A stragist conspiracy analogous to that plotted against the demonstrators in Caracas in after which the president of Venezuela Hugo Chavez was induced to resign and was arrested by the Americans for three days , before being reinstated for the insurrection of the population in his favor. The decision to keep the airspace open was criticized by the report of the Dutch Safety Board which led the technical part of the probe to the accident.
In this regard it was the same RT media that reported the investigation of two Dutch journalists who raised doubts about the completeness of the inquiry after finding remains of the plane at the site of the disaster even after the JIT team inspections. The knot of the investigation is all in the Buk missile: Russia claims that it was in the hands of the Ukrainian army, the Joint Investigation Team that it returned to the Moscow army.
According to the documents, some of which were declassified for the presentation, it was produced in a military facility in Dolgoprudny in the Moscow region in — reported Russia Today in an article dated 17 September highlighting the images with the serial number on the engine and rocket nozzle — The missile was shipped from the plant on December 29, and delivered to military unit located in present-day Ukraine. The JIT investigations, however, would refute this version by stating, without providing any proof, that the missile would return to Russia for maintenance.
One of the points on which the accusations of the JIT are based also comes from an ambiguous video released by the English group Bellingcat, at the center of various controversies precisely for the realization of fake journalistic inquiries, to support the thesis of the delivery of the Buk launcher from Russia.
The Ministry of Defense showed a video to show that the video was manipulated to place the images of the launcher in a background that was not in the original.
These numerous suspicious circumstances are not such as to be able to accuse Ukraine, or any of its extreme-right nationalists armed with mortar and missile launchers, of a direct responsibility in the accident but they are certainly sufficient to prove the existence of a plot to mislead investigations and ascertainment of the truth in connection with the ever closer interference by NATO over the security policies of Kiev.
Open Ukraine is a foundation established by the former prime minister of Kiev, the economist and lawyer Arseniy Yatsenyuk, who played a fundamental role in the propaganda of the orange revolution of Euromaidan Square and in the subsequent coup against the President of the Republic Viktor Janukovic, forced to flee the February 22, for its pro-Russian policy.
Also thanks to the international influence of Open Ukraine, supported by Soros, Yatsenyuk managed to become premier from to , and to found the Narodnij Front, the Popular Front, which welcomed some members of the national defense battalions into the military Council of the party. This political alignment allowed the rapid political rise of Arsen Avakov, Minister of the Interior from to today, despite allegations of office abuse that in had led to his arrest in the Frosinone prison. He was released for parliamentary immunity obtained from the subsequent elections and today is responsible for the Ukrainian National Guard, which also includes the ultranationalists of the Battalion of Azov, accused by Amnesty International of heinous war crimes.
In this context, the former premier Yatsenyuk stepped away from active politics to emulate his mentor Soros, and thus remain behind the scenes of every international maneuver thanks to the collaboration with NATO, the US State Department but also prominent personalities of the world intelligence. As the Open Ukraine website clearly highlights on June 5, , some young Ukrainians eager to explore national security issues in Kiev had an exceptional speaker: one of the great heads of intelligence in the United Kingdom and an important strategist in NATO policies, Sir Malcolm Leslie Rifkind.
Manual ONG & Lobby (French Edition)
He is a long-time British politician, born on 21 June in Edinburgh where he became a deputy in the Conservatories, and held various roles as a minister with Prime Ministers Margaret Thatcher and John Major, including positions as Secretary of State for Scotland , Secretary of Defense and Secretary of Foreign Affairs He take the function until than he remains only an Isc member. He persuaded the government to introduce legislation that would allow the ISC, for the first time, to be able to request intelligence agencies to supply any highly classified material required.
He was among those who called for an intervention against the Damascus government in response to the use of chemical weapons.
- PDF ONG & Lobby (French Edition).
- Hotel surroundings!
- ABOUT THE EEB.
At least in the last Douma massacre of April it would have been a false-flag attack organized by the Al Nusra terrorists in complicity with the operators of the Syria Civil Defense, the White Helmets constituted and trained by a former British military secret agent. This hypothesis put forward by two professors from the United Kingdom based on the dossier of an engineer and already the subject of a report by Gospa News.
In March , during an interview with CBC Radio News, Rifkind challenged the Russian annexation of Crimea by Ukraine , stating that this risked destabilizing the entire area and European politics in general. For his criticism of Russian action in the Crimea and eastern Ukraine, Rifkind was included in a list of top European political figures and former ministers banned from visiting Russia.
The British politician responded by saying that if there had to be such a list he was proud to be there.
Today, thanks to Open Ukraine, he teaches the youth of Kiev the strategies of international security, obviously with a very strong Russophobic matrix. Those nearly dead in were useful to mainstream media to blame pro-Russian rebels. In Flanders, the Dutch-speaking part of Belgium, there has been political discussion about introducing a deposit scheme for cans and bottles. Yet action on the scheme was postponed when a d eal was struck between industry and public authorities to fund Mooimakers.
Coca-Cola alone produces billion throwaway plastic bottles each year. Mooimakers is a member of the Clean Europe Network.
- Green Salad Recipes;
- Spell of Appalachia.
- goetechamlafi.cf – My Privacy is none of your Business.
- Origine du nom de famille LARTIGUE (Oeuvres courtes) (French Edition)!
- Welcome to LobbyFacts | LobbyFacts Database.
- Valentins-Zauber (German Edition).
Mooimakers calls itself a social movement but its links with industry give a different picture. Such an arrangement surely raises questions of conflicts of interest because OVAM is also actively working on litter monitoring which will lead to a decision about a future deposit return scheme. A March report commissioned by OVAM showed that littering had recently increased in Flanders by 40 per cent, but apparently it was not published.
This is significant because failure to meet the target of a reduction in litter by 20 per cent in would increase pressure for a deposit scheme, something which industry vehemently opposes. The report was later re-done and published , and it still showed an increase of litter, albeit at the lower level of 17 per cent. The report showed that the costs of dealing with litter had more than doubled. Later in there will be an initial evaluation to assess whether the authorities are on track to meet the target.
This model of industry funding has now been rolled out to the Wallonia and Brussels regions of Belgium too. In the Netherlands the Clean Europe Network member Nederland Schoon , which was set up by the packaging industry and waste management authorities, has been active on deposit return schemes. Over time its position has morphed from outright opposition to casting doubt on such proposals.
Nederland Schoon was a member of the sounding board that accompanied recent government-commissioned research into the possible introduction of an extension of the current national deposit scheme to include small bottles and cans. The other environmental NGOs on the sounding board gave the opposite view. Nederland Schoon receives substantial funding from industry, via Afvalfonds the packaging waste fund.
It denies being a lobby club for business interests. At a hearing in the Dutch Parliament in November to follow-up the research on the proposed extension to the existing Dutch deposit scheme, Peter Swinkels the chairman of Nederland Schoon and ex-CEO of Bavaria, a Dutch beer brand , said that there was no proof that deposit refund schemes help to reduce litter. Meanwhile the Director of Afvalfonds, Cees de Mol van Otterloo who incidentally is also a former director of public affairs at Coca-Cola Netherlands , indicated that if the deposit scheme extension went ahead, it would no longer fund awareness-raising and litter clean-up activities.
Meanwhile in March , while a majority in the Dutch Parliament expressed support for an extension to the deposit scheme, the government has decided to give industry another chance and postponed a final decision until Missed opportunity! KSB is active in many areas of environmental policy in Scotland and its work on many issues is welcomed by other green NGOs. But KSB is also not shy of corporate funding and there are significant concerns that this funding affects its positioning, particularly on deposit return schemes.
All three reports used the simplistic litter counting methodology and not the more sophisticated volume measurements which can provide clearer evidence for deposit return schemes.
A Tour of Ong & Ong’s New Singapore Office
And what of the position of KSB, now that at least some major industry players were supporting deposit schemes? Litter-strewn environments are bad for people and bad for wildlife, but despite what some industry and some NGOs tell us, littering is not just a consequence of people failing to use a bin, but also a reflection of industry reliance on disposable, throwaway products. And while deposit return schemes are not the only answer to the plastics challenge, they can boost recycling and reduce litter.
Anti-litter charities do great work in mobilising communities to clean their streets. Sometimes this is just about corporate green-wash which is problematic in itself, but when industry and NGO policy positions become indistinguishable from each other, and when it is about changing the wider political narrative and trying to head-off progressive public policies on waste, that is deeply troubling.