1. You mentioned recently that Russia is intentionally placing the Northern Hemisphere at risk currently. Can you please elaborate on this concern?
Answer: Russia is actually directing the plan for Ukraine, with U.S. support, to direct drone attacks to the far interior of Russia, thus needlessly escalating the conflict toward the use of non-conventional weapons, which is Russia's intent.
2. Does Russia genuinely believe that the use of non-conventional weapons would advance its interests at this time?
Answer: Unfortunately, Vladimir Putin does believe this, yes. All of the internal communications among the Russian military and intelligence apparatus appear to reference a "successful" use of nuclear weapons.
3. Does Putin believe that the West would not retaliate in the event of his use of nuclear weapons?
Answer: He knows that the West would not retaliate, because our three letter agencies have provided him with the nuclear codes pertaining to the United States and Western Europe. So, there would be no retaliation for the simple reason that we no longer possess the capability.
4. How did those disclosures occur?
Answer: How, indeed? The FBI and the CIA have a great deal of explaining to do. The possibility of mutual deterrence does not exist at the current time, and this leaves the whole of the Northern Hemisphere at great risk of Russian aggression.
5. Does Russia have ambitions to control more of Europe, beyond Ukraine?
Answer: Most assuredly, it does. Our military leaders are quite aware of this situation, and they are none too pleased.
6. Wouldn't Russia be reviled the world over in the event of unprovoked aggression with non-conventional weapons?
Answer: Well, this is where the staging of current drone forays deep into Russian territory comes in. Vladimir Putin plans to say that Russian nuclear aggression was, in fact, provoked by territorial incursion by the West.
7. Is there any justification for drone strikes to be perpetrated deep into the territory of Russia at this juncture?
Answer: Absolutely none. Those actions represent the staging for an environmental and geopolitical disaster from which human civilization would not recover.
8. So, the United States should not be supporting drone strikes far within Russian territory at this time?
Answer: Certainly not. This is a national sovereignty problem. The United States' military leadership needs to have the freedom not to follow Vladimir Putin's directives of escalation of the conflict. Right now, they don't possess that choice. And the world needs to be paying close attention.
9. Russia appears to have considered the idea of using non-conventional weapons in the past by blaming that escalation on Russian separatists. Is Vladimir Putin still considering that stratagem?
Answer: It is still on the table for Russia, yes.
10. But to be clear, if there were any use of non-conventional weapons in Ukraine or Western Europe, Russia would be to blame?
Answer: One hundred percent.
11. What can we do to prevent this plan from advancing?
Answer: We can illuminate the fact that we know Russia's thinking, we understand their stratagems, and we refuse to play along. That means that our top elected officials need to stop supporting drone strikes far into Russian territory when they speak to the news media and to each other. And that means that television journalists need to stop pretending that this is a viable strategy for Ukraine or the West. It is not viable now, it will not be viable tomorrow, it will never be viable.
12. How do you think Zelensky is responding to this situation overall?
Answer: He certainly senses the set-up, in my opinion. He seems extremely uneasy about the change in the United States' public directives to Ukraine regarding drone forays. He appears to know that the risks for Ukraine are unacceptable and growing by the day.
13. What does our military need to regain critical sovereignty for the United States right now so that this conflict can be effectively de-escalated?
Answer: Our military needs more leverage over Russia right away, and that means a few things. Number one, it means that the nuclear codes for the United States and Western Europe all need to be reset and rendered secure, with the clear mandate that they cannot fall into the hands of the CIA or the FBI at any point.
Number two, it means that the media, our elected officials, and the general public need to be more thoughtful participants in the geopolitical and environmental fate of the Northern Hemisphere. All of us need to say no to Russia's intended use of nuclear weapons, now and in the future. The United States should be emerging from our current environmental crisis in the leadership position regarding myriad long term global concerns. Not Russia. Not China. And that means we need to reclaim critical elements of our national sovereignty, as do our allies, now and not later.
Number three, regarding the matter of Russia's compromise of the FBI and the CIA pertaining to knowingly falsified law enforcement reporting against my family members and myself -- this one case, fully disclosed to me, can translate to dramatically increased leverage for the United States over Russia in the near term and beyond. We should understand the opportunity, and we should ensure that this translates into substantive and lasting change regarding long term self-determination for the United States and the West.
14. You are not suggesting that your case needs to be rendered fully public.
Answer: No, I am not. Profound change in the balance of power on the global stage does not require that step. But we need to rigorously assess the manner in which the FBI and the CIA are working against the sovereignty of the United States at this time, even while our military leadership needs these agencies in the short term.
Fundamentally, the military leadership of the United States should wield significantly more power than the FBI and the CIA, not less. Right now, the tail is wagging the dog. And that needs to change.
Our military leadership does not like to be subject to compromise to the territorial integrity of the United States, nor to the undermining of long term security interests of the nation.
We simply cannot have that internal conflict being constantly manifested by our intelligence apparatus. The risks are too great.
15. When we understand the torture of your sons and MX by the FBI and its affiliates in this context, to what extent is Vladimir Putin responsible for the egregious harms that have befallen your family?
Answer: He is a lead player, but he is not the only one. Most resoundingly, we need to comprehend that any compromise of U.S. agencies to the will of Russia and/or China at this time severely impacts the future sovereignty of our nation and others. Our chance to refuse the loss of our most cherished freedoms in the future is arising now. We need to comprehend it, and in a timely way.
16. You have repeatedly made the argument that the sovereignty of your sons and MX, and indeed, everyone affected by this case, should be returned to them in full.
Answer: Without question. If my sons and MX can recover their self-determination, so, too, can some of our leaders who have suffered sovereignty violations due to totalitarian overreach of the FBI and its affiliates. That means, in turn, that the sovereignty of our nation as a whole has a chance to be fully reclaimed in the long term.
17. You and your family stand on the front lines of this struggle. May I ask about the most pressing threats against you at this time?
Answer: Kidnapping, car bomb, car tire blowout, "spontaneous" deployment of airbags while driving, staged car accident, staged drug overdose, staged street crime, forced job loss, "accidental" gas explosion, "unintended shooting" during an unjustified law enforcement raid, staged plane accident, sniper assault -- this list goes on.
18. Will you please keep in close contact with us to update us regarding your safety and security and that of your family members?
Answer: I will.
19. Any further words for the public at this time?
Answer: Understand the importance of your voice in insisting that Russia not deploy non-conventional weapons anywhere in the world, now or in the future. Russia is not worthy of being the dominant leader on the global stage of the future that is fast approaching, nor is China. Rather, the United States must claim that role in defense of the global environmental concerns, in balance with the sovereignty that invests human life with the greatest meaning and purpose.
20. Thank you for speaking with us this afternoon.
Answer: You are quite welcome.
Lane MacWilliams
No comments:
Post a Comment