edition or printing, Nick, you can fill us in.
His name is Nick Kohlerstrom.
He's just a sensational guy.
I admire him beyond words.
And I have his slide set set up, so I think, Nick, we can make it happen.
Here's a slide set, but let me have you say a few words first.
Go ahead, Nick, all yours.
Hi there, Jim.
It's a wonderful privilege to be on this conference, and quite awesome forms by Scott Bennett, and I feel quite humble following it.
And I'm taking the angle from what we've done for many years before you and I about the tactics of deception employed by the US and UK and obviously I'm not a military expert but I want to look at the deceptive way in which this war was brought about and how Russia had no option Summer's been anti-war all my life.
This is the only conflict where I see that it was inevitable, that Russia could not have avoided it.
There was no option of avoiding this conflict.
And I want to try and describe that.
Very, very good.
So I'll do your slides for you, Nick.
Let's see.
Can you see all right?
There you go.
Right.
We're ready, right.
OK, this is just to show that Ukraine is very much a patched together nation.
It has very little, by way of a sense of national unity.
And obviously, this eastern part in pink is what we're looking at, the source of the conflict.
And OK, next.
It's been Russian, that eastern part, for a thousand years.
Let's be aware of that.
It started off.
Can I come to the next slide, please?
Thank you.
It started off a thousand years ago, the beginning of ancient Russia.
So this is a deep and ancient culture which overlaps the whole eastern part of what is now Ukraine.
And beginning in 2014, an absolutely real genocide program was initiated to eradicate this ancient culture.
In a way, that is the primary source of the present conflict.
If you wanted to say more generally, it is NATO's relentless move eastward, closer and closer to the boundaries of Russia, and the way NATO nations call defence when they want to put American missiles and, for that matter, American biological warfare research centres on the border of Russia.
As far as Russia is concerned, that is not defence.
And if Russia, if Europe wants a future, it needs to think about how defence can be defensive And not offensive.
How to defend your country without threatening other countries.
This is perfectly feasible with modern technology and it's not what NATO does.
Okay, right.
These, after the Maidan coup in 2014, these, and the, basically, trying to legalise, pass laws to outlaw Russian language and Russian culture, The Crimea and these two, these little mini-states here, Luhansk and Donetsk, they declared independence and didn't want to be part of a nation trying to suppress Russian culture.
So a lot depends on the history here.
A conflict began.
The NATO version is that Russia kind of Moved in, gave weapons to these little miniscates, and started a conflict.
That's the NATO version.
And from research on my book, I gather that didn't happen.
That Russia kept out of it, and this was a conflict initiated within those little miniscates, okay?
Here's just another picture.
You can see them, Kherson, Zaporizhzhya, Donetsk, Luhansk, and then down south, Crimea.
Crimea's had a wonderful bridge, the world's longest bridge built, joining it with the Russian motherland.
And as well as that, does Russia need a land bridge to be able to get to Crimea?
So these are what is at stake in this conflict.
And Russia did its very best to keep them incorporated as part of Ukraine.
OK, next.
This shows that the deep red part you can see is Russian language speaking.
OK, and the yellow part on the west is Ukrainian.
These are all the same race.
It's not a racial difference.
It's not a racial war.
But the western part, you could say it's more Polish.
And the Eastern part is more Slav and Russian, and they don't have very good traditions of getting on together.
OK, next.
Right, this is the very brutal coup, which it was... America spent about five billion dollars on it, and it was prepared years in advance And Americans taking over national positions in the Kiev government and influencing with money, influencing and buying politicians unduly.
So Ukraine was gradually losing its independence over these years when this coup happened.
And so there's a lot of different narratives who organized this coup and obviously Victoria Newland And her husband, Mr Kagan, Robert Kagan, were there, had crucial roles in making it all happen.
Okay, next.
There are deep traditions of the Ukraine military with German Nazis, and this then, part of the extraordinary feature that NATO is backing armies that outrightly proclaim themselves as being Nazis, the Azov Battalion and the Kraken.
And they don't have anything resembling what we'd call principles or laws of warfare.
And there's a lot of outright torture of anyone's Russian sympathies who these guys got hold of.
So it was extremely brutal tactics.
Okay, next.
Yeah, I think that Russia is a country that is successfully tolerating and getting on with different cultural elements and that's what it tries to do in Ukraine.
In the Minsk agreements, despite the difference in perspectives, even after that brutal coup, was there a possibility of developing a united Ukraine with friendship?
So these mincer courts were drawn up and they were co-signed by Germany and France, as well as Russia, and also the principles of two of those states, Luhansk and Donetsk, co-signed the Minsk Agreement.
So it's part of their claim that why they really exist as many states that should be recognised.
And this Minsk Agreement allows some degree of autonomy to these eastern states and guaranteed they could use their own language, Russian, and keep their traditions.
So they had a degree of autonomy, but they'd still be part of Ukraine.
That was the deal.
What followed then was years of In retrospect, it was an outright genocide program.
We can see here, and you'd only gather this by watching RT.
You wouldn't read it in the newspapers at all.
The Ukraine has cut off electricity, water, gas and finance.
Continually bombed.
Almost terrible thing.
Every other day bombs would be falling on your cities, schools and just pounding.
The Western nations basically managed not to know this is happening, which is very extraordinary.
In a way, that's the cause of the present conflict, that this outright genocide program goes on and all the kind of wealthy young people who could afford to leave, a lot of them left those eastern provinces and absolutely nothing is done.
And Russia has this great dream and hope of friendship in Europe.
And it's building this world's longest pipeline during these years.
The world's longest pipeline between Germany and Russia is being built while this awful conflict is going on.
Well, it isn't really a conflict.
It's not really the word for it.
It's the Kiev government continually bombing the eastern states and they can't really respond.
OK, and we're going to see how on this mystic number 22 to 22, 27th February.
The whole thing pivots around that.
And as the Minsk agreements come to an end and Russia finally decides to move in and assist these traditional parts of Russian culture.
OK, next.
OK, now, if you remember, between the winter of 2021 and 2022, there were continual announcements on the media, oh, Russia is going to invade Ukraine.
And everyone was puzzled by this.
Why on earth would they do that?
Russia doesn't invade countries.
And a Russian spokesman didn't seem to know what this was about.
And then, the crucial thing, it's only months later, in fact about a year later, that we understood the deep meaning of this.
In January of 22, we get categorical statements about the North Stream is going to be destroyed.
Victoria Nuland says, if Russia invades Ukraine, one way or another, Nord Stream 2 will not move forward.
And then a week later, Joe Biden says, if Russia invades, there will no longer be a Nord Stream 2, we will put an end to it.
And if you remember the amazing scene, Schulz, the German Prime Minister, was standing next to Biden when he said that.
And he did nothing.
So I think that's an amazing scene.
It shows the Well, what does it show?
It shows the complete absence of sovereignty of European nations.
This was a multi-billion dollar project between Germany and Russia.
It was going to bring cheap, reliable gas to Europe, so it would power the whole German economy.
And here is Joe Biden saying there will no longer be an Austrian II.
And Schultz, standing right next to him, says nothing.
Okay, now nobody quite knew the meaning of these statements because why would Russia invade, okay?
And aside from Mike Whitney in UNSTOCKHOLM, Ukraine is Washington's weapon of choice for torpedoing North Stream 2.
Now there's a whole perspective on this war, but the number one priority of America is to prevent friendship developing between Germany and Russia.
That's a supreme priority, always has been, of America.
And for us in Europe, we could say it's the most important thing, would be the most important thing in the world.
If that friendship developed, then you'd have, world peace would break out, you know.
There'd be no need for NATO anymore.
Russia and Germany would be friendly partners and we could all relax.
And instead of spending all those trillions on the military, we could start having fun and enjoying life.
So from a European point of view, that friendship would be on the pipeline.
The pipeline consolidates that friendship.
That would be the most valuable thing we could possibly have.
And we wouldn't have all this terrific energy crisis we've got now in Europe with that wonderful millions of cubic meters of natural gas.
So, what was going to happen now?
Many people, strategic analysts, believe that the war had to be initiated in order to stop that friendship development, in order to stop the pipeline.
There had to be the war.
A lot of people reckon that is a prime imperative of the war.
So, next.
Okay, now this is just a time when the war is beginning.
And not in February, we get a strange thing that Shultz proposes to Zelensky that all Ukraine has to do is renounce its NATO aspirations, declare neutrality, and then you can have a security deal.
So that was the key thing Russia was insisting on, just say no to joining NATO and This thing could have been stabilised and Zelensky said no.
Aaron Massey, by the way, is a brilliant commentator on something called thegreyzone.com.
I hope you all consult that.
Zelensky says no.
It's the 19th of February, but in a way he had to say no because the war preparations were already beginning, as we'll see next.
Okay, now this is an official count, I see, of the number of explosions registered in the Donbass and you can see around the 17th of February a massive increase starts and there's a terrific build-up of military, of Ukrainian military, on the border of the Donbass.
That's the word for Eastern Ukraine.
You can see here from the 17th of February and it goes up.
It's about a hundredfold increase, isn't it?
A staggering increase in the number of explosions going off every day.
You get well over a thousand explosions going off in the third week of February.
So you can see here that that offer that Shultz made was, in a way, just theatrical.
Zelensky knew that some sort of big conflict was coming.
And here it was, It was going up to that day, the 22nd, and this was Russia's moment.
If it didn't come in now, the whole eastern part would be wiped out by this Tariq military build-up, with this Tariq bombing just to soften up the East Ukraine.
So by this escalation of bombing, That gave Russia the absolute imperative.
You either come in now and defend Donbass or it's all over.
We walk over Donbass and that's it.
Okay, next.
Right, so, I'm sorry, let's just go back a bit.
I think there's a rather interesting sequence.
On the 17th, The little mini-states, Donbass and Luhansk, they ask Russia for assistance.
And what happens then, what happens immediately after, the Russian Federation Parliament recognises the mini-states of Donbass and Luhansk, and that is a key legal question, because NATO says, oh, they're not official, they have no right to do that.
Don't forget, these two were co-signatories of the Minsk Agreement, so they reckon they have some status, and Russia then recognises them as being Some degree means some degree of autonomy and can make their own requests.
Okay, as soon as Russia recognized them, then they asked Russia for aid, come and help us.
that then went to the Russian parliament and that was the I think that was the the the the 20th no that was the 22nd Russian parliament and then on the 24th uh Russian parliament proved on the 24th Russia storms in a kind of blitzkrieg uh going into um into the little mini states but also it has to go into the mainland Ukraine Why does it have to do that?
Because the bombing is coming from there.
The bombing is coming from maybe 30 kilometers away from Luhansk, Donetsk and so on, and therefore the Russian military have to go in there in order to try and stop the bombing.
They have no option, if they can do this at all, to go into the mainland to to stop this genocidal bombing program and I would suggest that is quite legitimate under international law.
Okay, I'd like to hear international law debate this but I would say this defence of this part of eastern Ukraine and stopping the continued bombardment is legally justifiable.
Okay next.
Okay right away when Russia storms into Ukraine The first thing it comes across, or able to ratify, is the existence of absolutely forbidden biological warfare laboratories.
There's at least two dozen of them found all over the place.
See this one, for example, up at Kharkiv, right at the northeastern part, that is literally on the border of Russia, Kharkiv.
These are totally banned.
There's a whole lot of stuff with Joe Biden's son, isn't there?
His laptop and stuff.
A whole lot of info, a connect show of the Bidens.
There is a loophole in international law, which I think we're coming to.
Let's go next.
Yeah, on March the 8th, this is A couple of weeks after Russia storms into Ukraine, the whole biological warfare scandal erupts and Newsweek says no, it's not happening.
I'll just read.
Part of its latest attempt to justify its invasion of Ukraine, Russian officials are once again pushing a false narrative that Eastern European countries are developing biological weapons with assistance of the US.
So all the papers were categorically denying and then On that same day, Victoria Newland admitted it.
Next.
OK, here is on the same day, Victoria admitted in testimony before Congress that there were biological research faculties in the Ukraine.
Okay, let's get a perspective on this.
The New American Century Project, that's a big neocon document in 2000, said that developing advanced forms of biological warfare that can target specific genotypes May transform biological warfare into a politically useful tool.
So it's a cynical advocacy of something absolutely forbidden under international law.
And then Putin, the Russian president, warned in 2017 that they had evidence this was happening, biological weapons in Ukraine, and that they were trying to collect DNA material from slums in Russia and Ukraine.
Ethnic specific bioweapons.
Now Nobody knows whether these exist.
I mean, do they?
Ethnic-specific bioweapons.
But there was endeavour to do that and it's quite a scary concept.
There is a loophole which America uses in the Biological Weapons Convention that permits threat reduction programs.
If you can show you're only studying biological weapons in order to protect yourself against them.
So these various labs are all called Threat Reduction Program Laboratories, but that's a complete scam and I doubt if anyone falls for it.
So that was one of the first things to come out once the war began.
OK, next.
OK, now this again only came out months later, or about a year later, that in Istanbul Erdogan was getting the two sides together and he thought he was going to have a great feather in his cap of a peace plan.
Now what Putin called the limited military operation, he insisted it wasn't a war, and exactly this was probably the aim, probably what the purpose of the limited military operation was.
It was to show Ukraine they could not walk in, they could not walk across, and they could not win, and for God's sake let's sit down and talk.
So they did.
Both sides were ready to sign.
That's the thing that came out, only a long time after.
And the one absolute condition was that Ukraine would say, we won't join NATO.
And the whole discussion of the Crimea and Donbass status, remember that was the thing, four minutes in the Minsk agreements, that would be decided in future negotiations.
So they weren't trying to solve everything.
The thing was, look, let's just stop the fight, No to NATO and then we can talk about the rest later on.
Incredibly sensible deal that would have saved how many hundred thousand lives?
I mean how many hundred thousand young Ukrainian men lives would have been saved if that had been signed?
But Boris Johnson, I think it was then the British Prime Minister wasn't he?
Or he just lost his job.
He told them, he said, you mustn't negotiate with Putin.
No, no, sorry.
You just walk away.
And here's a judgement by Mike Whitney.
Johnson sabotaged the deal because Washington wanted a war.
It's that simple.
Well, that is what happened.
And it was all very secret.
And so the first few days of April, Russia had to sadly admit, yes, there was a peace plan.
Which I hope is for it, but it's all off.
And as this conflict goes on, the Russians feel they've got no one to negotiate with.
There's no one who will negotiate in good faith with them.
This is one of the awful things to emerge from this war.
You've got a lack of people in Europe who will speak with good faith and reliability.
OK, now notice how that terrific event, the peace plan nearly signed, was knocked off the headlines.
How was it knocked off the headlines?
By what's called the Butcher Massacre, B-U-C-H-A.
This is just northeast of Kiev.
Basically, a whole lot of Russian troops were there at the beginning of the conflict.
I would say that was a feint to hold down a whole lot of Ukrainian troops around the Kiev area, as if they were planning to do something, which they actually weren't.
And after about a month they then moved away.
They backed off because they weren't planning to do anything.
Whereas the actual conflict was going on much more in the southeast.
Okay now there's a terrible price if Russia occupies a part of Ukraine then moves out.
The question is what about all the people in Ukraine who are sympathetic to the Russians?
What happens to them?
What is their fate?
So the The Ukrainian army, this is what seems to have happened, moved in after Russia moved out, and all those who could be identified as having sympathized with Russians were massacred.
There's about several hundred, three or four hundred of them.
The bodies were laid out on the street like this, you can see, and it was falsely claimed that Russia had done this.
Okay, next.
This is the way the papers reported it, as if this shows the brutal, brutal Russian assassination or killing of civilians for absolutely no reason.
And whereas the accounts, I think there are accounts on the ground of how very careful the Russian troops were not to shoot civilians.
And this is partly why their progress in this war has been It's quite slow, many people think it's quite slow.
They didn't storm across the land quite slow because they didn't want to harm civilians.
So this was a story, I would say it somewhat fell apart, but obviously most people still believe it, of a Russian atrocity.
A whole lot of fabricated Russian atrocity stories here.
Next.
Okay.
Now, in the summer of 2022, astonishing statements came out by the people who had themselves signed the Minsk agreements.
First of all, Poroshenko, who was the Prime Minister of Ukraine, he outrightly said he had signed them.
They had no intention of buying them.
It was just to buy time.
I mean, the whole Ukrainian army was being massively trained by NATO over those years.
So this is utterly treacherous behavior of claiming you've signed a peace deal, And you actually just want to buy time to train up your army for a war that's going to come.
Minstrels did not mean anything to us.
We had no intention to carry them out and rebuild our armed forces.
OK, well, you may say it's quite insignificant character, but Angela Merkel, arguably the most respected politician in Europe, she was coming to the end of her prime ministership of Germany.
And what she said Later on, some months later, she said the whole thing had been merely a ploy to get ready for the war, and she admitted there was no intention of honouring them.
And I think the French Prime Minister said the same thing.
So the Europeans who had co-signed the Minsk Agreements all said, made astonishing statements, but they hadn't intended to honour one of them.
And what Putin said in response is that arose for Russia the question whether there is anyone to negotiate with.
And Maria Zakharova, a very lively Russian spokesperson, said the horrible fraud as modus operandi of the West.
And that's what it was.
It was just horrible fraud.
And all the business of letting Russia build that huge pipeline because it thought and hoped for friendship with Europe and actually No, they just wanted the war.
OK, next.
Very insightful, Marine Scott Ritter, and let's just quote what he said.
This will not end well for either, about this treachery, this will not end well for either Germany, Ukraine, or any of those who shroud themselves with a cloak of diplomacy, all the while hiding from view the sword they held behind their backs.
I think that's a good phrase of the tactics of deception that were used by Europe to bring about this war.
Okay, next.
This is just another big atrocity story, perhaps it's not really relevant, but in June, mid-summer, a big supermarket is burning, And nobody comes out of it.
No shoppers come running out of it.
No children or women are there.
The car park's nearly empty.
And after terrific, supposedly, Russian missiles and so on, and then after all that, it turns out that actually there was a military depot just behind it, which was actually targeted.
And this had been closed for a couple of months, probably because... Okay, next.
Because of that military target.
Here's just a picture of it from above.
That is the big picture of a big military depot storing stuff, and right down in the 7 o'clock bottom is the supermarket.
So it was hit by some stray exploding shells from the military depot.
Right, so that's That's just a flavour of some of the atrocity stories fabricated, as if it's quite a normal policy.
Right.
OK, 28th of June.
Now, you might want to say that that atrocity story was just synchronising with this to help him get the money.
Help everybody be shocked.
And then Zelensky comes along.
He wants five billion a month from NATO.
This is in June, and he soon puts it up.
So that synchronizes with this atrocity story.
OK, next.
OK, now the whole question is, will Nord Stream?
Nord Stream is now ready to be switched on.
This is a terrific, climactic moment for Europe.
The world's longest pipeline.
It would give a vast amount of cheap natural gas to Europe.
Reliable, safe, and not just established friendship, but low-cost energy.
Germany, the powerhouse of Europe, totally needs that low-cost energy.
This is one moment when it's switched on.
It's not final, but It's a kind of indication that this isn't going to work.
This is just a map showing how Russia absolutely needs those eastern mini-states.
Partly because it has to have land access to Crimea.
It would be too dangerous not to have it.
This has been traditionally ancient Russian territory.
If Ukraine cannot exist as an integral land, then Russia has every right to move in and protect these many states, including Crimea.
OK, next.
OK, now, you never hear this.
It seems to me terribly important.
If Europe wanted a Europe at peace with itself, how can you imagine that happening?
Just suppose NATO wants to exist.
I mean, I'd obviously rather it didn't exist, but supposing European nations, North Atlantic nations want to have a military treaty with America.
Can you imagine, in what way could that be a peaceful Europe?
And I think the answer is what used to be the old Warsaw Pact.
It used to be these countries down through the middle of Europe, North, South, And they've reformed themselves.
So this is what's called the Three Seas Initiative.
You can see the three seas here.
Black Sea, Baltic Sea, Adriatic.
And about 10 or a dozen little countries, or generally little, that aren't quite large enough to, you know, have their own defence.
It totally makes sense for them to all join up.
And I would say if those could join up and hold a balance in Europe, A balance between East and West and say we don't have an enemy as such.
We may have a defence policy, having a defence policy without having a specified enemy.
I would say that is a possible way in which you could have a Europe without war.
I mean the NATO's remorseless motion eastwards It's almost a guarantee for World War Three because NATO has huge exercises every year in which Russia is the targeted enemy, which it wasn't supposed to do in its constitution.
It didn't formulate an enemy like that, but it does now.
So I would say at the moment you've got a continual remorseless eastward pressure It's hard to see how it's as if it really wants war.
It pretends that it doesn't.
If Europe had enough sovereignty to be able to want a peaceful Europe, I suggest that this three Cs initiative could possibly be the answer.
Okay, next.
Well, this is just another atrocity.
This is one that really did happen.
A whole lot of Azov Battalion people who had been captured.
I think they'd been captured, okay?
And maybe they were talking.
Maybe they were surprised how well they were treated by people in Luhansk.
And so Ukraine blew up its own Azov battalion, which is an incredibly cruel thing to do after they'd been captured while they were fast asleep.
Yeah, okay, next.
This again, incredibly cruel thing to do.
These tiny little anti-personnel mines that children step on without realising.
So you get a lot of damaged feet and that's incredibly cruel.
I think it's forbidden in warfare, this kind of anti-personnel mines.
I'm not sure, but it's a very cruel thing to do.
Now let's come on to the all-important thing, the elections.
I think this is a turning point in the conflict.
So September 22, 23rd to 27th, elections took place in all those little mini-states in the East.
And I would say for the couple of hundred thousand Men who died since then fighting the war.
I would say these are anti-democracy warriors.
They're fighting because they don't want the outcome of democracy.
I would say this is a war which hinges on the question, do you or do you not believe in democracy?
Ever since September 22.
That is, to my mind, that is the key question.
Do these, do these many states, God bless, do they have a right of self-determination or not?
Okay.
After all they've been through, the horror with which the main Ukraine government had treated them, did they have a right to vote to leave Ukraine?
That's the key thing.
Does part of a country have a right to vote to leave it?
And so what we'd like to hear international lawyers discussing this more, but let's just have a look at what happened during this very brave election That's up mobile mobile sensors for counting the votes because any stationary sensor would just be bombed.
The bombing kept on from Kiev during the referendum.
Donbass, Kherson, Zaporizhzhia and they were scoffed at by European politicians.
It's a sham and illegal.
I didn't say why.
What is sham about them?
And the official observers from the OSCE refused to come.
Just as they earlier refused to attend the Crimea referendum so that they could afterwards declare the elections invalid.
So that refusal to attend is an indication that the Empire wanted to invalidate and demonise these elections.
However, there were quite a lot of independent observers and I know one of them, Vanessa Bailey, Very insightful lady, who evidently thought it was quite reliable.
People complained there were too many pro-Russian independent observers.
Well, if all those from Western Europe refused to attend, that's hardly surprising, isn't it?
So look at these massive turnouts we got.
97% Donetsk, 92% Luhansk, 76% Kherson, 85% Zaporizhzhia region.
So the people were totally dedicated, despite the bombing, coming out and voting.
And a massive majority voted to leave Ukraine and apply for membership of the Russian Federation.
And I would say that's an absolutely valid decision.
They had a perfect right to do that after they were in charge.
So this is democracy in action.
Do you believe in democracy or don't you?
That's the key thing.
I would say that the Russian Federation then accepted that request and And it then became incorporated into Russia.
Was it Novorossiysk?
New Russia.
So from that point of view, from the Russian point of view, it's absolutely irrevocable.
They're defending Russia.
That's their point of view.
And notice how you don't get any discussion of this in the media, in the Western media.
What about those elections?
Were they valid?
And the entire conflict has gone on since then.
Maybe 300,000 young men are died, something like that, or at least half a million died or injured.
That massive tragedy, those are fighting against democracy, against the democratic decision.
They're fighting, we must put it this way, why do they want to fight and die?
They're fighting because they don't believe these eastern states had the right to determine their own destiny.
And then they think they should agree to go back to being part of the government by Kiev.
So there's a crucial international law issue here, and I think it's terribly important that we discuss this.
For example, in my country, in England, if Scotland voted on a referendum to leave the United Kingdom, everyone would accept that they could leave.
There'd be no question about it.
I mean, they don't have a majority at the moment, but if they did have a majority, it would be totally accepted that they could leave.
And also, in Yugoslavia, Europe had accepted a vote to leave by, what was it?
Kosovo, that's right, Kosovo voted to leave, wasn't it?
Germany recognised that.
So there are precedents here.
And while I think we need, if we believe in world peace, peace in Europe, I think we need to take international law very seriously.
And under what conditions can these parts, states, be decided to leave?
And partly because Ukraine is not a very stable country.
It hasn't held itself together for very long.
Maybe it looks like now it's doomed with the rejection of that peace offer.
Okay, next.
Okay, may I quote Vanessa Bailey?
She attended the domestic elections as an inspector.
She was an election checker, right?
And she didn't get threatened by the EU.
Can you believe it?
The French MEP demanded that all those in voluntary assistance in any way to the organisation of these illegitimate referendums be individually targeted and sanctioned.
So seeing democracy in action was just too painful, he couldn't bear it.
But Vanessa Bailey calmly replied, quote, imposing sanctions on global citizens for bearing witness to a legal process that reflects the determination of the people of Donbass is fascism.
Should the EU proceed with this campaign, I believe there will be seriously consequences.
The essence of freedom of speech is under attack.
Well said, well said lady.
I deeply regret, speaking personally, that we don't have a book About all these experiences, we'd like a book with all the people who acted as independent fact checkers, a detailed account of those elections in the different states and in Crimea, who organized them and different witnesses.
I think if somebody could publish a book on that, it would be very valuable.
And because I found when researching my book, I had to consult, say, RT videos, for example, which You know, not very permanent.
So I think if those little mini-states could possibly, or someone could, get reports from them, all the people who participated in the election, all the facts and figures, because, you know, native sources will just contradict it.
They'll say, no, there were sham elections, and the same for Crimea.
Oh no, it's all fiddled, you don't believe that stuff, do you?
So I would like, if there's anyone In East Ukraine or Russia, you could get facts and details.
It would be great if we could have that.
OK, next.
OK, here's one more.
You might want to hear testimony.
Indian lady.
She's Indian chair of the BRICS International Forum.
OK, and she witnessed the elections.
And what she said was because the Western media were rubbishing these elections, OK?
In the Western media we're told that people are being forced to vote at gunpoint.
Can you believe it?
We're here today and we can see for ourselves that the people, home families with smiles on their faces, are coming to exercise their inalienable right to vote to join Russia.
People are happy, hope shines in their eyes for a long-awaited peaceful future within Russia and we understand for our part that after this referendum the world will become a whole new place because a new history is being written in the Donbass.
Well, you can see why the Empire wanted to put a stop to that, can't you?
The idea that people can choose their own destiny.
So, I'm sorry, I concluded they were totally valid, absolutely real, those elections, and the figures were what they said they were, but it would be great if we could have some more detail.
Now, notice what happened at the same time.
Next.
Oh, right.
Sorry, that's just...
These are the powers behind the war that make sure the war happens, make sure most of the wars in our world happen.
This Anxious Evil, US-UK, fully dedicated to internal war, and which always works through deception.
Next.
Okay, now note this date, 26th of September, that exactly synchronises with the elections, right?
So this terrific event, the world's largest international terrorism event since 9-11, the world's longest pipeline getting blown up, all the hopes of Europe for peace, peace, prosperity, friendship terminated by being blown up and oh we're not allowed to talk about who did it.
That exactly synchronises with the election, so it knocked the elections off the headline.
So I think it's important to recognise that Also, while we're at it, let's look at this date, 26th September.
First of all, it was a new moon around the autumn equinox, and that is the Jewish New Year.
Small detail.
It's the day of the Jewish New Year, and also Robert Kagan, the husband of Victoria Newland, he was one of the chief architects of the Maiden Massacre, or whatever you want to call it.
That were by the elected Prime Minister of Ukraine had to flee and a lot of people were shot and the Prime Minister who Victoria Nuland had announced in advance would come in and replace the elected Prime Minister.
That coup, which a lot of people say is a neo-Nazi coup, that neo-Nazi coup had Robert Kagan and Victoria Nuland having central roles in it.
OK, so it's his birthday, Jewish New Year, and also synchronised with those elections.
So the thing is deeply timed.
I think times are terribly important when the Empire does these things.
OK, right, next.
OK, well just a sort of overall perspective from the great Brazilian philosopher Pepe Escobar.
I always like reading his stuff and he tends to have a cheerful optimism We didn't until this last walk again.
One constantly heard that China builds plants and high-speed railways while Europe at best writes white papers.
It can always get worse.
The EU's occupied American territory is now descending fast from centre of global power to the status of inconsequential peripheral player, a misstruggling market in the far periphery of China's community of shared destiny.
At the same time, the Greater Eurasia Partnership will be solidifying Russia as the ultimate Eurasian bridge, creating a common space across Eurasia which could even ignore vassalised Europe.
So there's a tremendous struggle going on for the destiny, the destiny of the world, in which Russia was not trashed or broken as was anticipated by this terrific assault.
Not at all.
And the Western and in Asia, a new prosperity is booming and friendship between different nations, while Europe, because it's lost its cheap energy, is on the way down.
So this conflict, It's not at all playing out the way Europe might have thought.
And Europe is in no way benefiting, in no way whatsoever is it benefiting from this conflict.
Quite the contrary.
It's trying to realise, whatever the point of it was, it's own only millions or billions it's given to Ukraine.
It spells bad news and a downhill path for Europe from now on.
I think the good times are over for Europe now.
For maybe, you know, a thousand years, it's been a great centre of world culture.
It's been where everybody wanted to be.
And I suspect that Pepe Escobar is right here and the good times are over for Europe.
OK, next.
All right.
OK, well, that's basically it, Jim.
These are the, I'm sure you're, this is all, where are these?
These are the main sources I've used for keeping up to speed on what's going on.
And yeah, so it looks like the drama of this war is mainly over now.
I've tried to show just in an outline form why Russia had to get into this conflict, was maneuvering to it and it couldn't avoid it.
And it has not had the Very bad consequences that people thought it would have.
On the contrary, I think this this struggle is going to be regarded as heroic and centuries to come.
But Russia established itself and defended its reputation, showed that Russia could not be destroyed by NATO as they thought it could.
Right.
Nick, I agree with you, and your sources were impeccable.
You had Colonel McGregor, Scott Ritter, UNS Review, UNS.com.
It turned out to be a fabulous source.
South Front, of course, and War News 24-7 are also excellent on developments, and now, of course, focusing a lot about what's going on in Israel and with Hamas.
I think you were covering very well Why Russia's intervention was a just war, and I'd like to return to the point you made in the preface, that you're an anti-war guy.
So what you discovered here, based upon your scholarly research, was that, in fact, Russia had a just cause to intervene in Ukraine, and this was not a war that you could, even though you're in principle opposed to wars, oppose this war.
Yeah, yeah, it's a terrible judgment, but whatever else Europe comes out with, its politicians, their words have no integrity.
That is what's come out of this, and whatever else it means, there's little point listening to European politicians now, as if they don't have sovereignty.
I mean, it may be, I don't know if America, does America benefit from this war?
I can't say, but I think the pressure of America wanting the war, which works through NATO into Europe, is what made it all happen, really.
And look at the absurdity now that Germany is dependent on liquefied natural gas from the United States that runs four times or more than what they would have had with the cheap gas through Nord Stream.
I mean, this is just a humanitarian disaster, economic exploitation.
Grotesque and offensive that the United States should have done this, Nick.
Just repulsive.
Yeah.
About 60 years ago, Europe felt it needed America for its security.
The nations didn't trust each other.
They wanted some American umbrella or security, and now this has become very ruinous for it.
If Europe could trust itself a bit more and have decisions reflecting sovereign interests of its members, perhaps it's too late for that now, but anyway.
Nick, an excellent presentation.
We want you back in an hour for the discussion with Scott Bennett and Russ Winter, whom I'll introduce in just a few minutes.
Thank you very, very much for that, Nick.
We're going to take a brief break while we, everyone, as you're doing, get a cup of coffee, whatever, a pit stop.
There you have it.
And we'll continue with our next speaker, Russ Winter.
Stand by.
So I'll be on in one hour's time.
Yes, yes.
Excellent, Nick.
▲
Export Selection