August 28, 2022
Ukrainian Graveyard Destroying Europe Is Actually Civil War Plan For America
By: Sorcha Faal, and as reported to her Western Subscribers
A thought-provoking new Security Council (SC) report circulating in the Kremlin today first noting Security Council Deputy Chairman Dmitry Medvedev granted a rare interview to the La Chaîne Info (LCI) television channel to explain that Moscow would only resort to nuclear weapons in four scenarios, all of which present an existential threat to the Russian state and are public, with him stating: “There are four reasons for the use of nuclear weapons…For the sake of interest and for the French public, I will name them: the launch of nuclear missiles, the use of nuclear weapons, attacks on critical infrastructure that controls nuclear weapons, or other actions that threaten the existence of the Russian state”, says in commenting on the possible use of tactical atomic weapons, or arms containing depleted uranium he factually assessed: “Over the past 20-30 years, the NATO states have used them quite actively both in Yugoslavia and Iraq…There is some uncertainty around this topic, with very tragic consequences…So, in this sense, we must first look at what Western countries have done in certain situations”, then he stressed that Russia’s response “will be consistent with the size of the threats this country is facing”, and correctly said that the “Special De-Nazification Operation” to liberate Ukraine, which started on 24 February, “is a defensive measure”.
Immediately prior to Deputy Chairman Medvedev addressing the peoples of France, this report notes, French President Emanuel Macron told them: “Some could see our destiny as being to constantly manage crises or emergencies…I believe that we are living through a tipping point or great upheaval…Firstly, because we are living through what could seem like the end of abundance…Faced with this, we have duties, the first of which is to speak frankly and very clearly without doom-mongering…It’s easy to promise anything and everything, sometimes to say anything and everything. Do not give in to these temptations, it is demagoguery”.
Quickly following President Macron telling the French peoples that they “are living through a tipping point or great upheaval”, this report continues, the socialist European Union’s top diplomat Josep Borrell declared: “The world has become a dangerous place…The EU members must understand that we have to defend ourselves if necessary and need the tools to do so…European citizens must be willing to pay the price for freedom, because the war in Ukraine isn’t only a war of the Ukrainians, but a war for our freedom”—is a “tipping point” statement and “world has become a dangerous place” declaration swiftly met by European Union member Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto, who forcefully fired back at these socialist Western colonial warmongering lunatics: “We’re not even willing to negotiate any sanctions on energy, be it oil or gas…The courage of the Hungarian government has helped Budapest to withstand pressure from Brussels…There is no security of energy supply to Europe without using Russian sources”—most certainly, is a defiant Hungary that paid close attention to former Vice President Willy Wimmer of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe, and member of the German Parliament, when he warned: “Ukraine seems to be the graveyard for Europe’s future as a continent of good neighbors…It is obvious that London is pursuing the policy of ‘Global Britain’…They will continue with their policy, which in the last three hundred years was very effective in controlling the continent and large parts of the globe and make use of foreign potential for their own purpose”—a warning joined by American international relations expert Gilbert Doctorow, Ph.D., who factually assessed: “The UK has been one of the main instigators of the crisis in Ukraine from the very beginning…British authorities are very keen to promote their anti-Russian policies as a leading element of their Global Britain post-Brexit foreign policy in order to claim relevance on the world stage”.
While Western colonial power Britain is destroying Europe with a “Ukrainian Graveyard” to bolster its presence on the world stage, this report details, it bears noticing the just published American article “Three Interesting Stories Of Note…We’re Sure There Is Nothing To Here”, wherein it reveals that over the past week: “The US government is hiring 87,000 new IRS agents to make sure more of its citizens’ money goes to Ukraine, where parliamentarians just voted to give themselves a 70% pay raise financed by international aid… The City of Miami holds another gun buyback with plans to give the firearms to Ukraine…The US has just announced it will no longer be publishing its military expenditures and arms transfers”.
What makes these “Three Interesting Stories” most critical to notice, this report explains, is because the socialist Biden Regime created the blueprint Ukraine is using called the Resistance Operating Concept (ROC), that was created by the United States Department of Homeland Security, and states about its goals: “The Resistance Operating Concept (ROC) encourages governments to foster pre-crisis resiliency through Total Defense (also known as Comprehensive Defense), a ‘whole-of-government’ and ‘whole-of-society’ approach, which include interoperability among its forces and those of its allies and partners…This establishes a common operational understanding and lexicon for resistance planning and its potential execution in Total Defense, incorporated within National Defense Plans”.
Though being used by Ukraine, this report notes, the Resistance Operating Concept is actually the plan created by the United States to use during an internal civil war, wherein it envisions American resistance forces will be aided by foreign powers supplying them with modern weapons and unlimited supplies of ammunition, and to counter sees this plan calling for the arming of the civilian population loyal to the socialist government and forcing them on the battlefield—and that in factual reality makes Ukraine the proof-of-concept testing ground for what former top socialist Clinton Regime official Robert Reich proclaimed: “The second American civil war is already occurring…But it is less of a war than a kind of benign separation analogous to unhappily married people who don’t want to go through the trauma of a formal divorce”.
In the just published leftist Washington Post article “Is The United States Headed For Civil War?” wherein it cites Oren Segal, vice president of the ADL’s Center on Extremism stating: “It’s hard to see a civil war emerging from the current mess, but I’m more concerned about what we can’t see”, this report concludes, it uses surveys and anecdotes to portray an American on the brink of civil war and notes Barbara Walter, a political scientist at the University of California at San Diego and the author of “How Civil Wars Start: And How to Stop Them”, pointing to two predictive factors: “Countries stuck in an unstable zone between democracy and autocracy are more susceptible to armed conflict…And countries with weakened governments and a population deeply divided by identity — by race, ethnicity or religion — can fall into civil war”—and as the socialist Biden Regime watches in horror as Russian military forces blow to bits this comical Resistance Operating Concept civil war test plan in Ukraine, world renowned American military historian Victor Davis Hanson, Ph.D. at the Hoover Institution, in his just published open letter “Civil War Porn”, factually assessed:
As Joe Biden’s polls stagnate and the midterms approach, we are now serially treated to yet another progressive melodrama about the dangers of a supposed impending radical right-wing violent takeover.
This time the alleged threat is a Neanderthal desire for a “civil war.”
The FBI raid on Donald Trump’s Florida home, the dubious rationale for such a historic swoop, and the popular pushback at the FBI and Department of Justice from roughly half the country have further fueled these giddy “civil war” conjectures.
Recently “presidential historian” Michael Beschloss speculated about the parameters of such an envisioned civil war.
Beschloss is an ironic source. Just days earlier, he had tweeted references to the executions of Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, who passed U.S. nuclear secrets to the Soviet Union in the 1950s, in connection with the FBI raid on Mar-a-Lago.
That was a lunatic insinuation that Trump might justly suffer the same lethal fate due to supposedly mishandling of “nuclear secrets.” Unhinged former CIA Director Michael Hayden picked up on Beschloss death-penalty prompt, adding that it “sounds about right.”
Hayden had gained recent notoriety for comparing Trump’s continuance of the Obama Administration’s border detention facilities to Hitler’s death camps. And he had assured the public that Hunter Biden’s lost and incriminating laptop was likely “Russian disinformation”.
So, like the earlier “Russian collusion” hoax, and the January 6 “insurrection,” the supposed right-wing inspired civil war is the latest shrill warning from the Left about how “democracy dies in darkness” and the impending end of progressive control of Congress in a few months.
On cue, Hollywood now joins the civil war bandwagon. It has issued a few bad, grade-C movies. They focus on deranged white “insurrectionists” who seek to take over the United States in hopes of driving out or killing off various “marginalized” peoples.
Pentagon grandees promise to learn about “white rage” in the military and to root it out. But never do they offer any hard data to suggest white males express any greater degree of racial or ethnic chauvinism than any other demographic.
When we do hear of an insurrectionary plan—to kidnap the Michigan governor—we discover a concocted mess. Twelve FBI informants outnumbered the supposed four “conspirators.” And two of them were acquitted by a jury and the other two so far found not guilty due to a mistrial.
The buffoonish January 6 riot at the Capitol is often cited as proof of the insurrectionary right-wing movement. But the one-day riotous embarrassment never turned up any armed revolutionaries or plots to overthrow the government.
What it did do was give the Left an excuse to weaponize the nation’s capital with barbed wire and thousands of federal troops, in the greatest militarization of Washington D.C. since the Civil War.
In contrast, Antifa and BLM rioters were no one-day buffoons. They systematically organized a series of destructive and deadly riots across the country for over four months in summer 2020. The lethal toll of their work was over 35 dead, $2 billion in property losses, and hundreds of police officers injured.
Such violent protestors torched the ironic St. John’s Episcopal church and attempted to fight their way into the White House grounds. Their violent agenda prompted the Secret Service to evacuate the president of the United States to a secure bunker.
The New York Times gleefully applauded the rioting near the White House grounds with the snarky headline “Trump Shrinks Back.”
As far as secession talk, it mostly now comes from the Left, not the Right.
Indeed, a parlor game has sprung up among elites in venues such as The Nation and The New Republic imaging secession from the United States. Blue-staters brag secession would free them from the burden of the red-state conservative population.
Over the last five years, it was the Left who talked openly of tearing apart the American system of governance—from packing the Supreme Court and junking the Electoral College to ending the ancient filibuster and nullifying immigration law.
Time essayist Molly Ball in early 2021 gushed about a brilliant “conspiracy” of wealthy tech lords, Democratic Party activists, and Biden operators.
Ball bragged how they had systematically poured hundreds of millions of dark money into changing voting laws, and absorbing the role of government registrars in key precincts.
What was revolutionary were new progressive precedents of impeaching a president twice, trying him as a private citizen, barring minority congressional representatives from House committee memberships, and tearing up the state of the union address on national television.
In contrast, decrying the weaponization of a once-professional FBI, and the scandals among its wayward Washington hierarchy is not insurrectionary. Nor is being appalled at the FBI raiding a former president’s and possible presidential candidate’s home, when historically disputes over presidential papers were the business of lawyers not armed agents.
Historic overreach is insurrectionary, not objecting to it. And those who warn most of some mythical civil war are those most likely to incite one.
[Note: Some words and/or phrases appearing in quotes in this report are English language approximations of Russian words/phrases having no exact counterpart.]
August 28, 2022 © EU and US all rights reserved. Permission to use this report in its entirety is granted under the condition it is linked to its original source at WhatDoesItMean.Com. Freebase content licensed under CC-BY and GFDL.