Satellite Images Reveal North Korea "Aggressively" Working On Ballistic Missile Submarine

According to the latest analysis of satellite imagery taken at North Korea"s Sinpo South Shipyard on November 5 conducted by the 38 North website, Pyongyang is pursuing an “aggressive schedule” to build its first operational ballistic missile submarine.

Continued movement of parts and components into and out of the parts yards adjacent to the construction halls indicates an ongoing shipbuilding program, the analysts concluded. "The presence of what appear to be sections of a submarine’s pressure hull in the yards suggests construction of a new submarine, possibly the SINPO-C ballistic missile submarine (SSB)- the follow-on to the current SINPO-class experimental ballistic missile submarine," 38 North said in the report published today.

Additionally, Imagery from November 5 shows two larger circular objects that may be sections of a submarine’s pressure hull: "The diameter of the first object was approximately 7.1 meters, while the diameter of the second starts at approximately 7.1 meters and reduces to approximately 6.1 meters. The larger object has what appears to be two internal cross members that could be used to support decks or internal equipment."

If correct, that would imply that the shipbuilding program is for a submarine with a beam broader (in width) than the ROMEO-class attack submarine (6.7 meters)—meaning it is potentially a SINPO-C SSB, the reported follow-on to the SINPO-class SSBA.

Separately, at the test stand, imagery from November 5 shows an object visible at the top of the service tower that appears to be either a launch canister support or launch canister.

This object does not appear in previous satellite or ground images of the test stand. While there is no additional activity of note in the immediate area, the service tower remains in place. During the earlier development of the Pukguksong-1/KN-11, it was removed after testing campaigns. Therefore, the continued presence of this object suggests ongoing SLBM ejection tests. If correct, this is likely a continuation of the ejection test campaign reported during July of this year.[4] Regardless, additional ejection tests should be expected in the future for further development of the Pukguksong-1, a potential Pukguksong-3, or other future SLBMs.

Such a test would also be valuable for validating missile launch systems for a new class of SSBs.

And while images of a test stand indicated continued experimenting with a mechanism for ejection launch of missiles from a submarine, so far, the report said, no activity could be seen suggesting preparations for a new test of a submarine-launched missile.

Last month, The Diplomat magazine quoted a U.S. government source as saying U.S. military intelligence had detected a new diesel-electric submarine under construction at Sinpo and dubbed it the Sinpo-C. It said the submarine was likely a larger successor to North Korea’s single experimental ballistic missile submarine.

Another article in The Diplomat last month quoted a U.S. government source as saying that North Korea had tested a new solid fuel engine sometime between Oct. 15 and Oct. 21. U.S. intelligence officials have declined to comment on this.

Twitter Bans RT, Sputnik Ads "For Attempting To Interfere With The US Election"

In a blog post this morning, Twitter"s Jack Dorsey explains why the social media company is banning RT and Sputnik from advertising on their platform...

Twitter has made the policy decision to off-board advertising from all accounts owned by Russia Today (RT) and Sputnik, effective immediately. This decision was based on the retrospective work we"ve been doing around the 2016 U.S. election and the U.S. intelligence community’s conclusion that both RT and Sputnik attempted to interfere with the election on behalf of the Russian government. We did not come to this decision lightly, and are taking this step now as part of our ongoing commitment to help protect the integrity of the user experience on Twitter.

 

Early this year, the U.S. intelligence community named RT and Sputnik as implementing state-sponsored Russian efforts to interfere with and disrupt the 2016 Presidential election, which is not something we want on Twitter. This decision is restricted to these two entities based our internal investigation of their behavior as well as their inclusion in the January 2017 DNI report. This decision does not apply to any other advertisers. RT and Sputnik may remain organic users on our platform, in accordance with the Twitter Rules.

 

Twitter has also decided to take the $1.9 million we are projected to have earned from RT global advertising since they became an advertiser in 2011, which includes the $274,100 in 2016 U.S.-based advertising that we highlighted in our September 28 blog post, and donate those funds to support external research into the use of Twitter in civic engagement and elections, including use of malicious automation and misinformation, with an initial focus on elections and automation. We will have more details to share on this disbursement soon.

Notably, the "off-board"-ing move comes less than a week before the company will testify on Russian election meddling on Capitol Hill, where he"ll join colleagues from Google and Facebook.

RT is not taking this lying down, asking an awkward question that we suspect will also get asked next week in Congress...

Hope @jack won’t forget to tell @congressdotgov how @Twitter pitched @RT_com to spend big $$s on US elex ad campaign. pic.twitter.com/7GqoEoSaY8

— ????????? ???????? (@M_Simonyan) October 26, 2017

We are sure this move will please Mark Warner, but the bigger questions are how will Putin respond, and whether Facebook and Google (which owns YouTube) are likely to follow Twitter"s freedom-of-speech-denying lead.

Paul Craig Roberts Asks "Was The Las Vegas Shooting A False Flag?"

Authored by Paul Craig Roberts,

Dear Readers, I appreciate the confidence that you show in me with your emails asking my opinion about the Las Vegas shooting. Many of you suspect that it is another false flag affair, and you ask me about its purpose.

I don’t know if it was a false flag attack, and if so, by who or for what purpose. I don’t expect to ever know. A story is set in place by officials and media. The only way to ever know is to personally investigate. You would have to go to Las Vegas, examine the scene, ask questions of the hotel, investigate the answers if you get any, find and interview concert attendees who were shot, attend funerals and see bodies of those killed, speak to their families, learn about the weapon allegedly used, experience trying to shoot at targets far below and far away, compare the number of casualties with the recorded time of firing, and so forth. In other words, we would have to do the job that in former times would have been done by the press, but no more.

It is almost like the story is being kept from us.

For example, from media reports that the event was just across the street from the hotel, I did not know that “across the street” was a distance of 390 yards (1,170 feet).

As I don’t expect to ever have a confident opinion about what happened, I am not paying much attention to the mass shooting, or should I say alleged shooting. We are lied to and deceived so much that we can never tell when we are told the truth. It is like Dmitry Orlov says:

“Lies beget other lies, and pretty soon unbiased intelligence-gathering, rational analysis and proper mission planning become impossible.”

” … a reputation for telling the truth can only be lost exactly once, and from then on the use of the phrase “US intelligence sources” became synonymous with “a conspiracy of barefaced liars.””

“Whatever message Washington and Western mass media are trying to push, a perfectly valid response is to point out all the times they have lied in the past, and to pose a simple question: When did they stop lying?”

Official explanations of such events as Las Vegas, Sandy Hook, and so forth, always throw up red flags, because the official explanations always studiously ignore contrary eyewitness and other evidence. Also, often there are not even smart phone videos of dead and wounded people. As far as I can tell, the bodies of 573 dead and wounded are absent in the Las Vegas video evidence. Considering the suspicion that such events cause, one would think the authorities would make a special effort to show the dead and wounded. In other cases of mayhem, alleged bodies look like dummies or are covered and could be a pile of anything. The presence of crisis actors on the scene, as in the Boston Marathon Bombing, raise more questions. I remember when it was expected that police and media would investigate all evidence and clear away contradictions. Now all we get is an official story instantly ready and repeated endlessly by officials and media. This itself raises suspicions.

You will have to make up your own minds about Las Vegas.

Here are some of the reported facts to consider:

The victims killed and wounded total 573. That number is the size of a military battalion. It is very difficult to turn an entire battalion into casualties with small arms fire even in a fierce combat situation. I don’t know if it has ever happened. Can one person with no military training shooting down from 32 stories, which requires special sighting knowledge, at a distance of 390 yards - the length of 4 football fields - hit 573 people in a few minutes of firing?

Jon Rappoport doesn’t believe it. 

Neither does the progressive Steve Lendman.

There are reports of multiple shooters.

There are reports of gun flashes from the 4th floor.

The windows on the hotel do not open and would require the glass to be broken.

Stephen Paddock doesn’t fit the profile of a psychopath. Reports are he was a multimillionaire with airplanes and his own pilot. He enjoyed life. His brother is dumbfounded, said it makes no sense Stephen did the shooting.

The Mandalay Bay Hotel is reportedly a casino. If so, security cameras are everywhere. Why no videos of Stephen Paddock carrying in the many cases of 23 firearms and ammunition? How could maid service clean the room for three days and not see 23 firearms and their ammunition? Makes no sense.

Why 23 guns? The number is beyond superfluous.

The large number almost suggests that the entire event is concocted as a gun control incident. The huge number of guns, the huge number of casualties. Finally, at last, enough “gun violence” to get gun control.

Skeptics are waiting to hear from the authorities how a person at such a distance managed to shoot so many people in such a short time and with what automatic rifle and caliber the deed was done. As this part of the story is especially difficult to believe, we will probably not get the explanation.

And it is not only the authorities and the presstitutes that truth is up against. There is also the lack of integrity in people with axes to grind. For example, Paul Street writing in CounterPunch says: “The Las Vegas massacre is just the latest in the Gun Lobby’s long line of terrorist attacks on U.S. soil.” The article is titled:  “The NRA’s Latest Terrorist Attack on U.S. Soil.” 

The gun control lobby has a massive vested interest in the official story. You can bet your life that the gun control lobby will ignore any and all problems associated with the official story. The story is exactly what they want in order to advance their cause. The campaign is underway.

As Paddock is a rich white male, the story also fits with Identity Politics. Paddock is another example of the evil white male. Here is the Identity Politics connection served up by the Washington Post:

“All across America white men, some young, some of middle-age, are turning into wolves. Always, after they commit acts of terror, it is revealed out that these perpetrators were not men after all. They were beasts, mindless monsters whose evil was abstract and cold and terrible.”

CNN says mass shootings are “a white man’s problem.” See “How America has silently accepted the Rage of White Men:”

People are more interested in confirming their beliefs and prejudices than they are in the truth. If Paddock were a Muslim, Islamophobic people would cling to the official account.

Truth requires that people believe in truth more than they believe in their own biases and causes. In the United States, such people are increasingly rare.

Remember always the Roman question: “Who benefits?” That is where you will find the answer.

*  *  *

UPDATE: Paddock’s girlfriend describes him as a “kind, caring, quiet” man who she envisioned a “quiet future” with. A woman knows a man. Her description is not one of a psychopath.

I have spoken to more experienced persons and experts including US Marine snipers. They don’t believe a word of the official story. Will, once again, the experts be got rid of by branding them “conspiracy theorists” as was done to 3,000 architects and engineers who challenge the official story of 9/11?

All The Countries America Has Invaded... In One Map

From Montezuma to the shores of Tripoli, the US has had a military presence across the world, from almost day one of its independence. For those who have ever wanted a clearer picture of the true reach of the United States military - both historically and currently - but shied away due to the sheer volume of research required to find an answer, The Anti Media points out that a crew at the Independent just made things a whole lot simpler.

Using data compiled by a Geography and Native Studies professor from Evergreen State College in Olympia, Washington, the indy100 team created an interactive map of U.S. military incursions outside its own borders from Argentina in 1890 to Syria in 2014.

To avoid confusion, indy100 laid out its prerequisites for what constitutes an invasion:

“Deployment of the military to evacuate American citizens, covert military actions by US intelligence, providing military support to an internal opposition group, providing military support in one side of a conflict, use of the army in drug enforcement actions.”

But indy100 didn’t stop there. To put all that history into context, using data from the Department of Defense (DOD), the team also put together a map to display all the countries in which nearly 200,000 active members of the U.S. military are now stationed.

For more details, click on the country:

The three countries with the biggest U.S. presence, according to DOD numbers, are Japan at 39,623, Germany at 34,399 and South Korea at 23,297.

The publication of the maps comes just after President Donald Trump announced the military would not be pulling out of its 16-year engagement in Afghanistan - a reversal of his previous stance - and that the U.S. would seek stronger ties with India to combat terrorism in South and Central Asia.

CIA Chief Warns: WikiLeaks Is Plotting To "Take Down America Any Way They Can"

Authored by Jason Ditz via TheAntiMedia.org,

CIA Director Mike Pompeo remains inconsolably hostile toward whistleblower organization WikiLeaks, insisting they are a “non-state hostile intelligence service” and are plotting to “take down America any way they can and find any willing partner to achieve that end.”

Hostility to WikiLeaks has been a mainstay in the US government, as every administration faces the prospect of their covert misdeeds becoming a matter of public record, to their general embarrassment albeit rarely to the end of any meaningful reform.

President Trump had a positive attitude toward WikiLeaks during last year’s campaign, declaring “I love WikiLeaks.”

Pompeo insists he doesn’t feel the same way, and that US intelligence agencies need to find ways to fight the organization.

“I don’t love WikiLeaks,” Mr. Pompeo said Thursday.

Pompeo argued that the US needs to use the Espionage Act much more in going after leakers who aren’t actually foreign spies, though he stopped short of openly endorsing Espionage prosecutions against journalists for reporting on the leaks.

“You said that we have to recognize that we can no longer let Assange and his colleagues the latitude to use free speech values against us,” New York Times columnist Bret Stephens asked Mr. Pompeo.

“What does that in your mind imply, legislatively or operationally? Should we be enforcing the Espionage Act much more?”

“Yes,” Mr. Pompeo responded without hesitation.

When asked if publishers and journalists should be prosecuted for using state secrets, Mr. Pompeo answered:

“There’s an old aphorism that says that the law is entitled to every man’s evidence, and I’ll leave it at that.”

Mr. Assange did not respond privately to requests for comment Thursday but reacted to Mr. Pompeo’s latest claim in a series of tweets.

“What sort of America can be ‘taken down’ by the truth?” he tweeted.

NSA Leak: Sessions Reportedly Discussed Trump Campaign With Former Russian Ambassador

The Washington Post just made Attorney General Jeff Sessions"s rotten week even worse.

In what appears to be yet another leaked NSA intercept, WaPo reports citing "current and former American officials", that Sergey Kislyak, the now infamous former Russian ambassador to the US, told his superiors in Moscow that he discussed campaign-related matters - including policy issues important to Moscow - with Sessions during the 2016 presidential race. If accurate, the report would amount to yet another straw on the camel"s back of Sessions" relationship with the former ambassador - who has been at the center of many of the US media"s stories alleging collusion between Russian officials and the Trump campaign.

When he announced his intentions to recuse himself from the DOJ’s probe into alleged collusion between the Trump campaign back in March, Sessions adamantly denied allegations that he had discussed the campaign with Russian officials, including former ambassador Kislyak. Sessions opted to recuse himself after he failed to disclose his contacts with Kislyak during his confirmation hearing with the Senate back in February.

“I never had meetings with Russian operatives or Russian intermediaries about the Trump campaign,” Sessions said in March when he announced that he would recuse himself from matters relating to the FBI probe of Russian interference in the election and any connections to the Trump campaign.

Sessions initially failed to disclose his contacts with Kislyak and then said that the meetings were not about the Trump campaign.

However, Kislyak’s accounts of two conversations with Sessions, then a top foreign policy adviser to Republican candidate Donald Trump, were intercepted by US spy agencies, which monitor the communications of senior Russian officials both in the United States and in Russia.

As WaPo details, one former official said that the intelligence indicates that Sessions and Kislyak had “substantive” discussions on matters including Trump’s positions on Russia-related issues and prospects for U.S.-Russia relations in a Trump administration.

Officials emphasized that the information contradicting Sessions comes from U.S. intelligence on Kislyak’s communications with the Kremlin, and acknowledged that the Russian ambassador could have mischaracterized or exaggerated the nature of his interactions.

However, WaPo waited until the end of the story to disclose one key detail about Kislyak’s reports to his superiors concerning his meetings with Sessions. According to Kislyak, Sessions didn’t discuss anything that could’ve influenced the election  - i.e. nothing here fits in with the Don Jr. collusion narrative. And, more importantly, there’s no way to corroborate Kislyak’s characterization of the meeting. Apparently, Kislyak isn’t a meticulous notetaker, unlike former FBI Director James Comey.

As the ambassador to the US, Kislyak is expected to meet with US lawmakers.

“Obviously I cannot comment on the reliability of what anonymous sources describe in a wholly uncorroborated intelligence intercept that the Washington Post has not seen and that has not been provided to me,” said Sarah Isgur Flores, a Justice Department spokeswoman in a statement.

She reiterated that Sessions did not discuss interference in the election.

However, after the tempestuous week that Sessions has had, this casts more doubt on the Attorney General"s "answers" in the past.

As a reminder, Trump, in an interview this week, expressed frustration with Sessions’ recusing himself from the Russia probe and indicated that he regretted his decision to make the lawmaker from Alabama the nation’s top law enforcement officer. Trump also faulted Sessions as giving “bad answers” during his confirmation hearing about his Russian contacts during the campaign.

When asked earlier this week about a falling out between himself and Trump, Sessions denied that he has any problems with the president, adding that he has no intentions of stepping aside.

*  *  *

Finally we note that, although the WaPo report is unconfirmed - as the Flores quote above clearly indicates - it could give Trump just the cover he needs to fire Sessions.

In that case he can appoint another attorney general who won"t have conflicts and does not need to recuse from the Russia probe – thus giving Trump justification to fire Mueller and have the new DOJ head continue the probe, likely quashing the Russia narrative once and for all.

Not that this would even matter. As recent polls show, the American people stopped caring about Russia months ago.
 

"Russian Forces Were Notified In Advance": Pentagon Statement On Air Strikes In Syria

Pentagon Spokesman Capt. Jeff Davis has issued the following statement on the U.S. strike in Syria in which US ships launched 59 Tomahawk cruide missiles at Syria.

Statement from Pentagon Spokesman Capt. Jeff Davis on U.S. strike in Syria

At the direction of the president, U.S. forces conducted a cruise missile strike against a Syrian Air Force airfield today at about 8:40 p.m. EDT (4:40 a.m., April 7, in Syria). The strike targeted Shayrat Airfield in Homs governorate, and were in response to the Syrian government"s chemical weapons attack April 4 in Khan Sheikhoun, which killed and injured hundreds of innocent Syrian people, including women and children.

The strike was conducted using Tomahawk Land Attack Missiles (TLAMs) launched from the destroyers USS Porter and USS Ross in the Eastern Mediterranean Sea. A total of 59 TLAMs targeted aircraft, hardened aircraft shelters, petroleum and logistical storage, ammunition supply bunkers, air defense systems, and radars. As always, the U.S. took extraordinary measures to avoid civilian casualties and to comply with the Law of Armed Conflict. Every precaution was taken to execute this strike with minimal risk to personnel at the airfield.

The strike was a proportional response to Assad"s heinous act. Shayrat Airfield was used to store chemical weapons and Syrian air forces. The U.S. intelligence community assesses that aircraft from Shayrat conducted the chemical weapons attack on April 4. The strike was intended to deter the regime from using chemical weapons again.

Russian forces were notified in advance of the strike using the established deconfliction line. U.S. military planners took precautions to minimize risk to Russian or Syrian personnel located at the airfield.

We are assessing the results of the strike. Initial indications are that this strike has severely damaged or destroyed Syrian aircraft and support infrastructure and equipment at Shayrat Airfield, reducing the Syrian Government"s ability to deliver chemical weapons. The use of chemical weapons against innocent people will not be tolerated.

And moments after the Pentagon statement, House speaker Paul Ryan said that the US action was "appropriate and just."

NEW: "This action was appropriate and just," @SpeakerRyan says of U.S. military strike against Assad regime in Syria https://t.co/FHWzmEfLIr pic.twitter.com/3aHKeuukSd

— CBS News (@CBSNews) April 7, 2017

British Foreign Secretary Admits "No Evidence" Found Of Russian Disruption Of UK Democracy

Echoing the numerous initial comments from various US intelligence probes, UK Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson told British ITV that "we have no evidence the Russians are actually involved in trying to undermine our democratic processes..."

However, careful to toe the propaganda line, Johnson quickly retorted..."But what we do have is plenty of evidence that the Russians are capable of doing that,” he insisted adding that Russians “have been up to all sorts of dirty tricks."

.@BorisJohnson reflects on the conduct of Russia ahead of his visit to meet Sergey Lavrov #Peston pic.twitter.com/SdbHT5FJFS

— Peston on Sunday (@pestononsunday) March 12, 2017

Remarkably, Johnson made these statements just weeks before his visit to Russia, during which he will meet with his Russian counterpart, Sergey Lavrov. His visit would be the first made to Moscow by a British Foreign Minister in five years. When asked what the UK’s approach to Russia should be now, he said that Britain needs to take “a twin-track approach” towards Russia. “As the prime minister has said, we’ve got to engage but we have to beware,” Johnson stated.

As RT reports, despite constantly saying there was solid proof that Russia had meddled in the affairs of other countries, such as by bringing down French TV stations and interfering in US elections, he failed to provide any concrete evidence to back his accusations.

Johnson also implicated that Russia was involved in the situation in Montenegro, where a group of Serbian nationalists was arrested in October of 2016 suspected of planning to carry out armed attacks on the day of the country’s parliamentary elections.

The British Telegraph newspaper later reported that the group was sponsored and controlled by the Russian intelligence officers and had actually tried to stage a coup targeting its Prime Minister Milo Djukanovic with “the support and blessing” of Moscow.

However, the paper’s report turned out to be based mostly on the assumptions of unidentified sources and Montenegrin Special Prosecutor for Organized Crime, Milivoje Katnic, confirmed that, despite the participation of several suspected “nationalists from Russia,” there was no “evidence that the state of Russia is involved in any sense.”

In the meantime, Russia’s ambassador to the UK, Alexander Yakovenko, expressed hope that Johnson’s visit will contribute to the resumption of a pragmatic dialogue between the two countries based on mutual respect, the Sunday Express reported. While the ambassador admitted that the British foreign secretary’s visit would come “at a time when our official bilateral relationship is at the lowest point after the Cold War,” he said that Russia hopes “it [the visit] means that our British partners are interested in resumption of political dialogue.” At the same time, Yakovenko also said Russia does not “need a cozy relationship with Britain, just one based on mutual respect and national interest.”

“The rhetoric does matter, but without a positive agenda, it becomes an end in itself,” he added. The ambassador also reiterated that “Russia poses a threat to no one, including the Baltic States” and has no intention of influencing the political processes of any foreign countries. “It sounds ridiculous that Russia could influence the Western nations’ domestic affairs. Certainly, we have our views to air on various issues of public interest,” he said.

The ambassador also criticized Johnson’s most recent statements, saying that the anti-Russian campaign in the UK “should be toned down, and whatever evidence there is to support accusations against Russia, it should be made public.”