Kursk Submarine Posts

Viktor Bout is Fair Game: In the Midst of the Shadow Wars

Hung by the Jury

On Wednesday November 2, 2011 I was on the 8th floor cafeteria of the Federal court house in New York located at 500 Pearl street. At approximately 1:35pm,  I stood up from the lunch table as Albert Dayan was walking towards me. Viktor Bout’s defense lawyer whispered to me, “the jury reached a verdict.” Alla Bout was at still at home and she had told me during an earlier phone conversation, “that it was too difficult for her and her daughter to sit around and wait at the court house.”

Alla Bout outside MCC prison before she visit’s her husband Viktor.

I immediately grabbed my bag and started to rush to the pay phones to call Alla so that she might have a chance to make it to the verdict reading in time. A tense and nervous looking Albert Dayan said, “don’t run walk, they told me not to tell anyone, just his family.”

Walking swiftly to the pay phones on the 8th floor and while passing Dayan, I asked him, “did you call Alla?” He replied, “I don’t know where she is.”

At approximately 1:58pm the jury entered the packed court room to read the verdict. There were extra security guards, many journalists, the DEA agents occupied the entire first bench directly in front of mine. The seconds before the verdict were very tense and time seemed to sit still. Then Heather H. Hobson, the jury’s appointed forewoman stood up and read the jury’s verdict to the court room focusing mostly on the judge until after the third count was read, she starred directly at Viktor Bout before reading out loud the the fourth and final guilty.

I called Alla Bout three times since I heard the jury had reached a verdict. The last time was shortly after the verdict was read to warn her of the media frenzy awaiting her so that she had the option of whether or not to come to the court house. Needless to say she did not come to the Federal court house on that unforgettable day.

The jury in only  approximately 2 hours of deliberations on Tuesday and approximately 3 hours on Wednesday, unanimously found Viktor Bout guilty on all 4 counts of the indictment [entire indictment PDF 37 pgs]. You can see a summary of the indictment from the actual charge sheet on the jury verdict form. The previous day the judge ruled, only after agreement from both attorneys, that the jury was able to take the chargesheets home with them on Tuesday night. The Honorable judge Shira A. Scheindlin told the jury explicitly that the were not to show it anyone including their family and spouses.

Jury forewoman in the Viktor Bout trial Heather H. Hobson.

A New York Times piece titled, Arms Dealer’s Own Words Convicted Him, Juror Says ran the day after the verdict. According to the article, jury forewaoman, Ms. Heather H. Hobson was very proud of what she did and said that “she felt a sense of pride and accomplishment.”

Here is a short excerpt from the article:

When it came time to deliver the verdict, Ms. Hobson paused after reading the first three counts. She turned her gaze away from the judge, and purposefully stared at Mr. Bout. Then she resumed, announcing the final finding of guilt. It was a simple gesture, she said, one that was motivated by respect, not scorn.

Ms. Hobson seemed to put a lot of weight into the DEA informants testimony according to her own words.

She said, “the informants, working with the Drug Enforcement Administration, had been “very convincing” FARC representatives who had made it clear to Mr. Bout that their whole purpose was to take down U.S. helicopters with U.S. pilots.”

Ironically, as a person who sat though the entire trial from the opening statements to the reading of the verdict, I personally thought that was the prosecutors weakest argument. During Carlos’ cross examination by Albert Dayan, he got Carlos to say on record that it was DEA informant Ricardo that spoke about about killing Americans and not Viktor Bout. In fact, the honorable judge Shira A. Scheindlin was explicit and crystal clear in her directions to the jury in her explanation of the law. There is no conspiracy charge if Viktor Bout was solely found conspiring with DEA agents and / or operatives. It was demonstrated many times by the defense throughout the trial that the DEA informants in operation ‘Relentless’ were highly paid to pretend, or play a “role” as prosecutor Brendan McGuire repeatedly said. Or as DEA agent William S. Brown said repeatedly while on the stand, it was all part of the “scenario” that they had to create.

An article titled, The $9 MILLION supergrass: How man who helped snare ‘Merchant of Death’ arms dealer was highest paid informant in history, appeared on 7 November 2011 in the UK’s Daily Mail just several days after Ms. Hobson’s piece in the NY Times. According to the article in the Daily Mail, Thomas Pasquarello, a former DEA special agent who headed the Bout probe in Thailand, said Mr Sagastume was among the DEA’s best informants.

Former DEA Special Operations agent Thomas Pasquarello.

If you’re looking at big fish, you need big bait,’ he said. ‘That’s what guys like Carlos are good at. They’re pros at what they do and they have deep connections.’

‘Look at Viktor Bout. He wasn’t going to fall for a rookie informant. Guys like that could see through a rookie undercover in five minutes,’ said Mr Pasquarello, now chief of police in Somerset, Mass.

The media’s character assassination of Bout which I wrote about in The Assassination of Viktor Anatoliyevich Bout in September 2010, apparently holds a lot of water. Here is one more excerpt from the previously mentioned NY Times article:

Another thing also became obvious: her [Heather Hobson] knowledge of Mr. Bout was more expansive than she had realized.

“I had seen that terrible Nicolas Cage movie,” she said, a reference to the film “Lord of War,” which is believed to have been inspired by Mr. Bout, “and I had no idea it was about this guy.”

Finally, Ms. Heather Hobson added, “He’s a very scary man.”
The Spin Doctors

While I am on the topic of character assassination, another interesting article about Viktor Bout caught my eye over the weekend. An Associated Press articled titled, Files Show Convicted Arms Dealer’s Libyan Ties written on 5 November 2011 by Stephen Braun. I actually laughed out loud when I read the authors name. In case you are not familiar with the name, Stephen Braun along with co-author Douglas Farah wrote the book titled the “Merchant of Death” which is about Viktor Bout. Before I continue, it is extremely important to understand that neither Braun or Farah have ever met, spoken to nor met Viktor Bout, not even once. Their book is filled with lies, manufactured flow charts and disinformation. It is filled with opinions and hearsay that are completely unsubstantiated and based almost entirely on one persons imagination and invention. According to author and investigative journalist Daniel Estulin, the Lord of War or Merchant of Death was invented in Belgium by Johan Peleman in 1996. For much more about Johan Peleman, read The Making of a Legend: Viktor Bout.

Johan Peleman.

It is entirely possibly that Braun and Farah believed what Johan Peleman said as truth and did not intentionally spread disinformation and lies. However, it is extremely odd to me that they wrote an entire book about a person without a single conversation or interview by them whether by phone, email or in person. Many of my doubts re-emerged when I read the above mentioned article written by Stephen Braun tying Viktor Bout to Gadhafi and Libya just days after Bout’s verdict was read. Here are a few excerpts from Braun’s article:

“Records found in Moammar Gadhafi’s former intelligence headquarters in Tripoli show that British officials apparently warned the Libyan regime in 2003 about its dealings with Russian arms dealer Viktor Bout, who was convicted in New York on federal conspiracy charges.”

“The documents indicate that Bout had been trying to expand his operations in Libya.”

“American officials and allied governments have sent teams of weapons specialists into Libya in recent weeks to scour for loose, Russian-made, anti-aircraft missiles and other dangerous munitions.”

“We know there are a lot of conventional weapons floating around Libya now and an important question to pursue is how they got there,” said Lee S. Wolosky a former Clinton administration national security deputy who headed U.S. scrutiny of contacts between Bout’s network and the Gadhafi regime in 2000. “Viktor Bout’s operation in Tripoli would be a good place to start.”

If you understand that some of Viktor Bout’s charges were conspiring to sell SAM’s [Surface-to-air-missiles] specifically Igla’s [A Soviet man-portable SAM], anti-aircraft weapons and RPG’s [Rocket Propelled Grenades], then it becomes clear that the allegations of  a direct connection to Gadhafi and Libya can have extremely serious and grave ramifications for Viktor Bout.

If you are not starting to see a connection, perhaps this will help. In a February 16, 2002 LA Times article titled, Al Qaeda Linked to Russian Arms Broker, written by Stephen Braun as well as Sebastian Rotella and Judy Pasternak. Once again the name Stephen Braun appears as well as his many references to Johan Peleman in this article. Let us examine a few excerpts. First please note that you will also see the familiar name of  Lee S. Wolosky who Stephen Braun quoted in his 5 November 2012 article tying Bout to the deceased Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi.

Russian S-300 surface to air missile sysytem.

Lee S. Wolosky, a former National Security Council official who headed a U.S. effort to stem Bout’s trading, said Ruprah’s arrest “is a very significant development in dismantling the Victor Bout organization.” Wolosky described it as the “largest arms-trafficking organization in the world.”

Belgian investigators have spent the last three years focusing “on money flows associated with Victor Bout through Belgium,” Peleman said. Belgian authorities, Peleman said, have examined “thousands of money transfers” flowing from several Bulgarian-based firms and through several African governments through “aviation and handling companies in Belgium that are run by Bout.”

“Although U.S. and Belgian interest in Bout’s activities predated the Sept. 11 attacks in America, evidence that his far-reaching arms trading empire might have aided Osama bin Laden’s terrorist network and Afghanistan’s now-deposed Taliban government appears to have heightened both nations’ investigative efforts.”

Usama Bin Laden.

One of the things that struck me as peculiar was that in searching for the above mentioned LA Times article, I did not come by it immediately or easily, in fact it took some time. What I did find quite easily was the exact same article but in a PDF file. It seems that this particular article was intended to be found easily and to be able to be used as a reference. I also came across a time line titled A Complete 911 Timeline, that quite conveniently intertwines the name Viktor Bout, Al-Qaeda and 9/11 quite seamlessly.

Smoke and Mirrors

Investigative journalist Wayne Madsen, among many others, has stated numerous times in an array of different mediums that Osama Bin Laden has been dead since 2001. How does he explain Operation Geronimo? Basically to paraphrase him, “it was staged.”

Author Chuck Pfarrer who is writing a book about how Operation Geronimo went down has been met with some skepticism. Here is a comment on Time’s Battleland blog which catch phrase is: Where military intelligence is not a contradiction in terms. Here is the link: Squawking SEAL as well as the comment below.

“CNN chum Barbara Starr has the inside skinny on the new book purporting to detail the inside skinny of how the Osama bin Laden raid went down – as told by a former SEAL. Author Chuck Pfarrer claims to have spoken to some Navy SEALs who conducted the raid. It seems his story has more holes in it than the post-raid bin Laden.

Here is just one more article of many on the topic titled Osama Bin Laden Has Been Dead Since December 2001. Here is a couple of excerpts from the referenced article:

During the period 4-14th of July, 2001 (only two months prior to the 9/11-WTC terror attacks), Bin Laden was in the American Hospital in Dubai. According to the United Press International (Oct 31, 2001), Bin Laden underwent kidney surgery and treatment under Dr. Terry Callaway. According to both the French “Le Figaro” & the “Radio France International”, Bin Laden was visited by a top US-CIA agent. This report and the one below are further substantiated by CBS anchor Dan Rather, Peter Bergen, investigative journalist Barry Petersen and Prof. Michel Chussodovsky.

More astonishing is the fact that just a day prior to the September 11 attacks, Bin Laden was undergoing treatment in the Military Hospital in Rawalpindi itself (Le Figaro – Jan 28, 2002). So both the Pakistani Military establishment and the ISI as well as the CIA were more than aware of Bin Laden’s whereabouts.

Apache attack helicopter.

A bit off the topic but another example of the secrets as well as the lack of intelligence sharing between U.S. agencies and in some cases the outright withholding of info or in worse cases intentional misinforming can be seen clearly in this article titled the CIA’s Account of 9/11 Under Attack. The article is date 16 October 2011 and I highly recommend everyone to read it. For now I will just share one excerpt:

A growing number of former government insiders – all responsible officials who served in a number of federal posts – are now on record as doubting ex-CIA director George Tenet’s account of events leading up to the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the United States. Among them are several special agents of the FBI, the former counterterrorism head in the Clinton and Bush administrations, and the chairman of the 9/11 Commission, who told us the CIA chief had been “obviously not forthcoming” in his testimony and had misled the commissioners.

The biggest contradiction that I find in Operation Geronimo, besides that fact I believe that Osama’s bin dead, is the completely unbelievable claim that the U.S. military wanted to give him a proper burial at sea. We live in a society where the FBI, NYPD, CIA, DHS, TSA as well as the entire U.S. population is fed anti-Muslim propaganda and taught to stereotype. Suddenly we care about giving him a proper Muslim burial? It would be much more plausible, giving the hideous allegations against the former CIA asset Osama Bin Laden, if his dead body were on public display on the White House lawn as opposed to a secret and swift Muslim burial at sea. It is the modus operandi of the CIA / U.S. government to display such victims to the general public whenever possible, i.e. Malcolm X, J.F.K., Che Guevara, Saddam Hussein, Moammar Gadhafi as well as former FARC commanders Raul Reyes and most recently Alfonso Cano. If you want to see for yourself, just enter any of the previous names then add dead after their names and then search under Google images. They do now have a few photos of Osama Bin Laden, whether they are real or fakes created by a Hollywood special effects team is for you to decide.

Video Of Osama Bin Laden’s Burial At Sea Leaked [Satire]


The DEA’s New Mandate

Investigative journalist Wayne Madsen did a taped RT television interview last January titled Viktor Bout: Lord of War blame game. Madsen raises some very interesting points and topics, he mentions how “the Bush administration probably left him [Bout] alone because he was doing business with that administration.”

Madsen also mentions the broader range of the DEA as well as having a new mandate. He states in the RT interview, “The DEA is not only involved in drugs anymore but they have a new mandate. The DEA is now in the intelligence gathering business which is perhaps out of their league. According to Madsen, the new DEA is “operating far beyond it capabilities and its knowledge.”

Wayne Madsen also states that “Viktor Bout was entrapped in Thailand by the DEA.” Madsen goes on to say that “Bout was not really extradited he was renditioned.”

Investigative journalist Wayne Madsen.

The U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration has become a vast international spy network as shown by U.S. Embassy cables revealed by Wikileaks. The DEA now has 87 offices in 63 countries and close partnerships with governments that distrust the CIA, such as Nicaragua and Venezuela. Many nations are eager to take advantage of the agency’s drug detection and wiretapping technologies as stated by a Public Intelligence December 27, 2010 article.

According to a Wikileaks cable that was reprinted in the New York Times, “The Drug enforcement Administration has been transformed into a global intelligence organization with a reach that extends far beyond narcotics, and an eavesdropping operation so expansive it has to fend off foreign politicians who want to use it against their political enemies, according to secret diplomatic cables.”

The Birth of DEA Operation Relentless

I first learned about the DEA’s covert Special Operations Division or SOD from investigative journalist and author Jeremy Scahill in his article titled Blackwater’s Black Ops that first appeared on September 15, 2010 in The Nation. Scahill in his article quite clearly shows how the DEA’s Special Operations Division came into existence and perhaps their new mandate that Wayne Madsen refers to as the DEA’s New Madate. As well as perhaps the inception of DEA’s Operation ‘Relentless’ which was to pursue and catch Viktor Bout ‘by any means necessary’. Here are some excerpts from Jeremy Scahill’s article:

While the network was originally established for use in CIA operations, documents show that Prado [former CIA paramilitary officer Enrique “Ric” Prado] viewed it as potentially valuable to other government agencies. In an e-mail in October 2007 with the subject line “Possible Opportunity in DEA—Read and Delete,” Prado wrote to a Total Intelligence executive with a pitch for the Drug Enforcement Administration. That executive was an eighteen-year DEA veteran with extensive government connections who had recently joined the firm. Prado explained that Blackwater had developed “a rapidly growing, worldwide network of folks that can do everything from surveillance to ground truth to disruption operations.” He added, “These are all foreign nationals (except for a few cases where US persons are the conduit but no longer ‘play’ on the street), so deniability is built in and should be a big plus.”

The executive wrote back and suggested there “may be an interest” in those services. The executive suggested that “one of the best places to start may be the Special Operations Division, (SOD) which is located in Chantilly, VA,” telling Prado the name of the special agent in charge. The SOD is a secretive joint command within the Justice Department, run by the DEA. It serves as the command-and-control center for some of the most sensitive counternarcotics and law enforcement operations conducted by federal forces. The executive also told Prado that US attachés in Mexico; Bogotá, Colombia; and Bangkok, Thailand, would potentially be interested in Prado’s network. Whether this network was activated, and for what customers, cannot be confirmed. A former Blackwater employee who worked on the company’s CIA program declined to comment on Prado’s work for the company, citing its classified status.

Time ran a very interesting and informative article titled, The DEA’s Terrorist Hunters in August of this year. The article backs up what Jeremy Scahill first wrote about last year as well as emphasis the astronomical sums being paid to DEA informants. Here are some excerpts from the Time article:

While few think of the DEA as a counterterrorism organization, since 2007 it has leveraged a little-known federal statute passed in 2006 to conduct sting operations across the globe, netting major figures including arms dealer Monzer al-Kassar and the “Lord of War” Viktor Bout by connecting the suspects to terrorism plots.

DEA agents escorting Bout off the plane after his extradition to the U.S.

That statute effectively created the team within the DEA’s multiagency SOD to take on investigations in which drugs and terrorism crossed over, what policy types call a nexus.

Interesting terminology, it said by connecting suspects to terrorism plots perhaps like a sting operation. Oddly, Viktor Bout has never been arrested until March 6th 2008 in Thailand and has never been associated or accused of terrorism until the DEA’s Operation ‘Relentless’ sting or plot was developed. As it is well documented by airplane registrations, company records, cargo receipts that Viktor Bout had no dealings in Columbia. Africa and parts of Europe is where he did the majority of his air cargo business. In fact, the two witness’s that the prosecutors put on the stand that had met or worked for Bout in the late 1990’s were both from Africa and both testified that they had met Viktor Bout in Africa.

DEA Terrorist Hunters

The DEA’s Special Operation Division has poured millions of dollars into its covert activities that span across the globe. Besides the huge sums being paid, I am surprised that the question and legality of jurisdiction have not been raised by watch dog and consumer interest groups. Here are a few more excerpts from the Time article mentioned above:

The arrests and prosecutions do not come cheap. Among the expenses the government has incurred in these investigations is compensation for informants. One DEA informant, Patrick “Paddy” McKay, a former pilot with the South African mercenary company Executive Outcomes said he has received $450,000from the government since 2005. “When I first saw these cases, I found it hard to believe that all these resources were being expended,” Merer says.

DEA drug money and weapons.

Similarly, cooperation can be rewarding for nations partnering with DEA investigations. Liberia’s narcotics- and law-enforcement-assistance package from the State Department has jumped from $800,000 in 2007 to a requested $17 million for 2011, a more than 2,000% increase.

Just to point out, the Russian pilot Yaroshenko who was caught by the DEA and then extradited to the U.S. and recently sentenced to 20 years in prison was arrested in Liberia. As I previously mentioned, the question of jurisdiction has not become a hot topic in the mainstream media but it has raised questions from criminal defense attorney and judges, including the judge that presided over Viktor Bout’s trial.
Jamal Yousef is a dual Swedish and Lebanese citizen that was renditioned by masked member’s of the DEA’s SOD squad  from the streets of Honduras then ferried by helicopter to Guantánamo Bay, Cuba where a learjet then escorted him to Westchester County Airport in White Plains, N.Y., the exact same airport where Viktor Bout first arrived onto U.S. soil. The significance of landing in White Plains is that it by default then creates a legal venue for any court proceedings to take place in The Southern District of New York. One journalist told me the Federal court in Manhattan is nicknamed the DEA’s playground and that the prosecutors have never ever lost a terrorism case in The Southern District of New York.

Guantanamo Bay, Cuba prison camp Delta 1.

Yousef’s defense attorney expressed her criticism at the SOD’s tactics as well as Viktor Bouts judge in the second excerpt. The following excerpts are from the same Time article previously mentioned:
“The government creates imaginary links to terror organizations to ensnare people who may not actually have any other connection to terrorists,” says Melinda Sarafa, a criminal defense attorney who is representing Yousef.Prosecutors in the Bout case faced vocal criticism on this issue not just from the defense, but also the judge.
In Bout’s case, he went to a Bangkok hotel to meet with DEA informants who represented themselves as FARC operatives wishing to purchase weapons to be used against Americans. Judge Shira A. Scheindlin accused the government of “bravado” in making its case to prosecute the Russian citizen in the U.S. “There’s a long line of cases where we look at the facts of each case,” she said. “This one is weak.”

Viktor Bout with translations headphones and the honorable judge judge Shira A. Scheindlin on the bench.

I discuss in great detail the topic of manufactured jurisdiction as well as manufactured evidence in my article Imaginary Crimes: The Never Ending Viktor Bout Story as well as give over a dozen examples of the U.S. government exerting pressure on the Thai government to extradite Viktor Bout. I will give just one example from the Wikleaks cable but strongly suggest you read the article cable via the link below:

“Finally, despite the listing by the US and EU of the FARC as a terrorist organization, we understand that the FARC is not listed as such by the UN. A move to have the FARC listed formally by the UN would assist the effort to keep Bout in custody. JOHN”

Here is the link to Wikileaks cable that appeared in the Guardian: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/us-embassy-cables-documents/220583

Connect the Dots

I have mentioned Osama Bin Laden, Moammar Gadhafi, former FARC commanders Raul Reyes and Alfonso Cano as well as SAM’s, RPG’s and Igla missiles. What could this possibly have to do with with Viktor Bout. It is actual not very complicated but rather simple. A predated and carefully designed media smear campaign as well as a premeditated witch hunt against Viktor Bout that spanned over a decade was then followed by the DEA terrorist’s hunters mandate to go after Viktor Bout in Operation ‘Relentless’ via their Special Operations Division. It becomes quite evident when you consider the astronomical sums paid to the informants in DEA Operation ‘Relentless’ in conjunction with the decade plus smear campaign and the intentional and blatant character assassination of Viktor Bout.

Moammar Gadhafi and his female bodyguards before he was killed.

Put in more simple terms, Osama Bin Laden, Moammar Gadhafi and Alfonso Cano were all killed while Viktor Bout was in prison. Raul Reyes was killed just 5 days before Bout was arrested in Thailand but after he had already agreed to meet in Bangkok. Even if you believe Wayne Madsen that Osama Bin Laden was already dead before Operation Geronimo, that means that the U.S. intelligence agencies had a specific reason to stage his death. Now with U.S. enemy number 1 ‘officially’ dead and gone that apparently left Viktor Bout as the new enemy of the state. Conveniently for the U.S. authorities, hired journalists made baseless claims and allegations to Osama Bin Laden and Viktor Bout. As luck would it approximately 6 months later Moammar Gadhafi was killed and was kind enough to leave valuable intelligence in an easy to find location which linked himself and his rogue missiles directly to Viktor Bout.

A NY Times article appeared on March 2, 2008 titled Colombian Forces Kill Senior Guerrilla Commander, Official Says. I have quoted two excerpts from the article:

The death of Raúl Reyes, one of the rebels’ highest-ranking commanders, was a severe blow for the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, or FARC, which has been waging an insurgency against the government for the last four decades.

The United States, which provides Colombia with more than $600 milliona year in military aid, was offering a $5 million reward for the capture of Mr. Reyes, 59, part of the FARC’s seven-member secretariat and believed to be a contender to succeed the group’s top commander, 77-year-old Manuel Marulanda.

FARC’s Alfonso Cano answering journalist’s questions in San Vicente, Columbia on February 2, 2001.

Just three days after Bout’s verdict was read another FARC commander was killed. The article titled FARC leader Alfonso Cano killed in military raid didn’t actual appear until 5 November 2011, the exact same day as Stephen Braun’s article linking Viktor Bout to Moammar Gadhafi. As you can see from the quotes below, Columbia’s President celebrated the death as a victory, they did however also immediately issue a photograph of Alfonso Cano unlike Osama Bin Laden which the U.S. intel agencies squabbled about in the press whether or not to release photographs.
Friday’s killing of Alfonso Cano, a bookish 63-year-old from Bogota’s middle class, was celebrated by President Juan Manuel Santos as “the hardest blow to this organization [FARC] in its entire history.”

Authorities released a photograph of Cano’s head in which his face did not appear disfigured.

Shadow Wars

Investigative journalist Wayne Madsen asserts in this RT television interview titled Viktor Bout: Lord of War Blame Game on Jan 21, 2011 that the U.S. wanted Viktor Bout very badly because he knows who was behind 9/11. Wayne Madsen is almost right. The U.S. didn’t want Bout so bad because he “knew” who did 9/11 but instead wanted to pin 9/11 on him!

In addition to all the allegations and alleged connections between Viktor Bout and Osama Bin Laden, Moammar Gadhafi and his alleged rogue Russian missiles, it is by no mistake that Johan Peleman’s UN report that eventually put Viktor Bout out of business and ruined him financially appeared in 2001. It was the same year that 9/11 occurred as well as former CIA asset Osam Bin Laden officially became America’s number one enemy of the state, at least in the mainstream media. I have taken the following excerpt below from Richard Chichakli’s website from a page titled What connects Richard Chichakli to Victor Bout.

Richard has always called Victor a “brother and friend” and he is that to Richard, nothing more and nothing less. What was unique in the friendship of these two men is that after the UN [written by Johan Peleman] published its report about Victor Bout in 2001 and which led to the financial collapse of Victor Bout, almost all of Victor’s friends abandoned him except for Richard Chichakli.

The Twin Towers burning on September 11, 2001.

Let’s talk more about Osama Bin Laden and 9/11. As many people know especially those who follow alternative and independent news sources as well as those with ties to the the intelligence community know for a fact that Osama Bin Laden was never formally charged with 9/11. Just more smoke and mirrors and diversions to the average American citizen. The article titled Osama Bin Laden never charged for 911 – Inside Job likely is just of many that discusses this very topic. Here are a couple of excerpts from the previously mentioned article:

Osama Bin Laden was never formally charged, because the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation didn’t deliver the necessary evidence to the Department of Justice, which would be the required path in this matter.

“The FBI gathers evidence. Once evidence is gathered, it is turned over to the Department of Justice. The Department of Justice then decides whether it has enough evidence to present to a federal grand jury. In the case of the 1998 United States Embassies being bombed, bin Laden has been formally indicted and charged by a grand jury. He has not been formally indicted and charged in connection with 9/11 because the FBI has no hard evidence connecting bin Laden to 9/11.”

Anyone who has followed the The Curious Case of Viktor Bout either in Thailand or New York for that matter must be asking themselves a question; what happened to Michael Belozerosky aka Misha and why was he not arrested? According to the prosecutors portrayal of DEA Operation ‘Relenteless’, the DEA agents and informants were obviously not arrested but Viktor Bout and Andrew Smulian were immediately arrested. However, Misha walked out of the DEA sting operation unscathed, hopped in a taxi proceeded to the airport and then flew home to Russia. Unfortunately we did not have the opportunity to hear him testify before us in the Federal court house. We did however get to see a picture of him displayed in the court room, not to sound cruel or judgmental, and to borrow juror Heather Hobson’s words in her description of Bout, I thought Misha was very scary looking.

Andrew Smulian and Viktor Bout in Moscow, November 2007 photo taken by Misha.

What was much scarier than the photograph of Misha was how easily he disappeared from the DEA’s Special Operations Division and flew back home to Russia never to be troubled again while Viktor Bout is facing life in prison in a foreign country. After all, he arrived with Viktor Bout and accompanied him from Russia to Thailand. Andrew Smulian testified to also meeting Misha in Moscow with Viktor Bout in November 2010. How scary he looked is actually irrelevant but the fact that he was untouchable leads me to believe in Dimitri Khalezov’s theory that Misha was in fact FSB [Russia’s Federal Security Service a branch of the former KGB] working in collaboration with the DEA in Operation ‘Relentless’.

I spoke with an acquaintance of mine on the phone today about the mysterious Misha. We both agreed that Misha was not needed by the DEA thus not detained. Just for the sake of convenince we will call this acquaintance anonymous. It is apparent that DEA Operation ‘Relentless’ was a well thought out intricate plan than spanned over three continents that had very specific objectives and specific ways to execute and achieve those objectives. In fact,one could say that Viktor Bout was treated as a High Value Target (HVT) by the DEA’s Special Operations Division empowered by the U.S. Department of Justice in their pursuit of him.

Russian FSB agents.

Anonymous did not buy the FSB theory but they offered in their own words a non-expert and common-sense opinion. Misha was an unknown variable is this very delicate and previously worked out equation. Thus, being an unknown variable would make him dangerous to the DEA’s case. In addition to that, anonymous suggested that Misha could only collaborate and empower Viktor Bout’s case and by default weaken or even perhaps destroy the case the DEA’s case. I agree with anonymous on both of their points and both seem very plausible. However, I also think that Misha being FSB doesn’t negate anonymous’ two points but in fact would add strength to their argument.

Investigative journalist and author of SHADOW MASTERS, Daniel Estulin delivers an extraordinary and captivating exclusive interview with Dimitri Khalezov. Dimitri Khalezov is a former Soviet commissioned officer of the “military unit 46179”, otherwise known as “the Special Control Service” of the 12th Chief Directorate of the Defense Ministry of the Soviet Union. Basically in layman’s terms, he worked in nuclear intelligence for the Soviet army. In an interview with Dimitri titled Arms Trafficking, Stolen Missiles, Soviet Submarines, Nuclear Detonations and 9/11: Exclusive Interview with Dimitri Khalezov in Bangkok, he links Viktor Bout, former FARC commander Raul Reyes and uranium. The following is an excerpt from Dimitri Khalezov’s previously mentioned interview:

Primarily, the Israeli secret services – the Mossad and Sayaret Matkal. They have keen interest in this case, too. It was demonstrated by the unprecedented Sayaret Matkal’s involvement in the case of one of the FARC leaders – Raul Reyes and “his” weapon-grade Uranium that was planted by “someone” around his camp in the Ecuadorian jungle. Don’t miss this point – Raul Reyes was murdered on March 1, 2008, while Victor Bout was scheduled to be lured to Bangkok on March 4, 2008, in direct connection with the FARC and Uranium affairs, while all legal paperwork that requested the Thais to arrest him has been submitted to the Thai side by the Americans in the last day of February – that is BEFORE the murder of Raul Reyes.

Former FARC commanders Raul Reyes on the left and Alfonso Cano in the center.

In my face-face interview with Dimitri in Bangkok in February of this year titled, Reality is Stranger Than Fiction: Dimitri Khalezov discusses 9/11 with George Mapp in Bangkok was focused primarily on 9/11. However, we did touch on the subject of Viktor Bout. Here is a sample from the previously mentioned interview between Dimitri Khalezov and myself with just a portion of his entire answer.

I know you are very close to Viktor Bout and his family as well as his Thai lawyer Lak. You were also extremely involved in the actually court case in Thailand. Is there any connection to Viktor Bout’s extradition to America and 9/11?

Yes, of course. The Americans do not even hide this. They openly state that Viktor Bout is “bad guy” in connection to 9/11. But they do not go into details. However, I will. Viktor is actually wanted in America because the U.S. security officials are gullible enough to believe that Victor has allegedly sold the nuclear-tipped missile that hit the Pentagon on 9/11 to “terrorists”. In addition they believe that Viktor also sold several portable mini-nuclear devices (known as “mini-nukes”) to the so-called “Al-Qaeda” prior to 9/11, and they also believe that he sold weapon-grade Uranium to various terrorists who used the Uranium to produce home-made nuclear bombs that were used in several acts of nuclear terror – particularly in the infamous mini-nuke’s bombing at El-Nogal, in Bogota, Columbia, in 2003, that was presented to plebes as a “car-bombing”.

Dimitri actually goes into much greater detail in his interview with author Daniel Estulin. The full text of Daniel Estulin’s interview of Dimtri Khalezov as it relates to Viktor Bout and 9/11 can be found here in a 28 page PDF: http://www.911-truth.net/Victor_Bout/Most_shocking_interview_English.pdf

For anyone interested in the transcripts used in the trial you can find them at the link below. Please keep in mind that these transcripts are only a small sample of all the conversations that took place and these particular segments were cherry picked by the prosecutors. Albert Dayan in his cross of Ricardo Jardenero got him to admit on stand that DEA informant Carlos Sagastume had the ability to turn the recording device on and off at will. Viktor Bout – Government Trial Exhibit 1002-T: [PARTICIPANTS: Viktor Bout, Andrew Smulian, Misha Belozerosky, Carlos Sagastume, Mike Snow, Ricardo Jardenero, Unidentified female, and Unidentified male]

Fair Game

“I am proud to have served my country by working at the Central Intelligence Agency. I and my former CIA colleagues trusted our government to protect us as we did our jobs. That a few reckless individuals within the current Administration [Bush] betrayed that trust has been a grave disappointment to every patriotic American…. I feel strongly that those who acted so recklessly, and who acted in such a harmful way, need to answer for their shameful conduct…” ~ Valerie Plame Wilson, July 14, 2006.

Valerie Plame who was a covert CIA operative whom did extensive work in the CIA’s counterproliferation operations. She began her long career with the CIA sometime in 1985 [the CIA will not release exact dates]. Valerie had served her country first, ahead of her husband and her twins, risking her life on the front lines of terrorism often in foreign countries. Her husband Joseph Wilson, former Ambassador to the United States wrote an article in the New York Times on July 6, 2003 titled What I Didn’t Find in Africa.

Former CIA covert operative and author Valerie Plame Wilson.

Joseph Wilson’s was standing up for the truth, unfortunately for him, his article directly contradicted the White House, the entire Bush Administration as well as attacking their premise for invading Iraq. After that article was written, many insiders on Capitol Hill and inside the White House considered Valerie Plame as ‘Fair Game’. In retaliation for her husbands article members inside the Bush administration ‘outed’ Valerie Plame on July 14, 2003 Robert Novak intentionally revealed her name as well as saying that she was a CIA operative in a newspaper column.

If a CIA covert operative working for the agency for approximately 18 years can get ‘outed’ and betrayed by her own government, then what chance does Russian citizen Viktor Bout have? The short answer is slim to none! The State Department, the White House, the Department of Justice, the FBI [did forensic analysis on Bout’s laptop], the NSA probably helped with the wiretaps and Google records, more than likely the CIA lent a hand and of course the DEA and their secret Special Operations Division with their highly paid informants all collaborated in DEA Operation ‘Relentless’. Not to mention the Thai government that broke international law in their cooperation with the U.S. government in the illegal extradition of Viktor Bout who still had a legal pending court case in the Royal Thai court system. If you believe Dimitri Khalezov’s theory about Misha working for the Russian FSB then that would implicate the Russian government at least at the highest levels also conspired against Viktor Bout and collaborated with the Thai and U.S. governments to help catch him.

Viktor and Alla Bout in a Thai court room October 4, 2010.

On Monday 4 October 2010 in a Bangkok, Thailand court room I had several opportunities to speak face-face with Viktor Bout. Late in the afternoon that day, Bout left me, according to him, with a famous Russian saying, translated into English of course because my Russian is slightly better than my Thai. Bout said, “the circus is gone but the clown’s still remain.” He was referring to the biased, illegal [Thai] court proceedings that have detained him for over two and half years and that have separated him from his wife Alla and their [then] sixteen year old daughter Elizabeth.

I hope to have an opportunity to speak with and interview Viktor Bout directly in the near future as opposed to second-hand via his wife Alla. If so, one of the first questions that I will ask him is what he thought of the entire legal procedure that he had undergone from his extradition through to the verdict. One thing is certain and indisputable, from the Wikileaks cables showing that Viktor Bout was pursued as a high value target as well as lobbying the U.N. to add the FARC as a terrorist organization, the intentional disinformation and lies, all the spin doctoring, all the character assassinations in the media, to the all the resources, time, efforts that the U.S. have expended in their pursuit of him, and that is that Viktor Bout is ‘Fair Game’!

Contact Information:

[Video] Soviet P-700 Granit Missile Launch

Watch this extraordinary footage of the Soviet P-700 Granit( П-700 “Гранит) missile launch. The P-700 Granit is a Soviet and Russian naval anti-ship cruise missile. Its GRAU designation is 3M45, its NATO reporting name SS-N-19 Shipwreck. It comes in ASCM and SLCM variants.

A Soviet P-700 Granit cruise missile.

This is the exact missile that many believe is what actually hit the pentagon and left a hole in the thick concrete layered walls, as opposed to an aluminum plane. As well as scientifically being unable to penetrate the thick walls of the Pentagon, a plane also could not have possibly flown a flight pattern as described by the 9/11 commission. It is not unlikely, it is absolutely, positively impossible.

The Pentagon impact hole on 9/11.



Further Reading:

Dimitri Khalezov on 9/11 Pentagon Attack

Mossad’s Dancing Israelis and a 9/11 Confession from Mike Harari

Reality is Stranger Than Fiction: Dimitri Khalezov discusses 9/11 with George Mapp in Bangkok

BBC Correspondent Alan Hart Discusses 9/11 being a Mossad Operation

Imaginary Crimes: The Never Ending Viktor Bout Story

Arms Trafficking, Stolen Missiles, Soviet Submarines, Nuclear Detonations and 9/11: Exclusive Interview with Dimitri Khalezov in Bangkok

The Curious Case of Viktor Bout

The Assassination of Viktor Anatoliyevich Bout

BY: Dimitri Khalezov

Bio-terrorism — anthrax attacks following September 11

Arms Trafficking, Stolen Missiles, Soviet Submarines, Nuclear Detonations and 9/11: Exclusive Interview with Dimitri Khalezov in Bangkok

The most provocative, prohibited and proven 9/11 book written:

911thology by Dimitri Khalezov

Important information and download links: http://www.dimitri-khalezov-video.com

Download videos and other important files (direct): http://911-truth.net

I will be a guest on the Kevin Barrett Radio Show

Please tune in to the Kevin Barrett’s radio show schedule. I will be an upcoming guest on Kevin’s show on Truth Jihad Radio.

An excerpt from Kevin Barrett’s Blog:

“Next Monday, 2/21/11, my first hour guest will be journalist George Mapp Jr., who met and wrote about incarcerated arms dealer Viktor Bout, has published an article on Dmitri Khalezov (then another one here), and writes extensively about CIA/DEA agent David Headley, organizer of the Mumbai terror attack, at his blog.”

Reality is Stranger Than Fiction: Dimitri Khalezov discusses 9/11 with George Mapp in Bangkok

A must read for anyone who has any interest, connection or whose life has been touched or affected by September 11, 2001. Dimitri Khalezov explains in layman terms eye-opening and riveting truths concerning that catastrophic day. I know for myself, watching live both towers collapse with many of my friends still inside, that September 11, 2001 is permanently scarred into my memory. They say that reality is stranger than fiction, in the case of 9/11 it especially holds true as the real events that transpired on that day are extraordinarily strange.

A couple of days ago in Bangkok, I met up with Dimitri Khalezov and we sat down and discussed his theories and conclusions in regards to 9/11.

George Mapp and Dimitri Khalezov in Bangkok, Feb 1, 2011

We met over several days as there was an enormous amount of interesting topics and discussions. Dimitri and I could have probably kept talking for a week about 9/11. Instead of having an endless discussion, we kept it brief so that it would be more interesting and intriguing to our readers. Here is what Dimitri had to say:

Dimitri, please tell me briefly about your background and how it relates to 9/11?

It is not so easy to make it brief, especially describing my personal acquaintance with one of the chief planners of 9/11. Perhaps, you will need to read my book, since a few chapters of it are entirely devoted to this matter. But to be able to answer your question I would put it this way: first of all at the end of the ‘80s I served as a commissioned officer in the so-called “Special Control Service” of the 12th Chief Directorate of the Defense Ministry of the former USSR, which is otherwise known by its code-name “military unit 46179”. This organization was responsible for gathering various kinds of nuclear intelligence, primarily for the detection of nuclear tests of various adversaries of the former USSR. In addition, this organization was tasked with official controlling functions regarding the observance of various international treaties related to nuclear explosions, nuclear tests, etc.

During my service in that organization it has come to my knowledge (still at the end of the ‘80s – more than 10 years prior to the 9/11 events) that under the Twin Towers of the WTC in New York there were two huge thermo-nuclear charges intended for emergency demolition of the WTC. This fact does not have any actual relation to 9/11 except only that it gave me some understanding to what actually happened with the WTC, why nearly all of the structural steel was pulverized and why the site of the WTC demolition bears the strange nuclear name “ground zero”.

However, due to the above knowledge of mine later I got acquainted with the real 9/11 perpetrators – those who planned the entire affair. And due to this acquaintance yes, we can say that I have some relevance to 9/11. In fact this relevance seemed to be so important to the American secret services that they even attempted to get me arrested and extradited to America in 2003 – together with one of the chief 9/11 planners. Ironically, neither he, nor I were actually extradited, despite the fact that both of us were indeed arrested for that reason by the request of the Americans. After making such a request the Americans wisely preferred not to let the truth of the WTC nuclear demolition be discussed in the U.S. court-room and so they dropped the extradition claims against me.

I have been to Ground Zero many times, the first time was just several days after 9/11. Before I met you, I did not know its true meaning. Please discuss the actually meaning of Ground Zero.

You simply have to get any unabridged English dictionary printed before 9/11 and you will see the meaning. Don’t make this mistake – don’t look for it in any newer, post-9/11 dictionary. Go only for a pre-9/11 one. I mean that only in a pre-9/11 English dictionary you could find the true meaning of this strange term. Because after the 9/11 events and in the ensuing cover-up the U.S. authorities had no choice than to re-print all dictionaries without exception in order to re-define the term “ground zero”.

Webster’s Encyclopedic Unabridged Dictionary of the English Language - Edition 1989, printed in 1994, ISBN 0-517-11888-2.

Thus if you look for the definition of “ground zero” in any newer dictionary you will only find modified definitions. However, when Civil Defense specialists designated the WTC demolition spot as “ground zero” (that time still in low-case letters) they apparently used the pre-9/11 definition of this strange term, not the post-9/11 one. So, you have to do the same thing – just go for any large unabridged dictionary printed before September, 2001, and see what is the definition of “ground zero”.

I guess it is not so easy to find such an old dictionary right away, so to satisfy your curiosity immediately, you can go to this web site: http://www.what-is-ground-zero.com/ since it contains photo-copies of several pages from pre-9/11 dictionaries that show the true definition of “ground zero”. Hope you will find it interesting.

Dimitri, please tell me about the infamous Flight 93.

I don’t know much about Flight 93. At least I don’t know about this affair as much as I do about the WTC nuclear demolition scheme (which was known to me in the ’80s due to my military service). All that I know about Flight 93 is this. When I watched the contemporary news on September 11, 2001, I remember that a few news agencies reported that one of the passenger flights was shot down by a U.S. fighter-jet over Pennsylvania because the U.S. authorities believed that it was hijacked and was heading towards a specific high-priority target.

I remember it clearly because some news agencies on that day had even shown a pilot who actually shot down the alleged 4th passenger aircraft. Several of my friends and acquaintances remember this fact as well – I especially asked several people who watched the 9/11 news in real time and almost all of them remember that the 4th flight was shot down by the U.S. fighter-jet. However, after some time this story was completely forgotten. A new story was quickly invented – that the passengers in the Flight 93 allegedly “rebelled” against the “hijackers” and allegedly “overpowered” them and thus caused the plane to crash thus “preventing” the plane from being used as a missile.

Screen shot from the said video – the US Air National Guard servicewoman Lt.Col Phyllis Phipps-Barnes confirms to the FOX reporter the 4th passenger aircraft was shot down by her unit.

The entire U.S. propaganda machine was set in motion to bulldoze all doubts to the contrary. Due to the fact that You Tube, where everyone could post videos freely and conveniently did not come into existence until the year 2005. Not many accidentally saved 9/11 videos by individuals could be made publicly available and shared widely before 2005. Thus you could not hope to get any genuine video footage confirming the original news release where it was openly stated that the 4th flight was shot down. In fact even after 2005 it was not so easy to discover that seditious piece of contemporary news. It appears that the U.S. authorities took very good care of that. Most probably they carefully monitored You Tube and once anything of this kind was uploaded for public view they quickly contacted the original owner of the video and offered him some huge some of money to redeem the seditious footage in order to hide it from the public.

In fact, many 9/11 researchers who remembered the original news about Flight 93 were desperately hunting this seditious footage for years after 9/11. But to my knowledge none of them succeeded in finding any. But when it came to me, I was really lucky. In June 2010 I accidentally encountered an original 9/11 news footage on one Russian web site. It was in Russian, from a Russian news channel. I watched it all carefully and at one moment I noticed a part where a news reporter talks (apparently citing his colleagues from CNN) about the 4th passenger plane being shot down by the US fighter-jet. I cut this part of the video and uploaded it to my own You Tube channel here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-LCcCfmCRTM

I would say that it was a huge success, because out of all the 9/11 researchers, I was the first who was lucky enough to find such a thing as the confirmation of the Flight 93 being shot down. However, this was a limited success, since this piece of news was in Russian and not many people could truly appreciate it. I continued my search for the same thing and may be by the grace of God (because I can’t even attribute it to merely “good luck”) I managed to find a similar confirmation in English. In August 2010, I managed to get original FOX news footage where it was repeated twice, moreover by some real U.S. Air National Guard official, that their unit has indeed shot down the 4th passenger aircraft.

I cut two important pieces of FOX news, made them into a video clip, adding my explanation and some additional third-party confirmations of this fact and uploaded it to my You Tube channel here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jMrF1caOmOw This video was very popular for the first few days after uploading. It got something like 1000 views per days during the first few days. However, it seems that the You Tube and Google did something so that this most seditious video would not appear in search results and since then not too many new visitors have watched this clip.

Nonetheless, this video is still there and you can watch it right now. Besides this I don’t know much more about Flight 93. In addition to these two news videos I found some other interesting materials discovered by other 9/11 researchers. Some interesting materials regarding Flight 93, that even include a photo of a pilot who shot it down, were made into a zip archive that you can download from here:


When the World Trade Center was being designed in the late 1960’s, nuclear technology was not taboo, in fact you could say at the time it was en vogue. Could you please discuss this as well as the building code for demolition plans for skyscrapers at that time?

Since I am not a demolition expert, neither an architect, nor an official of the Department of Buildings, I don’t know much about it. My knowledge is limited to only what I got to know from the Soviet Special Control Service back in the ‘80s. All I know is this: in the ‘60s, ‘70s, and ‘80s in the United States (at least in New York and in Chicago, but perhaps elsewhere too) Building Codes did not allow to permit the building of skyscrapers unless a developer of the construction project could submit a satisfactory demolition scheme of his would be skyscraper. Since traditional demolition methods were designed to deal with old type of brick-walled and concrete-paneled buildings (since in the second half of the 20th century they used to demolish buildings built in the first half of the 20th century or in 19th century), nobody knew how to demolish the new type of incredibly strong steel-framed buildings that came into existence only in the end of the ‘60s.

Traditional controlled demolition methods did not work with these steel-framed buildings due to their excessive strength. So, developers of the new skyscrapers could not get permission from the Department of Buildings to build their project, since they were unable to submit any satisfactory demolition scheme to deal with their skyscrapers in the future. Hence their desire to implement the nuclear demolition schemes of the skyscrapers. These awful nuclear demolition schemes were not to actually demolish the buildings in the middle of the populated cities by huge nuclear explosions underground, please don’t get me wrong. It was merely to satisfy bureaucratic demands of the Department of Buildings officials and to get the permission to build the steel-framed skyscrapers whatsoever. At least this is what we believed back then in the Soviet Special Control Service where I used to serve as an officer.

I will not go into exact details of the actual nuclear demolition scheme of the WTC, because it will take time, but if you are interested in details you can see them in my book. To answer the first part of your question: yes, those days the nuclear explosions were not as “evil” as they are now and it was perfectly acceptable – to use them for civil purposes such as demolishing of civil infrastructure. To get an additional confirmation you can look at a seditious diagram of the ‘70s that was used in a Wikipedia article dealing with nuclear tests: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_tests . The diagram has its own web address : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Types_of_nuclear_testing.svg

Just look at Figure (2) – an underground nuclear explosion as depicted on that diagram. And pay particular attention to a skyscraper for some truly strange reason shown right above the spot of the underground nuclear explosion. The problem is that in the ‘70s (this diagram is from the ‘70s) the nuclear demolition of skyscrapers was a well-known fact, so the concept of it managed to find its way even to such diagrams… Hope I have answered your question?

Is it possible for a nuclear explosion to occur in lower Manhattan without devastating and destroying the entire population of New York City?

Yes. Because it occurred deep underground. If it were on the surface level or above it, the 150 kiloton bomb would almost destroy New York City in its entirety, as well as making the rest of it uninhabitable. Just imagine that 150 kiloton is 8 times the size of the first atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima. However, since the 150 kiloton bombs detonated deep under each of the WTC Twin Towers and under the WTC-7 they did not cause much damage – just only the damage you can see in the immediate aftermath of the actual WTC demolition on 9/11.

You have to understand that physical properties of deep underground nuclear explosion (not to be mistaken with shallow sub-surface nuclear explosion) are distinctly different from an atmospheric nuclear explosion. A deep, fully-contained underground nuclear explosion produces neither penetrating ionizing radiation (because its primary radiation is stopped by surrounding rock and can not reach the earth’s surface), nor air-blast wave (because there is no air around the nuclear explosions hypo-center), nor thermal radiation (because this one too requires air while air is absent in underground conditions), nor even Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP), because EMP is an aftereffect of electrons’ flow, while in the underground conditions all electrons are stopped by surrounding rock – along with gamma-rays, X-rays, and neutrons. Thus an underground nuclear explosion (if it is only not shallow sub-surface one, but really deep and contained) would not cause anything noticeable on the ground: no sound, no flash, not thermal radiation, no air-blast wave, no penetrating ionizing radiation, no EMP, not even the trademark mushroom cloud.

It will only cause an earthquake – that is the only noticeable factor. And indeed right at the WTC Twin Towers collapse (precisely 11-12 seconds prior to the beginning of collapse) a strong earthquake that corresponded to a nuclear explosion of well over 100 kiloton was observed and felt by anyone around (and also recorded by several video cameras).

However, I must make one correction: even though none of the well-known destructive factors of a typical atmospheric atomic blast were present in the WTC demolition case, radioactive contamination of the surrounding area was still there. The levels of gamma-radiation after the three underground nuclear explosions were well over 200 roentgens per hour during the first hours, and tens of roentgens per hour during first few days after 9/11.

While alpha- and beta-contaminated radioactive particles (especially radioactive vapors that were ascending from beneath the WTC debris from extremely overheated cavities under them) were present for at least 4 months time – until the hot radioactive matter in the underground cavities was cooled down. And these radioactive vapors caused extreme damage to the health of those who worked without gas-masks on ground zero. Now almost all ground-zero responders suffer from leukemia and other secondary effects of chronic radiation sickness – mainly from various cancers. Also many of these responders have died since then and many more are dying right now.

Please tell me briefly how according to the science of physics that it is absolutely impossible for a jumbo-jet to penetrate the frame of the former World Trade Center.

Many people naively think that the WTC facades were made from huge panes of glass – because the “planes” shown in 9/11 footage appear to penetrate in too easily – without even reducing their speed upon the impact. However, it is not so simple in reality. In reality the facades of the Twin Towers were made from densely positioned thick steel perimeter columns.

Core- and perimeter columns of the WTC Twin Towers.

There were 59 of such columns on each of the 4 facades and these columns were positioned every one meter from one other. Each column represented a hollow tube square in cross-section. Each of the four walls of such perimeter column was as thick as the front armor of a tank.

Do you think that an aluminum plane could penetrate steel thick as tank’s front armor? Try to be realistic… Yes, intuitively it might appear to some people that a massive, fast-flying aircraft, even though it is made from aluminum, has a lot of kinetic energy to penetrate steel. But this is a very wrong perception. You intuition badly cheats you in this particular case. Aluminum can not penetrate steel irrespectively of its mass and its speed. Because if it were so simple then artillery armor-piercing shells would be made from aluminum. However, anti-tank rounds are not made from it. They are made from Wolfram (Tungsten) or from Depleted Uranium. Because either of these materials is harder than steel.

Official diagram of the Twin Towers’ structure.

I will try to illustrate this to you. From the point of physics it does not matter – if a moving car A hits a stationary car B, or, vice versa – a moving car B hits a stationary car A. As long as we are talking about the speed of the moving car relative to the stationary car and the speed is the same, the physics of the process is the same. From the point of view of physics it is the same if the moving plane hits stationary Twin Tower or some fabulous giant took the Twin Tower and hits with it (as it were a huge baseball bat) a stationary plane – the physics of this process is the same. Now we move further. Let’s imagine that we have a plastic swatter to kill flies. And we hit a fly with the swatter at an impact speed of 1 meter per second. It will flatten the fly. Now we increase the speed of the swatter to 10 meters per second and hit the fly – it will again flatten the fly. We increase the speed of the swatter to 100 meters per second and hit the fly – it will again flatten the fly. And even if we increase the speed to 1000 meters per second or to any other speed, the result will be the same – the hit of the swatter will flatten the fly. I think it is very obvious. Now, we imagine that the swatter now is stationary and the fly is attempting to “penetrate” it by flying into it. If the fly hit the swatter at the speed of 1 meter per second what will happen? Apparently the fly will be flattened without being able to penetrate the plastic swatter (because it does not matter if the moving swatter hits a stationary fly or the moving fly hits a stationary swatter – the physics of this process is the same). If the fly increases the speed to 10 meters per second? The result is the same. 100 meters per second? The same. 1000 meters per second? The same: the fly will be flattened without being able to penetrate the plastic swatter irrespective of the speed of impact. The very same consideration is applicable to the aluminum planes hitting the enormously strong steel Twin Tower boasting its outer skin as strong as the front armor of a tank. An empty aluminum plane would be flattened on impact without being able to penetrate the Tower and the flattened plane will fall back to sidewalks. Add here an additional logical confirmation of what I have said. Imagine that a certain bridge collapses killing people on the bridge and under the bridge. Would you see an architect of the bridge arrested and brought before the court of law? No doubt. Have you seen an architect of the Twin Towers arrested and brought tried for his failure to provide an adequate strength to his construction? No. Now you get the point. The WTC architect is not guilty. Neither in a sense that aluminum planes could penetrate his steel building, nor in a sense that fires caused by kerosene could collapse his steel building. The architect is clearly innocent because neither of the two suggestions has taken place in reality: the aluminum planes have never penetrated the Twin Towers and “fires” did not cause the Twin Towers to collapse. Therefore there is no reason to arrest and try the architect. Do you agree with this logic?

Please tell me what really took down World Trade Center buildings 1,2 and 7?

Steel structure of the WTC South Tower was reduced to complete microscopic dust.

Three underground nuclear (to be more precise “thermo-nuclear”) explosions 150 kilotons each. Hence the “ground zero” name, promptly awarded by the Civil Defense officials to the WTC demolition site.

Do you still doubt it was nothing else by the nuclear explosions that determined the “ground zero” designation awarded by the U.S. Civil Defense servicemen to the former WTC site? Then look at this:

The definition of “ground zero” as defined by The New International Webster’s Comprehensive Dictionary of the English Language.

Many firefighters, EMT and rescue workers who spent time at ground zero are disabled, terminally ill or dead. You claim this is not from smoke inhalation, please explain.

No, it is not from “smoke” inhalation. It is from radioactive vapors inhalation. Radioactive vapors were ascending from deep cavities left by underground nuclear explosions. Make sure to notice that “smoke” (if any) is not white. It is much darker. But vapor (to be exact radioactive vapor in this case) is white.

Vapors rising from ground zero on October 17, 2001.

Because the cavities were filled with extremely hot radioactive materials in liquid state and the firefighters were ordered to poor water into the WTC debris (and through them – into the cavities underground).

Deep underground cavity under one of the WTC buildings; molten rock could be clearly observed.

This, understandably caused vapors. And the vapors were radioactive – each particle of vapors carried alpha- and beta- particles that were extremely dangerous when inhaled or ingested. Because they would continue to irradiate the victim’s body from inside for extended periods of time and eventually cause chronic radiation sickness.

According to your video that you produced, you claim that the television footage was edited to add the frames of the planes. How can you prove that?

Several such videos show black frames right at the time of impact. There are other multiple signs of digital manipulations. You can see some of such videos on my You Tube channel that is http://www.youtube.com/user/DimitriKhalezov there I have a few videos dealing with “planes”. Here are direct links to these videos:











The first two videos deal with black frames, the rest – with real witnesses who claim there were no planes, but only explosions.


Dimitri, if you don’t mind I would like to interject here. I was an international equities trader working for RBC Securities in Jersey City on September 11, 2001. The office was located at Hudson Street directly on the water front. We watched the catastrophic events live from our 30 foot long windows, from almost beginning til end.

I will never forget that day, it was just two days after I watched the Williams sisters compete against each other at the U.S. Open Womens Tennis Final. It was one of the most beautiful days in recent memory. Clear blue skies, I didn’t see a trace of a cloud. The weather was perfect, if there is an ideal temperature, it existed on that Tuesday morning. I remember being still extremely tired from the weekend and a long tiring Monday. I was extremely happy that morning because my screens were all green that morning, nearly all my stocks were up in the European, Asian, Russian and South African markets. I wasn’t usually long stocks being mostly a short-seller but I was anticipating a nice bounce and a week long rally. I didn’t want to sell at that time because I anticipated when Wall Street opened, the rally would continue and my stock levels would increase further. I was up approximately $50,000 before the disaster occurred. But less than two hours later when we had to evacuate the building and the New York Sock Exchange was shut, my positions were now costing me about $200,000.00 in losses that would only get worse as the week progressed.

I was one of the first people in the room to notice the fire burning. There were simultaneous reports of a small prop jet hitting the tower that caused the fire. Since we were in a trading room, we had several televisions on constantly tuned to CNN, CNBC, Blomberg etc. I remember how one guy was laughing about the fire while I was asking out loud to everyone, “what tower is Cantor in?” I was very concerned and understood that from our window the flames appeared very big thus in reality the fire was growing quite rapidly. I had many friends that worked at Cantor Fitzgerald, some who I have known over a decade, none had made it out alive. As I was glued to the window, others were watching the reports on TV. Thus, I heard people yelling another plane, another plane is coming but I did not see it live, I just saw an explosion. It never occurred to me until I met Dimitri that perhaps the people shouting in the trading room about a 2nd plane were all watching TV as opposed to watching it live.


An explosion rips through the south tower of the World Trade Centre on September 11, 2001.

You see, watching four monitors from 7am til 4pm and watching for small discrepancies and arbitrage opportunities as well as being able to dischipher the name of one of my stocks in a room with 30-40 people talking, yelling and sometimes screaming at once gave me the impression that I was extremely observant and alert. Until recently I simply thought that I missed the 2nd plane hitting even though I was starring directly at the WTC buildings. Our view was so magnificent and crystal clear of lower Manhattan from our over sized windows, it was always the highlight of any visitor to our offices. In fact, if you go to Google images and search for pictures of the WTC towers, many will be from Jersey City.

I will save the rest of my eye witness observations for another time. I will finish with that we evacuated the building after the first tower collapsed, I yelled out audibly, “is it being imploded?” It came down so orderly that at the time, I naively thought in 30 minutes the NY firefighters imploded it with explosives so it did not topple left or right and cause massive damage. I did as well as many others notice a tremor an our building in New Jersey that shook from what I thought was the tower collapsing but according to Dimitri, it was the underground nuclear explosion and the aftershocks that I felt.

My trading assistant Charlie lost his best friend and college room mate from Cantor. Charlie who I ended up taking home with me as well as three other co-workers who could not return to Brooklyn due to closed bridges and tunnels was devastated and in shock over worry about his missing best friend Greg (as well in denial). The day before I had a long conversation with Greg, who called to speak with Charlie who was off the desk. Greg was unhappy at Cantor, he was waiting for his December bonus and would then leave to another firm. Unfortunately, Greg did not make it til December, he was approximately 27.

The Twin Towers engulfed in flames on September 11, 2001.


The same person that was in the early moments of the fire that was laughing was crying quite heavily when the the first tower fell, no need to mention his name. I would in the weeks and months (many families delayed the process holding on to false hope that a loved one would be found or at least some remains to bury) to come attend many memorial services, unfortunately they could not be called burials since in almost all cases there were no bodies or remains to bury, mostly pictures.

Harry Ramos’ service was extremely emotional for me, the Mayor of Newark was there, since so many people knew Harry thus it was extremely well-attended. Standing room only. Every memorial service that I attended reminded me of all the previous ones before and the ones yet to occur but a reminder of broken families and the premature death of many of my friends.

Walking to the parking lot to my car with my co-workers, we stopped briefly at a Light Rail station,we heard a women screaming and yelling. We all turned and saw the 2nd tower falling. I remember distinctly that the entire area of lower Manhattan looked like it was sinking into a sea of clouds and smoke and for a short time I couldn’t see anything but smoke. I then thought if my best friend Curtis who has 3 children and a wife was still alive, since he worked across the street from the WTC. Luckily, my best friend Curtis and many others escaped, unfortunately many others did not.


Dimitri, could you please tell me your thoughts about what really happened at the Pentagon?

Picture taken immediately after the missile impact – before the Pentagon’s wall was collapsed and before the lampposts were toppled to imitate the “plane’s wings”.

The Pentagon was hit by a cruise missile. It is not even my thoughts; it is a matter of fact. You can get a confirmation of my words if you look at this picture showing penetrating details in the case of the Pentagon strike.

Penetration details of the Pentagon; 6 capital walls were penetrated and the final punch-out hole.

Do you think this type of damage could have been caused by a Boeing-767? Of course it was a missile. Moreover, the missile was equipped by a real thermo-nuclear warhead (although unexploded due to its intentionally broken detonator). This fact caused an extreme panic in the U.S. government and caused various high-ranking officials to search for weapons of mass-destruction in Iraq. It is widely believed that Saddam Hussein was the actual owner of the missile that struck the Pentagon. It is a long topic do discuss, so I suggest that you read my book – at least three full chapters are devoted to this missile attack. Or you can get more ideas about the Pentagon missile attack if you read my interview on Victor Bout that is available here:


Okay, Dimitri, let us really delve into what really happened on 9/11. Who were the actually perpetrators and what were there motives?

De-facto perpetrators are some individuals from the Mossad and from French secret services. But it is only an outward appearance. The real planners and the real perpetrators are, of course, those folks who promote the New World Order, so-called “globalization”, and other means of the final enslavement of humanity on this Planet. Basically they are the very same guys who stood behind the United Nations Organization, Bilderberg Club, the WTO, the so-called “Council on Foreign Relations”, “Trilateral Commission”, Olympic Games enterprise, “Greenpeace”, “Amnesty International”, and other well-known and little-known instruments of the so-called “globalization”. The 9/11 job was conceived and ordered by these guys, of course. The Mossad and the French are merely hired executors – similar to contract killers in the common sense; they are by no means the masterminds.

Was the Bush administration directly involved in the 9/11 cover-up?

George Bush and Dick Cheney.

Yes, of course. Can’t you just see this obvious fact with your own eyes? Doesn’t the infamous Report of the 9/11 Commission look like a desperate cover-up to you? But the 9/11 Commission is definitely not a circus and not a bunch of freelance comedians. It is a governmental entity, isn’t it?

I know you are very close to Viktor Bout and his family as well as his Thai lawyer Lak. You were also extremely involved in the actually court case in Thailand. Is there any connection to Viktor Bout’s extradition to America and 9/11?

Dimitri Khalezov (in a black shirt in the background) and Victor Bout (in an orange prison garb) in the Thai Criminal Court during one of the last hearing on Victor’s extradition case in Thailand.

Yes, of course. The Americans do not even hide this. They openly state that Viktor Bout is “bad guy” in connection to 9/11. But they do not go into details. However, I will. Viktor is actually wanted in America because the U.S. security officials are gullible enough to believe that Victor has allegedly sold the nuclear-tipped missile that hit the Pentagon on 9/11 to “terrorists”. In addition they believe that Viktor also sold several portable mini-nuclear devices (known as “mini-nukes”) to the so-called “Al-Qaeda” prior to 9/11, and they also believe that he sold weapon-grade Uranium to various terrorists who used the Uranium to produce home-made nuclear bombs that were used in several acts of nuclear terror – particularly in the infamous mini-nuke’s bombing at El-Nogal, in Bogota, Columbia, in 2003, that was presented to plebes as a “car-bombing”. If you need to know more about this affair with Viktor Bout’s extradition from Thailand and my involvement with it, you can read my interview given to Daniel Estulin, that is available for download as a pdf file here:


This one is in English, but it is also available in several other languages. You can find these files and many more interesting files related to Victor Bout and his extradition here:




Dimitri, on behalf of our readers and myself, I want to thank you for these last several days and the wonderful and insightful discussions that we had as well as for your time. I am sure that since I have written quite a bit about Viktor Bout, that many readers would like to know more details about the Viktor Bout case and how it relates to 9/11. Perhaps we will have another discussion soon. Thank you again!

Further Reading:

BY: Dimitri Khalezov

Bio-terrorism — anthrax attacks following September 11

Arms Trafficking, Stolen Missiles, Soviet Submarines, Nuclear Detonations and 9/11: Exclusive Interview with Dimitri Khalezov in Bangkok

The most provocative, prohibited and proven 9/11 book written:

911thology by Dimitri Khalezov

Important information and download links: http://www.dimitri-khalezov-video.com

Download videos and other important files (direct): http://911-truth.net

Imaginary Crimes: The Never Ending Viktor Bout Story

Viktor Bout Whisked Away


Alla Bout after her husbands extradition.

On Tuesday morning, 16 November 2010, Viktor Bout’s wife, Alla, received a most disturbing and completely unexpected phone call. She was informed that her husband Viktor was being extradited to the U.S. imminently. This phone call came to her before she was able to prepare and bring Viktor’s vegetarian lunch and visit him in prison, both of which she did routinely on a daily basis. After receiving the horrifying news, according to an article in the Guardian published that same day, “Alla rushed to the prison with his [Bout’s] lawyer when she heard her husband was about to be deported but did not get to see him.”

Alla did not make it in time to say goodbye, her husband Viktor was already whisked away by the Thai commandos to Don Muang airport. Alla Bout would not see her husband Viktor again until five weeks later when they spoke briefly in yet another courtroom during his scheduled court date last Friday 21 January 2011. However, this time it was in a different court in a different country, a New York city Federal court room.

Alla was looking forward to her first scheduled visit with her husband Viktor since last November 16th when he was suddenly extradited from Thailand. In a recent report published on 21 Friday January 2011 by Itar-Tass, Alla Bout said,A lawyer told me that the prison administration at last gave me a permission to see my husband, she said. The meeting will take place on Monday [January 24] afternoon and will continue for three hours, rather than one hour as envisaged by the law.”

She later mentioned in the same article that “she does not know yet whether her next meeting with her husband will also be three hours long or whether the prison administration offered only one such chance in leniency.” Alla Bout felt that she was granted two extra hours visiting time because their 16- year-old daughter Lisa and Viktor’s 74-year-old mother Raisa would also attend the visit.

Operation Stealth Kidnap


Viktor Bout being taken to the plane during his extradition.

Alla Bout was shocked and surprised by the sudden and unexpected extradition which she refers to as a ‘kidnapping’. It was sudden because the Thai cabinet just made the decision in a secret session hours before Bout was extradited. “The operation was secret,” Alla told Russia Today in a television interview. The decision was unexpected because Viktor Bout’s court case was still pending in the Royal Thai court. According to Lak Nittiwattanawichan, Bout’s Thai lawyer, they filed an appeal which was accepted by the court and they were waiting for a court date to be set for the appeal to be heard. Viktor Bout was as Alla Bout said, “kidnapped” just days before the extradition deadline of 20 November 2010. A previous Thai court ruling had set a deadline of November 20th for Viktor Bout to be extradited to the U.S. or be set free.

Alla Bout told Russia Today during her recent interview on 20 January 2011, “the operation [to send him to the US] was secret. The cabinet ordered the extradition of Viktor Bout, even though the prime minister of Thailand had said that while court proceedings are ongoing, he wouldn’t be extradited…. He was shipped to the United States as if he was just a thing, without his documents and without the Russian embassy being informed. The operation was so quick because it is illegal under Thai law.”

After the secret Thai cabinet meeting took place and the decision was made, Bout was quickly whisked to the airport and placed under DEA custody. According to BBC News, “Within hours of the Thai cabinet’s decision Bout was removed from his prison cell, placed in a bulletproof vest and escorted to a chartered plane by police commandos in balaclavas and combat gear, where he was handed over to DEA agents.”

Viktor Bout boarding the plane at Don Muang airport.


In the same Russia Today interview mentioned previously, Alla Bout said that her husband Viktor was extradited from Thailand to the United States last year without the proper procedures being followed, so he was in effect kidnapped.

Lak, Viktor’s Thai lawyer told Alla that, “he cannot find a single document signed by the Thai Cabinet on Viktor’s extradition, which should exist according to the Thai government. This means that nobody has signed any documents, no written permission on his extradition has been issued.” Alla then states again in the Russia Today interview that “nobody signed any documents, no written extradition permission was given. So, he was merely kidnapped,” she said.

Coming To America

On the morning of 16 November 2010 the U.S. DEA agents wasted no time in flying Viktor Bout out of Thailand to U.S. soil. Apparently they did not want anything else to go wrong with the case in Thailand than that which had already occurred. The agents were able to get him out of Thailand and into U.S. jurisdiction just days before the deadline that the Thai court set of 20 November 2010. After that date, according to Thai law, Viktor Bout would have been a free man.

Apparently in their haste in bringing Bout to the U.S., the agents did not bother with any formalities or paperwork. Therefore, one can not say that Viktor Bout was actually transferred from Thai custody to U.S. custody, because in reality he is still legally in Thai custody as well as having an open and pending court case in the Royal Thai court.

Alla Bout was not able to talk directly with her husband and had to rely on the Russian consul in New York. It was only through Alexander Otchaynov, the Russian deputy consul that Alla was told about Viktor’s flight from Thailand to America. In an interview on 21 November 2010, in the Bangkok Post, Alla Bout said that the DEA agents tried very hard to get a confession and to cop a plea out of Viktor on his flight to America.

”While on the flight to America, the American guards tried to apply psychological pressure on him, trying to convince him very hard to cooperate with them and to admit something he did not do and did not say,” said Alla Bout.

Viktor Bout arriving in the U.S. in DEA custody.


In the same interview Alla expressed a bit of sarcasm towards the U.S. authorities for them offering political asylum to Viktor and his immediate family because he was being portrayed as such a villain by them.

”In exchange for that [a confession], they promised him political asylum in America and also political asylum for his wife and daughter in America, but he refused. This is especially strange since the Americans maintain that he is such a bad person,” said Alla Bout.

Before Viktor Bout was able to embark on his unplanned, visa-free travel to America on a chartered jet, he first had to suffer humiliation and inhumane treatment. Alla later in the same interview expressed her displeasure at Viktor’s inhumane treatment after he was stripped butt-naked and left that way for some time. Alla Bout said that ”on Tuesday morning, they stripped him naked and they took absolutely everything from him including his shoes and the telephone books with his contacts and the telephone contacts of his lawyers [sic] all of them. They left him naked, absolutely naked. After that, they bought him some dirty sports shoes which do not belong to him. The prison authorities felt sorry for him and they gave him the cheap slippers.”

Manufactured Jurisdiction

Before I discuss the allegations waged against Viktor Bout and the lack of evidence, I would first like to talk briefly about jurisdiction. On Tuesday 16 November 2010 shortly after Viktor Bout’s extradition, the Russian foreign ministry expressed their displeasure and questioned the jurisdiction of a trial to be held in America. According to the Guardian, the Russian foreign ministry, “has questioned the U.S. claim of jurisdiction given that he [Bout] is not an American citizen and is not alleged to have committed crimes on U.S. soil.”

Also on the same day in a BBC News report, Sabrina Shroff Viktor Bout’s court appointed lawyer told a federal court in New York City, “that since none of his alleged crimes occurred in the U.S., the U.S. cannot try him.”


Viktor Bout's wife Alla in New York city.

As I have stated many times before that Viktor Bout was being held in prison in Thailand illegally, it appears that U.S. federal court appointed attorney Sabrina Shroff agrees with me. In the same BBC News article. Mrs. Shroff also stated that “she will also argue the arrest of Mr Bout in 2008 in Bangkok was illegal under Thai law.”

Andrei Klimov, Vice Chairman of the Russian State Duma Committee on Foreign Affairs, argues that Bout’s case is not within the jurisdiction of U.S. courts. Klimov told RIA Novosti on 16 November 2010 that:

He is not a U.S. citizen and has not committed any crimes on the territory of the United States. All the rest is outside the U.S. jurisdiction. Washington has no right to force anyone suspected of wrongdoing to be brought over to the U.S. for trial. Every country has its own courts to try crimes committed on their territory. Second, crimes suspects can stand trial in countries whose citizens they are. Finally, they can be tried by international courts. By the way, Americans do not recognize the jurisdiction of international courts with respect to their own citizens.”


Viktor Bout's Thai attorney, Lak.

Andrei Klimov also says in a report that appeared in The Christian Science Monitor on the same day that the issue is unlikely to derail US-Russian relations, but says it sets a dangerous precedent.

“Bout is not a citizen of the U.S., nor do the Americans have any evidence of him breaking the law on U.S. soil, so why are they doing this?” he says. “It appears the U.S. is acting like a global prosecutor, and a world judge. But who gives them this power? This looks something like Guantanamo,” where people fall into legal limbo, he says. “The principle is wrong.” says Klimov.

Viktor Bout’s attorney Sabrina Shroff in a BBC News report expressed her concern to his lawyer about the jurisdiction issue. Ms Shroff told U.S. District Judge Shira Scheindlin, that “it’s a manufactured jurisdiction.”

The DEA’s New Mandate


David Gaddis deputy chief of operations for the DEA.

The U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration has become a vast international spy network as shown by U.S. Embassy cables revealed by Wikileaks. The DEA now has 87 offices in 63 countries and close partnerships with governments that distrust the CIA, such as Nicaragua and Venezuela. Many nations are eager to take advantage of the agency’s drug detection and wiretapping technologies as stated by a Public Intelligence article.

According to a Wikileaks cable that was reprinted in the New York Times, “The Drug enforcement Administration has been transformed into a global intelligence organization with a reach that extends far beyond narcotics, and an eavesdropping operation so expansive it has to fend off foreign politicians who want to use it against their political enemies, according to secret diplomatic cables.”

Well, this would explain why U.S. undercover DEA agents set up or as Wayne Madsen put it, “entrapped” Viktor Bout in Thailand while posing as rebels from the terrorist organization the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia or FARC. Just to recap, Bout was arrested in Thailand by U.S. undercover DEA agents posing as a terrorist organization from Columbia.

Here is an important observation that I want to acknowledge, according to a very well-written and informative article titled, Turf Wars in Washigton, which was published last September, Bout never before had any dealings in Latin America before the DEA sting operation where the agents posed as Columbian rebels.

Interestingly, prior to his bust, Bout had never been involved in Latin American gunrunning, concentrating instead on Africa and Eurasia” as reported in Turf Wars in Washington.


Viktor Bout behind bars in a Thai prison.

In the article, The Assassination of Viktor Anatoliyevich Bout, I already discussed quite extensively the DEA’s sting operation. I will however talk later in greater detail about the significance and relevance of FARC, which are directly linked to Viktor Bouts charges and allegations.

After the release of the Wikileaks cable it was clearly evident that the DEA had a new mandate and they had expanded far beyond drugs and drug trafficking. What is not clear is the scope of its operations that it is now involved in or the boundaries of its jurisdiction. The DEA and its new expansive outreach of intelligence operations and its border-less jurisdiction is starting to make it look much more like the CIA.

Thanks to the release of the U.S. Embassy cables, we catch an inside glimpse of their expansiveness, their operations as well as their jurisdictions or lack of. According to the Wikileaks cable reprinted in the New York Times, the “cables describe lengthy negotiations over the extradition to the United States of the two notorious arms dealers wanted by the DEA as it reached beyond pure counternarcotics cases: Monzer al-Kassar, a Syrian arrested in Spain, and Viktor Bout.”

The cable in the New York Times also states that, “Both men were charged with agreeing to illegal arms sales to informants posing as weapons buyers for Colombian rebels. Notably, neither man was charged with violating narcotics laws.”

According to an article in Public Intelligence, The body’s vast network of informants also had on its roll David Headley, an accused in the Mumbai attacks case, who worked as a double agent for the DEA.”


Former DEA agent and now a confessed terrorist.

The report in Public Intelligence also said, “Though the cables did not offer large disclosures, they provided an insight into the story of how an entrepreneurial agency operating in the shadows of the FBI has become something more than a drug agency.”


A Wikileaks cable dated from 13 August 2009 published in the Guardian on 1 December 2010 showed and proved that the Viktor Bout extradition was an extremely high value priority for the U.S. government. It also clearly showed how concerned the prosecutors had become about the previous defeat in the Thai court system. So concerned in fact that they urged President Obama to call Thai Prime Minister Abhisit specifically in regards to Viktor Bout. Here is a closer look at a few small excerpts of that Wikileaks cable that appeared in the Guardian.


Discussion of a POTUS[President Of The United States] telcon to PM Abhisit has been under way for some time; they have not spoken in the seven months both have been in office. We suggest that the call be accelerated and that it include a serious discussion of our concerns over the implications of the Bout verdict, as outlined above. We believe POTUS involvement on Bout would have significant effect here.

…the USG [United States government] had repeatedly underlined the importance of the case, all the way up to the Secretary of State and POTUS [President Of The United States ] levels.”

There are many more interesting examples in the Wikileaks cable but I will just point out several more for the purpose of context. The cable expressed concern by the U.S. that they disagreed with the judges ruling in the Thai court, “In our view, the judge was wrong on both counts.”

The cable also suggested that the Obama administration should contact the Columbian government for support, “We suggest Washington engage the Colombian government …”

The cable also states, “We also suggest exploring whether Colombia would be willing to ask Thailand for Bout’s extradition while he (hopefully) is still in detention during the appeals process.”

This stems from the allegation that Bout was trying to sell weapons to the Columbian rebels aka FARC which is deemed a terrorist organization by the U.S. but not by the United Nations.

Finally, despite the listing by the US and EU of the FARC as a terrorist organization, we understand that the FARC is not listed as such by the UN. A move to have the FARC listed formally by the UN would assist the effort to keep Bout in custody. JOHN”

Also the U.S. Embassy suggested the U.S. government contact Russia in case Bout is found not guilty in the Thai court. “Finally, we recommend consideration of laying down a marker in Moscow about Bout, looking forward to the possibility that Bout may end up back in Russia were the appeal of the Lower Court ruling might not succeed.”

Finally the last example of the cable that I will share, “At the same time, the Embassy [U.S.] recommends the State Department, Attorney General Holder, and the US Mission to the UN in New York engage the Thai Ambassador in Washington and the Thai PermRep in New York in parallel.”

The Wikileaks cable certainty pointed out an awful lot of lobbying by the U.S. Embassy to the governments of Columbia, Thailand and even Russia. As well as within the U.S. government itself all way up to President Obama. This U.S. Embassy cable clearly contradicts the allegations levied against Viktor Bout and highlights a need for a lobbying effort in the absence of any evidence.

Here is the link to Wikileaks cable that appeared in the Guardian: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/us-embassy-cables-documents/220583

Mind Games

Alla Bout already expressed her displeasure in the press about her husband Viktor being stripped butt-naked shortly before he was extradited and whisked away on a charted flight to America. In an article published Saturday by RIA Novosti, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov said that “they are putting Viktor Bout under intense psychological pressure.”

Ryabkov continued, “this should be ended and he [Bout] should be given a chance to defend himself and communicate, including with his relatives.” Ryabkov went on to tell journalists in Washington that “Bout is being held in isolation.” According to RIA Novosti Bout is allowed one 15-minute telephone call a month, is not allowed to send emails and is being denied a requested vegetarian diet.”

However, an indirect head game and possibly the most damaging thus far was the harassment by U.S. custom and FBI anti-terror agents towards his wife upon her arrival that more than likely, eventually got back to Viktor Bout. After Alla Bout left the airport she spoke to Russia Today, “They have clearly been waiting for us,” she said.

They turned our luggage upside down and took away all the personal things from my bag.” Alla Bout was not allowed to speak with the Russian consul,“They told me to switch off my cell phone and did not allow me to get in touch with the Russian consul until this interrogation was over,” explains Viktor Bout’s wife. Alla then added,One person introduced himself as a special anti-terror agent. He said he wanted to talk to me about the purpose of my visit.


U.S. military psyops air mobile training.

I can only imagine that the only thing worse than being locked in a tiny cell like a caged rat, is being locked in a tiny cell like a caged rat and having your family being harassed and being unable to do anything about it.

According to Alla Bout, “they also asked her questions such as whether or not she knew her husband was a terrorist.” Alla, claims they were “interrogated” for hours and treated like terrorists.

The Media’s Smear Campaign and Their Wild Imagination

In my piece about Viktor Bout that I wrote last September titled, The Assassination of Viktor Anatoliyevich Bout, which discusses who is behind the character assassination of Viktor Bout, I pointed out that Viktor Bout was not a billionaire as stated by the media but in actual fact that he was broke. Alla Bout in a press conference held in Bangkok on Monday 22 November 2010, stated that she is actually in debt.

Mrs. Bout detailed how the Bout family is actually in debt, having to support her daughter in Russia and herself in Thailand, paying for rent, food, transportation fees, visa fees, and Viktor’s care,” according to Russia Today.

Recently in the Bangkok Post, Alla Bout was quoted as saying, “the U.S. has no evidence against Viktor, otherwise it would have long ago been presented at the Thai court.”

Alla Bout tells The Voice of America on 22 November 2010 that her husband is “the victim of a smear campaign by what she calls ‘unscrupulous United Nations experts’, U.S. officials, and the media.”

Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov commented in an article that appeared in The Voice of Russia on 16 November 2010:

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov.

Despite the fact that Bout was not found guilty by a Thai court, he was, however, allowed to be extradited to the U.S. I see it as an example of unprecedented political pressure on Thailand’s government and judicial system. Russia will continue to provide Viktor Bout with all necessary support”, Mr. Lavrov said.

What the U.S. authorities are doing is both ethically and legally incorrect”, says Mr. Alexander Treshchev, a spokesman with the EU Chamber of Lawyers in the same Voice of Russia article.

Professor Rolf Goessner, a German law analyst, shares this view with the Voice of Russia:

In my opinion, this is legally unjustified. International practice should embrace Russia as well – we need to stick to international norms. That’s why I regard this as a violation of international law.”

On Monday, October 4 2010 in the Honorable Royal Thai court in Bangkok, I was eye to eye and Face to Face with Viktor Bout. In Face to Face with Viktor Bout I talk explicitly and in great detail about the the lack of evidence against him. The only thing that has changed since last October when I wrote that article, is that more laws against Viktor Bout were broken and he was illegally snatched and kidnapped out of the Thai court system while a case was still pending.

Alla Bout tells The Voice of America that “his extradition was illegal because there was still a case against him pending in court here [in Thailand].”

On Friday 21 January 2011, Viktor Bout prepared to attend a pre-trial hearing, his wife Alla told Russia Today that “the allegations are a fabrication to distract the public from its real problems. In fact, Alla Bout refers to her husband Viktor’s allegations as “wild imagination.”

Role Model vs. Case Study

The allegations against Bout are a defamation of character, as well as being scathing and slanderous. Even Douglas Farah, who co-authored a book about Bout said this — “It is important to note, as we do in the book, that much of what Viktor Bout does is, while reprehensible, not illegal.”

A report by Amnesty International published in the same year [as Lord of War, 2005] accused Mr Bout of being “the most prominent foreign businessman” involved in trafficking arms to UN-embargoed destinations from Bulgaria, Slovakia, Ukraine, Kyrgyzstan and other countries.” as reported by The Sunday Times of London on 6 March 2008. Interesting, no mention of Columbia and they refer to him as a businessman.

Viktor Bout was an opportunist. A hard working and ingenious entrepreneur. He was simply a transporter. Yes he transported everything from oil, coltan (a mineral used in mobile phone production), various other minerals, ostrich eggs, diamonds, troops and yes sometimes even ‘legal’ weapons. I am not saying that he is an angel or a role model but I am saying that what he did was not illegal and does not distract from his accomplishments as a businessman. Viktor was simply earning a living and providing for his family. He had mouths to feed.

Viktor and Alla Bout inside a Thai courtroom.


I met him and spoke to him face to face inside a courtroom in Bangkok as well as spent time talking and dining with his wife Alla. Viktor, Alla, Kurt Pelda of Deutsche Welle, Thilo Thielke of Der Spiegel, Dimitri Khalezov and I had quite a lengthy discussion for a court room. Luckily for us the judges left the room for quite a long time to deliberate thus enabling us to chat. Viktor from my observation is quite intelligent, well-read, polite and charismatic. I can easily imagine him outside of the court room in a party setting being the center of attention while people in the party gravitate towards him.

If Viktor Bout was properly examined in a truthful and unbiased fashion, I am sure a case study of his career would one day be talked about in text books at Harvard, Yale, The London School of Economics and Wharton. He was the epitome of capitalism. From nothing, Bout, grew a huge international air cargo business that eventually grew into an empire. That was his only crime, being too successful.

Once Bout grew a successful international air cargo empire, with a virtual monopoly in the African continent, then others became envious and thus was born the global jihad against him. I will not speculate as to how much Viktor Bout’s air cargo empire was once worth because I am not sure but perhaps in the billions. Bout built from nothing a extremely successful empire that was an entirely legal entity until he was put out of business by his previous customers, the United States government and the United Nations.

According to The Christian Science Monitor, Viktor Baranets, a military columnist for the Moscow daily Komsomolskaya Pravda, “The Russian reaction to the prosecution of Bout might have been different if the Americans had come to our side and spelled out the case against him,” says Mr. Baranets, who has interviewed Bout and says he appears to have many strong arguments in his own defense.”

He also said that the “US authorities never attempted to cooperate with their Russian counterparts to bring Bout to justice.”

“As it is, we have a lot of questions. Many people in Russia believe that Bout is being framed. Some think that Bout was removed because he’s a competitor of American arms interests, or otherwise crossed them. The case against him contains a lot of strong accusations, but the substance looks thin.” stated Mr. Baranets.

As reported by the Guardian 16 November 2010, “However, part of the Russian criticism of the American charges against Bout stems from the continued U.S. use of him to transport supplies in Iraq as well as contracting with NATO in Afghanistan and the United Nations in Sudan.”

Many air cargo companies left the African continent when it became too hot and dangerous and ripe with bloody civil wars that made it too risky to transport cargo. Bout stayed and gambled and it paid off huge.


Face book CEO Mark Zuckerberg in front of his company's logo.

If anything, Viktor Bout should be given recognition for his accomplishments as a businessman. But as Face book CEO Mark Zuckerberg encountered, you can not grow a business into a billion dollar company and not make enemies. It is not possible. Zuckerberg was sued by he best friend at the time that his company was growing exponentially.

Another example of a business success story besides that of Bout and Zuckerberg is Robert Johnson. Johnson started with $10,000 from a credit card, not cash but credit and years later eventually sold that media company, BET (Black Entertainment Television) to Viacom for over $1 billion dollars. If you are interested in this story you can read more in The Billion Dollar BET: Robert Johnson and the Inside Story of Black Entertainment Television written by Brett Pulley.

Marc Zuckerberg started Face book with O.P.M. (other peoples money), initially with practically no money of his own and last week the company was valued at $50 billion. Viktor Bout merely filled a gap in an area where there was huge demand and where the law was gray. Viktor Bout was able to operate freely for decades because of the lack of any internationally-binding rules therefore his air cargo business’ were legitimate as well as legal. He built a successful and colossal air cargo empire form scratch, isn’t capitalism and entrepreneurship what America is all about?


Logic and Reason

It is not intelligent to think that if Viktor Bout actually had billions or even millions of dollars, according to the slanderous lies continuously spun out by the media, that he would not spend it to salvage his freedom. Viktor has been stuck in solitary confinement in a tiny cell, in Thailand while several cameras were constantly watching him including one above the toilet, living like a caged rat. Now he is again isolated back in solitary confinement in a foreign country facing life imprisonment.

You do the math. If you were a billionaire would you have Sabrina Shroff represent you? No disrespect to Ms. Shroff but she is a U.S. government court appointed attorney. If it was me facing life imprisonment and I was a billionaire, I would resurrect Johnny Cochran from the grave and have him represent me, no matter what it cost. Actually, according to Daniel Estulin in a recent phone conversation with him, Mrs. Shroff may no longer be representing Viktor Bout. He told me that Alla had been meeting with several other attorneys.


Alla Bout and Dimitri Khalezov preparing press kits in Bangkok.

When in Bangkok last October, I saw Alla Bout, Dimitri Khalezov and several of their friends, running around like chickens being chased, photocopying, collating, organizing and stapling documents that supported her husbands case to then be handed out to the press. And paying for this copying and all other legal cost’s with their own money. If Alla Bout was wealthy, which she is not, she would not be be handling a large portion of her husbands legal defense personally. There would have been a huge team of lawyers alongside Lak to defend Viktor.

It is not intelligent. I’ll say it again, it is not intelligent for someone to be extradited for terrorism, accused of killing U.S. nationals and U.S. officers and then offered a deal. Bout was offered a plea bargain while the DEA agents applied psyops on him on the flight to America. They offered a deal not only to Bout but his whole immediate family. According to a Bangkok Post article in November approximately five days after Bout’s extradition, ”While on the flight to America, the American guards tried to apply psychological pressure on him, trying to convince him very hard to cooperate with them and to admit something he did not do and did not say,” Mrs Bout said.

It makes absolutely no sense and goes against human nature and common sense for any DEA agent or any U.S. government official to have any sympathy for him and his family if there was a shred of truth to the accusations. It is not intelligent or logical to think that agents of the U.S. government would offer Viktor Bout and his family a deal if they really believed or had any evidence of the allegations of terrorism and trying to kill Americans charged against Viktor Bout. If there was any real evidence or truth to his allegations, I believe that most law enforcement officials, government employees, military personnel and most American citizens including myself would be happy for him to spend the rest of his life in prison.

In fact, I doubt that Viktor Bout would be alive today if any of the allegations were true but assassinating him quietly does not fit the political agenda nor would it justify the astronomical waste of U.S. taxpayer dollars used for the propaganda, sting operations and legal fees used in the capture and extradition of Viktor Bout. The U.S. taxpayers tab for this political agenda against Bout has been running since the 1990’s and the meter is still ticking.


A Blackwater helicopter.

However, it is logical to understand why the DEA agents where applying such pressure to Bout to make a deal. The charges, are imaginary and fabricated. There is no evidence and never has been. Bout was cleared twice in Thai courts for lack of evidence.

Wayne Madsen and the Blame Game

Investigative journalist Wayne Madsen recently did a taped interview on Russia Today. Madsen raises some very interesting points and topics while reiterating many things that I have previously discussed. Madsen mentions how “the Bush administration probably left him [Bout] alone because he was doing business with that administration.”

Madsen also mentions the broader range of the DEA as well as having a new mandate. He states in the Russia Today interview, “The DEA is not only involved in drugs anymore but they have a new mandate. The DEA is now in the intelligence gathering business which is perhaps out of their league. According to Madsen, the new DEA is “operating far beyond it capabilities and its knowledge.”

Wayne Madsen also states that “Viktor Bout was entrapped in Thailand by the DEA.” Madsen goes on to say that “Bout was not really extradited he was renditioned.”


Investigative journalist Wayne Madsen.


The Russian Foreign Minister, Alla Bout and many others all agree that Thailand is ripe with corruption and it is in bed with the U.S. government including Wayne Madsen. He says that “Thailand is a military dictatorship where the PM is basically a stooge for the U.S. and that Thailand is not a democracy.”

When asked by the interviewer if he thought Bout would receive a fair trial in the U.S., Madsen replied,

I doubt he is going to get a fair trial here [U.S.]” He then added “If Bout made a movie it would be a blockbuster.”

Wayne Madsen and I diverge slightly on his conclusion on why Viktor Bout was ultimately captured and is now being detained by the U.S. government. Madsen alleges that “Bout was taken off the streets, because he thinks that he knows who is really behind the 9/11 attack.” Thus Madsen believes that the U.S. went after Bout to find out what he knows about 9/11 and its perpetrators.

I believe the claims of the U.S. prosecutors of charging Viktor Bout with terrorism and attempting to sell ballistic missiles, will ultimately be tied into Bout’s allegations thus linking him to 9/11. However, I feel strongly as well as Dimitri Khalezov that Viktor Bout knows absolutely nothing about nor has ever had any connection to 9/11. Dimitri is an expert on the 9/11 topic and is a former Russian nuclear intelligence officer.

If you are interested in 9/11 you should watch Dimitri’s video as well as read his book the 911thology. It is by far, the most provocative, prohibited and proven 9/11 video.


Dimitri Khalezov during an interview.

Whether or not Viktor Bout has any knowledge of 9/11 or not does not mean that the prosecutors will not attempt to connect him to the events that occurred on that catastrophic day. I will discuss this topic more in the following two sections.

The Auspicious Court Date

On Friday, 21 January 2011 Viktor Bout would finally have his day in court which was already postponed from January 10th. He and his family were eagerly awaiting the pending announcement of his trial date as Viktor had already spent over two and half years in Thai prisons. The judge then announces that his court date will be held on 12 September, 2011.

When I heard Bout’s court date announced, I shook my head. I immediately thought to myself that September 11, 2011, the ten year anniversary of 9/11, has to be a Sunday and that the next business day is Monday the 12th. I was correct. I was thinking that 12 September 2011 could not be a Saturday because then the trial could be held on the previous Friday if they had wanted it to be on the 11th.

In a RIA Novosti article that appeared several days ago, Alla Bout also made reference to that auspicious date. “The trial was set on this date to flaunt the results of U.S. efforts against terror and the costly anti-terrorism campaign pursued by the United States in the past decade. I support a fight against terror, but will not let it be carried out at the expense of my family,” Alla Bout told RIA Novosti in a video linkup from New York.


The World Trade Center on 9/11.

In a CNN report in November approximately a week after Bout’s extradition, Alla Bout claimed that “the United States had been describing her husband as an alleged “Merchant of Death” for years — and intensified their campaign after the September 11 terrorist attacks.”

“Reading between the lines of the media reports, you can see now a message that’s very clear: we have not got [Osama] bin Laden yet, but we have got Viktor Bout, and that’s the second best,” said Alla Bout.

Last October I wrote an article titled, Face to Face with Viktor Bout: Court Room Conversations. I stated in a slightly semi-flip manner the following statement.

Next the prosecutors will be blaming Viktor Bout for firing the Granit missile that struck the Pentagon on September 11, 2001 that was stolen from the Kursk submarine (which was sunk by a collision with the SSN 691 Memphis in August 2000) which in turn caused the U.S. government to panic and then to press the buttons to cause the underground nuclear detonation of World Trade Center 1, World Trade Center 2 and World Trade Center 7; thus blaming Bout for those deaths of Americans that died on that tragic day.”


A Russian Kursk submarine.

I then went on to say, “Sounds preposterous, outrageous and far-fetched? Ironically, the latter paragraph has much more truth than the former.”

The former paragraph in the referenced article was referring to the baseless and imaginary charges of terrorism and conspiring to kill Americans filed against Viktor Bout.

Alla Bout described on last Tuesday as a “political show” the U.S. authorities’ decision to begin a trial against her husband on September 12, a day after the 10th anniversary of 9/11.” via a RIA Novosti report.

The End Game

According to Daniel Estulin, I may have not been too far off base in my claims that Viktor Bout will ultimately be connected with 9/11 as I have just stated in the previous section. In fact, in one of Daniel’s recent Russia Today interviews, he mentions 9/11 specifically. I spoke to Daniel via phone last Tuesday to clarify a few points and ask him a few specific questions about Viktor, Alla and the case in regards to his interview titled, Daniel Estulin: Bout gets life sentence in unfair trial, but end game is Russia.


Daniel Estulin, author and investigative journalist.

Daniel Estulin is an award-winning investigative journalist and public speaker. One of the many books that Estulin has written is SHADOW MASTERS which deals with several topics but a large portion of the book is devoted solely to Viktor Bout. Unlike Douglas Farah, co-author of a book titled ‘Merchant of Death’, who admittedly never met or interviewed Bout, Estulin has met and interviewed Bout extensively. According to Estulin, Farah’s book is filled almost entirely with propaganda and lies and says that “the the book’s nickname [the Merchant of Death] for Bout is constantly parroted in the US media.” Estulin goes on to say that Farah has even lied under oath in his testimony in front of the U.S. congress in August of 2008.

Viktor Bout is charged with conspiracy to kill U.S. nationals and government officers, conspiracy to use an anti-aircraft missile and conspiracy to provide material support or resources to a designated foreign terrorist organization.

According to Daniel Estulin the U.S. public prosecutor’s office entered a court appeal on the 26 August 2009 that states “Bout conspired to provide guided ballistic missiles to FARC.” Estulin told me that the reference to ballistic missiles is extremely significant because it implies that by default they are nuclear capable. Estulin added “FARC=Bout=Ballistic missiles=Nuclear terrorism.”

I just recently found out through International extradition attorney Douglas McNabb that the U.S. federal prison does not have a parole system. Viktor Bout is facing 25 years to life if convicted of all of the alleged charges. This past January 13th Viktor celebrated yet another birthday in prison, now 44 years old, a 25 year sentence is not much different to a life sentence in my opinion.

Daniel Estulin is not optimistic at all about Viktor’s freedom and rights to a fair trial. Estulin says, “The U.S. has been after Bout since the 1990’s. It is absolutely ridiculous to think that he will get a fair trial in America. He will NOT

Viktor Bout picture taken in a Thai prison.

get a fair trial and will get a life sentence.”

Game Over

On 6 March 2008 Viktor Bout was arrested in Thailand by U.S. DEA agents and Thai police in a well orchestrated sting operation. The quote that splashed headlines world-wide was the phrase “The game is over.” DEA agent Louis Milione according to CBS was asked if Bout said anything, Milione replied, “‘The game is over,’ or something like that.” My guess is that what Bout said was closer to “something like that,” but not in English.

This strange, curious and eventful case of Viktor Bout has been anything but dull. It continues to develop new twists and turns and to throw us a few curve balls. It will be very interesting to see how it unfolds and what new developments will occur. I am intrigued and fascinated by the possibilities that lay ahead for Viktor Bout as well as his fate in this seemingly never ending story.

Contact Information:



Additional Articles about Viktor Bout written by me:

Face to Face with Viktor Bout: Court Room Conversations

The Curious Case of Viktor Bout: Bout’s extradition case has more curves, twists and turns than Penelope Cruz naked

The Assassination of Viktor Anatoliyevich Bout

Убийство Виктора Бута по найму on

Viktor Bout: ‘The Lord of War’ Quietly Awaits his Fate – The Silence is Deafening Part 2

Viktor Bout: `The Lord of War` Quietly Awaits his Fate – The Silence is Deafening Part I

Further Reading:

BY: Dimitri Khalezov

Bio-terrorism — anthrax attacks following September 11

Arms Trafficking, Stolen Missiles, Soviet Submarines, Nuclear Detonations and 9/11: Interview with Dimitri Khalezov in Bangkok (Exclusive)

The most provocative, prohibited and proven 9/11 book written:

911thologyby Dimitri Khalezov

Important information and download links:http://www.dimitri-khalezov-video.com

Download videos and other important files (direct):http://911-truth.net

BY: Daniel Estulin

SHADOW MASTERS by Daniel Estulin

BY: Brett Pulley


The Billion Dollar BET: Robert Johnson and the Inside Story of Black Entertainment Television

On Friday, 21 January 2011 Viktor Bout would finally have his day in court which was already postponed from January 10th. He and his family were eagerly awaiting the pending announcement of his trial date as Viktor had already spent over two and half years in Thai prisons. The judge then announces that his court date will be held on 12 September, 2011.

Arms Trafficking, Stolen Missiles, Soviet Submarines, Nuclear Detonations and 9/11: Exclusive Interview with Dimitri Khalezov in Bangkok

Read this brand new, fascinating, exciting, mind-blowing and provocative interview completed earlier today with former Soviet nuclear intelligence officer an author of 911thology, Dimitri Khalezov. Investigative journalist and author of SHADOW MASTERS, Daniel Estulin delivers an extraordinary and captivating exclusive interview with Dimitri Khalezov sent me a copy of the interview via e-mail and granted me permission and copyright to post on my blog. Therefore I am very excited to share this fascinating and riveting interview with my readers.


Dimitri Khalezov is a former Soviet commissioned officer of the “military unit 46179”, otherwise known as “the Special Control Service” of the 12th Chief Directorate of the Defense Ministry of the Soviet Union. He has agreed to this exclusive interview and it is our pleasure to be able to offer readers of www.danielestulin.com another quality first. Dimitri is a crucial piece of the puzzle in the case of Victor Bout. It is safe to say that had it not been for Dimitri´s dedication to helping Mr. Bout, his incorruptibility and brilliance, Victor, might very well have found himself today behind bars in some high-profile American prison. Dimitri is the first man to see Mr. Bout after his world famous arrest in Bangkok and he is the man who has given more headaches to the United States government than anyone else in the world. Furthermore, Dimitri Khalezov is the first person in the world to have uncovered the true reasons for the United States government’s dogged pursuit of Victor Bout. Mr. Bout´s arrest is directly linked to 9/11, and Mr. Khalezov, because of his unique vantage point as a former member of the Soviet “atomic” and later “nuclear” intelligence says that he knew about the in-built so-called “emergency nuclear demolitions scheme” of the Twin Towers as long back as early 1980´s, while serving in the Soviet Special Control Service.

How did you get involved in the case?

Both Victor Bout and I are Russian. We are both former Soviet military officers. Moreover, we actually come from the same village. I think, these are good enough reason to try and help him with his case, considering that Victor was arrested in Bangkok and I happened to have been living in Bangkok at the time of his arrest. Furthermore, I have extensive experience with the Thai legal system, especially when you consider that the United States government has tried to have me arrested and extradited to America too in connection with 9/11. It happened back in 2003. So, I have enough motivation to try to help Victor.

In March 2008, Victor Bout was Osama bin Laden´s equal as far as notoriety on the world´s stage. How did you manage to see Victor Bout on the very first day of his detention in Bangkok?

Under the Thai Criminal Procedure any person under arrest has his or her undeniable right to be visited by friends while under arrest. Victor Bout, despite being the so-called “Merchant of Death” and the so-called “Lord of War”, was not excluded from the provisions of the Thai Criminal Procedure Code. I simply came to the police station where he was detained and requested to visit my friend. They had to let me see him as much as it might have pained them. In fact, the police went out of their way to help. They seated both of us on a sofa in the corridor and let us chat nicely. Usually they only allow visitors to talk to detained persons through bars of a detention cage, but for Victor and me they made an exception to this rule.

Is there a link between your case, 9-11 and Victor Bout?

Apparently yes. I was wanted by the United States allegedly in connection with 9/11, and with the 2002 Bali bombing (which was a mini-nuke bombing), while Victor Bout is apparently wanted by the Americans in connection with 9/11 and in connection with the 2003 El-Nogal bombing. Incidentally, El-Nogal is known to have been a mini-nuke bombing – at least known to appropriate security officials. As you can see there are a lot of similarities.

Who are the main players: US and Bout’s camp?

It might appear that a certain alleged ‘Bout camp’ exists, it is a totally false impression. The so-called ‘Bout camp’ consists of Victor Bout, his wife, his brother, his mother, his daughter, me (Dimitri Khalezov), a couple of Victor’s personal friends from the Soviet Union, his Thai lawyer – Mr. Lak Nittiwatvicharn, his Russian lawyer, of course, Daniel Estulin, and, perhaps, a few journalists who came to know Victor and his family during their investigation of the case. If you can call this rag-tag army “Bout´s camp”, then yes, there are two main players – “Bout’s camp” and the US camp. Aside from the US government, however, there are quite a few other powerful players who have positioned themselves against Victor.

Who are these powerful players and why have we not heard anything about them?

One branch of the Russian Secret Service: FSB

First of all, the Russian Government (at least certain powerful individuals within the Russian Government), and the Russian secret service.

What? Are you serious? You have just accused the Russian government of working against Victor Bout when the entire world is convinced that had it not been for Putin and Medvedev, Victor Bout, most likely would have been extradited to the United States a long time ago!

You will not be able to hear anything about them, because they are not so stupid as to show off. They would rather show you something entirely opposite – that they are allegedly “helping” Victor Bout. But make no mistake – from the very beginning of this unprecedented set-up, the Russian side was heavily involved with the Americans in the entire operation in framing Victor and in luring him to Bangkok. It was conceived and conducted by both – the Russian and the American secret services working together. In addition to the Russians, other players were involved as well. Primarily, the Israeli secret services – the Mossad and Sayaret Matkal. They have keen interest in this case, too. It was demonstrated by the unprecedented Sayaret Matkal’s involvement in the case of one of the FARC leaders – Raul Reyes and “his” weapon-grade Uranium that was planted by “someone” around his camp in the Ecuadorian jungle. Don’t miss this point – Raul Reyes was murdered on March 1, 2008, while Victor Bout was scheduled to be lured to Bangkok on March 4, 2008, in direct connection with the FARC and Uranium affairs, while all legal paperwork that requested the Thais to arrest him has been submitted to the Thai side by the Americans in the last day of February – that is BEFORE the murder of Raul Reyes.

Raul Reyes

And, please, note that it was the Israeli Sayaret Matkal (a highly tailored organization that deals exclusively with nuclear weapons of enemies and with nothing else but that) involved in the actual murder of Reyes and in the “discovery” of “his” Uranium. Don’t miss to notice also that Victor Bout arrived in Bangkok not alone, but in a strange company of his alleged “friend” – a certain colonel from the Russian FSB, who was initially arrested with Victor and then strangely released and sent back to Moscow on the first available flight. To understand how improbable it is, try to imagine the following situation. Let´s say that a certain secret service (the French, for example) arranged to lure Osama bin Laden to Paris, promising the Saudi terrorist that he will meet in Paris with his Muslim brothers and in the meeting they will discuss how to demolish the Eiffel Tower with a stolen Soviet mini-nuke. But Osama bin Laden arrives to the meeting in Paris not alone, but accompanied by a certain colonel from the Taliban counter-intelligence service who decided to travel together with Osama just for the occasion – to have a chance to see the Louvre, and the Eiffel Tower (before it is nuked).

The French secret service arrests both – Osama bin Laden and the colonel from the Taliban. Except that the French realize that the one they want is Osama bin Laden, and not the colonel from the Taliban’s counter-intelligence who indeed came to Paris to see its attractions and who simply kept his friend Osama bin Laden company on the flight to France´s capital. So, the French police decide to release the colonel and send him back to Kabul on the next available flight, detaining only Osama bin Laden, because ONLY he was the target of their sting-operation. Does this version sound believable to you? Just as “believable” sounds the explanation why the Thai police and the U.S. DEA so quickly released Victor Bout’s casual companion – the FSB colonel – who strangely arrived with the infamous “Merchant of Death” and “Lord of War” on the same plane and in the same taxi and checked into the same hotel, but in reality did not want to help the latter to sell “portable anti-aircraft missiles” to the blood-thirsty narco-dealers from FARC – he only wanted to see Bangkok and to have a chance to try the famous Thai massage.

Of course, this FSB colonel arrived to Bangkok by “mistake”, so this “mistake” was promptly corrected by the honorable and honest Thai police who quickly realized that the friend of the “Merchant of Death” was innocent and sent him back home immediately. Do you believe this nonsense? I don´t. At least four countries were heavily involved in Victor Bout´s frame up: Russia, United States, Israel and Thailand. There is plausible evidence that other nations were involved in this disgusting frame-up, but involved to a lesser extent than the abovementioned four. It appears that the Danes, the Dutch and the Romanians were involved too; at least, it appears so from the legal paperwork available in Victor’s case-file at the Thai Criminal Court.

The entire world has the impression that the Russian government and Russian Embassy in Thailand have gone above and beyond the call of duty to help Mr. Bout? In fact, the United States government has bitterly complained publicly about the apparent behind-the-scenes pressure Putin and Company are allegedly applying on the Thais to release Mr. Bout.

Unfortunately, this is one of the biggest mistakes to think that the Russian Government is allegedly involved in Victor Bout’s extradition case in the Thai court on the side of Victor. Indeed, the “official line” in many hysterical publications in the Western and even in the Russian press imply that the Russian officialdom is allegedly “trying hard to help Victor” as Victor could, allegedly, implicate “certain Russian politicians” in some alleged “wrongdoings”.

This impression is somehow supported by the fact that Russian Embassy officials regularly attended Thai court during Victor’s extradition case hearings, and also as a result of a number of statements coming from the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs. But this leaves one with a false impression. Russian Embassy officials visiting Victor Bout and attending court hearings are nothing but a regular consular assistance to a Russian citizen; be it to a citizen named Victor Bout or an unknown Sergei Ivanov.

Putin in full Navy uniform

That said, I can assure you that even though the Russian Consul attended every court hearing, the Thai judges were not “pressured” by the Russian delegation. It is normal for consuls to attend hearings of foreign defendants and the judges are used to it. So by no means the fact that the Russian Consul has diligently performed his duties could be considered as a kind of an “extrajudicial assistance” to the Defendant Victor Bout in the courtroom.

When it comes to the apparent statements of unflagging support made by the Russian Foreign Ministry they should not mislead you either into believing that the Russian officials are allegedly “helping Victor Bout”. They were not and are not helping him at all, but are rather doing their best to harm his position in the Thai court. It sounds strange to a lay Westerner, but you have to understand some peculiarities when it comes to the Russians. First of all, besides Putin, Medvedev and Co., there are other political powers in Russia – so-called “patriots” led by Vladimir Zhirinovsky, for example, or “communists”, just to mention a few. Some of the “old Russians” sincerely believe that the United States government must not be allowed to arrest a Russian citizen abroad, especially in a third country. Because if allowed to do so with impunity, it will set a dangerous precedent. Today they dare to frame and arrest an alleged “Merchant of Death” who knows no government secrets. But tomorrow, they might arrest a real colonel from the Russian Strategic Missile Forces who decided to spend his holidays in Thailand. The United States government can accuse this colonel of “planning to annihilate the United States as an entity with a massive thermo-nuclear strike” and to demand his extradition to America. What´s more, such a hypothetical accusation would in fact be correct – because such a colonel could indeed plan to annihilate the US due to his service duties.

Please understand, a great majority of Russian citizens as well as Russian Armed Forces, are extremely unhappy that the United States can arrogantly claim their alleged jurisdiction over territories that are not part of the United States and they are especially annoyed when such bullying directly affects Russian citizens. Medvedev, Putin and Company are aware of this and they have to take it into account when making their public statements.

Medvedev and Putin

Hence the public pledges of support from the Russian Foreign Ministry which sound like they really care about Victor Bout and his case in Thailand. But nobody should be fooled by these tearful pledges of support. They are nothing but a publicity stunt. In reality, they are no more harmful to the Americans and their cause than barking of stray dogs around the Criminal Court in Bangkok. All these actions of the Russian Foreign Ministry are merely intended to appease Russian population by creating an impression that the Russian Government allegedly “works for Russia” and still “constitutes a challenge to the US hegemony in the world”. However, neither of these is true in reality. Moreover, if the Russian Government did nothing at all to help Victor Bout fight his extradition case in the Thai courts, he would have had a much better chance at winning his case.

Does the United States want Victor Bout for being an arms merchant as he is portrayed by the UN and US journalist Douglas Farah or is there more to his case?

In reality, Victor Bout is not wanted for being an alleged “arms merchant” as he is portrayed and as he is perceived by the people who put more stock into a newspaper article than they do into facts. If Victor was really wanted for what you suggested, then the Americans would not wait until March 2008 to arrest him – they would have initiated criminal proceedings against Victor Bout back in the ‘90s, or, at the latest, at the very beginning of the new millennium. The problem is, Victor is NOT wanted for being the “arms merchant”, at least in the sense he is portrayed in the infamous movie or described in the irresponsible UN report by a former United Nations weapons inspector, Johan Peleman. Victor is wanted for something totally different, but, perhaps, we will discuss that further in more detail.

Johan Peleman

How strong of a case does the United States government have?

From the judicial point of view, US government’s case is very weak and Victor could easily have won it. Can you imagine that the accusers (US government) failed to bring to the Thai court even a single “portable anti-aircraft missile” that Victor was alleged to have been illegally selling to “the highest bidder”? But the main problem was that the Russian Government and the Russian secret service did their best to harm Victor’s position in the Thai court, to force him to defend himself in the wrong way from the judicial point of view, to make false promises that would dull his vigilance, and, moreover, to deprive Victor of funds, so that he would have simply no money to conduct his defense in the Thai court in an effective manner. If the Russian Government were indeed concerned about Victor’s defense as believed by most people, then it would have at the very least subsidize his legal expenses. It would be normal to expect for the Russian Government to at least provide the best legal experts from the Russian side free of charge and contribute a couple of millions US dollars to cover the legal expenses on the Thai side. At least, it is logical to expect it. What is the two million US dollars for the government of a country with over 150 millions populations that sells gas and oil and brandishes nuclear weapons capable of destroying the Earth a hundred times over? Such petty cash is a small price to pay for Mother Russia to defend its famous citizen in such a notorious case, isn’t it?

President Obama and Russian President Medvedev this past June at Obama's favorite 'Burger Joint'

But in reality not only the Russian Government did not pay anything either openly or covertly (in disguise through a “private donation”) to Victor Bout and his family; the Russian secret service did their best to force Victor’s brother and Victor’s wife into absolutely unnecessary expenses that drove them into total bankruptcy. Instead of helping them financially, the Russian Government indeed sucked out their last savings. If you also add that it was the Russian officials who advised Victor to conduct his defense in the Thai court in the most wrongful manner and if you add that one of Victor’s lawyer – a proven shill for the American DEA – was also recommended by the Russian officials, you will understand the travesty and injustice and treason involved. Let me say it again, the Russian Government, from the very beginning was secretly, but very efficiently working with the Americans to get Victor Bout to the United States to stand trial, and at the same time, to create an impression that Russia is still “great” and could still “defend its citizens”.

Let´s go over the basic facts of the case. First of all, the Russian secret service managed to convince Victor and his wife Alla, not to conduct the defense in the Thai court by proving the fact that there were no actual portable anti-aircraft missiles available to be sold to the FARC. Solely based on this evidence alone, the case should have been dismissed. The Russian officials proposed, instead, to conduct the defense by proving to the Thai court that the case was allegedly “political”, because the FARC is a political organization, the Communist party. This was a suicidal method of defense if looking at the case through the eyes of a professional lawyer. By proving that the case was “political” Victor automatically proved that he agreed with the existence of the actual “case”, that is missiles and such. This case could have been easily won by proving that there were “no case at all” and as such a non-existent “case” can not be “political” because there was nothing to be “political”.

Russia's Foreign Ministry has thrown a lifeline to Viktor Bout

Instead, Victor and his wife agreed with the proposal of the Russian officials and limited the defense in the Thai court by claiming that the case of dealing with the FARC was “political” without challenging the actual “case” whatsoever. The most important point of the entire case – that there was not even a single alleged “portable anti-aircraft missile” captured – was not voiced in the court-room. And no questions have been asked by Victor’s lawyer from the witnesses of the prosecution as to WHY the arresters failed to go after the alleged “missiles” in order to seize them and to deprive the so-called “Merchant of Death” of his deadly arsenal. Therefore, from the way Victor´s lawyer conducted the actual defense, it appeared to the judges that Victor was indeed selling the missiles, but the matter to consider was only if the FARC was a terrorist organization (as claimed by the Americans) or a political one (as claimed by Victor). As you may expect, the court eventually disagreed with such an interpretation and ruled that the case was NOT political, while Victor and his then lawyer (who was a shill for the Americans) did absolutely nothing to prove to the court that there were no case, no missiles, and no FARC – instead of proving that so-called “FARC” was represented by the US citizens while the “missiles” was merely a product of their sick imagination and existed only in their bogus paperwork, Victor and his then lawyer managed to prove by default that the actual accusations of the Americans had some grounds.

F.A.R.C. Rebels

Secondly, the Russian secret service promised Victor and his wife that if Victor conducted his defense in the Thai court in the abovementioned manner (by proving that the case was “political” without challenging the actual claims and the total absence of any evidence of the Americans) then the Russian Government would guarantee that Victor would win the case and the guarantee allegedly comes from the “close personal relations” between Putin. As you may expect this promise and this “guarantee” was just a cheap ploy invented by the Russian secret service in order to blunt his vigilance and to ensure that Victor would lose his case in the Thai court despite total absence of the alleged missiles and despite an absolute presence of abundant evidence that the entire “case” was merely a frame-up by the American DEA.

Furthermore, Victor’s wife, at my insistence made a very efficient complaint against her husband’s illegal detention (because the actual detention of Victor was indeed illegal due to technicalities and during the entire extradition hearings in the Thai court Victor must have been freed, and not behind bars). Submission of such a complaint by Victor’s wife caught all Victor’s enemies – the Thais, the Russians and the Americans – virtually with their pants down. The problem was that the detention of Victor was indeed technically illegal and he must have been released immediately – the technicalities of the illegality of the detention were obvious, if not to say self-evident, and were presented in the written complaint by Alla Bout in such a clear manner that they could not have been challenged even by the best lawyers in the world. The only way left to the judges was to consider the case and to rule to release Victor Bout from unlawful custody and to continue the extradition hearings with him released from prison. Apparently, it was not an option for the Russians, Americans and Thais who worked too hard to get Victor arrested, thrown behind bars, and deprived of any income. But what could they do in this situation? Unfortunately, they found a way out: the “trusted guys” from the Russian secret service approached Victor’s wife and convinced her to voluntarily withdraw her complaint against her husband´s illegal detention (claiming that it puts the Thai court in a difficult position and the court does not like this at all – which was indeed true) in exchange for the deal: once the complaint is withdrawn, the “grateful” Thai court would immediately rule to release Victor on bail – as a kind of a “settlement” that allows everyone “to save face”.

Victor and his wife again put their faith in the Russian government and agreed to withdraw the complaint. Except that the “grateful” Thai court never released Victor on bail as promised. This is just another example of how the Russian officials actually “helped” Victor Bout. The list of their “help” is very long, but I don’t want to make it too long and too boring. I would mention that on the recommendation of the Russian secret service, Victor’s brother has paid U.S. $120,000 for Victor’s bail, but the money was stolen, the bail has never been granted and the money was never returned. Again, on the recommendation of the Russian secret service, Victor’s brother paid $250,000 dollars allegedly for an “out of court settlement” whereas Victor would be released before conclusion of the case. According to the promise of the Russian officials, if the 250 thousand USD were paid, Victor Bout will be freed by May 1, 2008. The money was paid as demanded, but nothing happened in the Thai court – the case just continued and nobody bothered to return the money or take responsibility for the false promise.

As a result of this despicable behavior on the part of the Russian officials, “Victor Bout’s camp” as you call it, ran out of money to such an extent that when it became necessary to translate several important court documents from Thai to English in order to understand what the Thai witnesses said in court, Victor could not afford to pay the 2,000 USD for the translation and till today, some of the important papers from the case-file remain only in Thai language. I hope this is more than enough to establish how the Russian Government is actually “helping” Victor Bout to lose his extradition case in the Thai court.

Then, why is the Russian government working against Victor Bout?

Because of the Russian, to be more exact the Soviet-made missile that hit the Pentagon on 9/11.

Hole in Pentagon wall on 9/11

What? I think you better explain that and, please go slowly.

The Americans, understandably, demand from the Russians to find a fall guy or a patsy (or a group of fall guys) who is/are responsible for the missile that was found in the middle of the Pentagon. Considering that the missile was actually nuclear-tipped (with a half-megaton thermo-nuclear warhead that is more than 25 times the size of the Hiroshima bomb) you can imagine that the Americans are quite insistent with their demands to the Russians to find, at last, the culprit and to surrender him to the US Justice.

It is indeed serious. But when it comes to the Russians, they can not admit the truth – that the “Granit” missile with its thermo-nuclear warhead was stolen from the sunken “Kursk” submarine, because Putin back in 2000 solemnly declared to the world that there were no nuclear weapons on board of the sunken submarine.

What is a “Granit”?

The P-700 “Granit” missile (also known by its NATO classification as “Shipwreck” or “SS-N-19” – where “N” apparently stands for “Navy”) is the most advanced Soviet-era Navy missile. It is intended to be fired from submarines in submerged position and is primarily intended to destroy the US aircraft-carrier battle-groups. This is a highly sophisticated and highly “intelligent” missile. The “Granit” missiles could be used to strike battle-groups and other ship orders while fired in swarms of 12 missiles in one salvo, but could be as well used in single shots – fired against single naval targets, as well as against stationary ground targets (as was demonstrated in the case of the Pentagon strike on 9/11). Each “Granit” missile weighs about 7 tons, has length of about 10 meters, could fly up to 625 km at the supersonic speed at 2.5 Mach. Each missile is typically equipped with a standard “Navy-type” 500 kiloton thermo-nuclear warhead; conventional warheads for this missile even though exist in theory, are never used in reality – so that all without any exception “Granit” missiles in service are nuclear-tipped.

Granit missiles

This missile deems to be totally indestructible, because NATO lacks any means to shot down this missile even if they detect it in advance. In fact, it was demonstrated in the case of the Pentagon attack on 9/11 – NORAD managed to detect the upcoming “Granit” missile at least 6 minutes before it struck the Pentagon. NORAD’s operational officers managed to ring the atomic alert, scramble the so-called “Doomsday plane” in response, but were not able to prevent the actual strike – the missile managed to successfully approach Washington DC and hit the wall of the Pentagon despite being detected by NORAD 6 minutes in advance. Make you own conclusions – as to the danger of this weapon. I would also like to note, that according to the Soviet and Russian strategic plans, the submarines armed with the “Granite” missiles could be used as a “back-up” option for the retaliatory nuclear strike against the United States (while the primary role in such a strike belongs to strategic intercontinental- and submarine-launched ballistic missiles, of course).

For the reason of possible usage in the retaliatory strike the “Granit” missiles are also designed to produce airbursts above the US cities – so they are equipped with special non-contact detonators for such reason, in addition to the usual contact detonators. I should mention also that the “Granit” missile has a very advanced inertial guidance system that also has a list of pre-loaded most important NATO targets. While flying above the ocean the “Granit” missile will scan and reconnoiter the operational theater and try to distinguish ship orders and especially aircraft-carrier battle-groups and to select the most important targets in the ship orders and to strike them in automated manner. If flying above the territory the missile will reconnoiter it too and will try to detect the most important stationary targets by comparing their coordinates with those pre-loaded in its warhead. Once encounter such targets the missile’s on-board computer will immediately select the most important target by the order of priority and the missile will strike it. So, once the missile was fired towards Washington D.C. it compared the two most important targets – the White House and the Pentagon and “preferred” to strike the latter one as being in its “opinion” the more important target. Perhaps I should mention that this is the most heavily armored missile in the world – it is made from very thick steel and in fact it could be compared with a flying tank or with a giant bullet. Due to its tremendous speed, weight and strength of its body this missile managed to penetrate six capital walls of the Pentagon building when it struck it on 9/11.

Pentagon walls

Ok, please continue.

You have to understand that now Putin can not afford to take his noble presidential words back and to admit that he was outright lying to the world community and that all nuclear missiles from the “Kursk” were indeed stolen. Some other solution is badly needed to meet the US demands for the “culprit” behind the Pentagon attack. And this “solution” was eventually found. The problem is that all “Granit” missiles, despite being made in the Soviet days, could only belong to Russia and to no other former Soviet republic.

Can you prove this?

Absolutely. The ‘Granit” is the Navy missile; it is not used by anyone except the Navy. In the Soviet Union there were four Navy fleets – the Arctic Fleet, the Pacific Fleet, the Baltic Fleet, and the Black See Fleet. Out of the four Russia inherited in its entirety the three fleets – the Arctic, the Baltic, and the Pacific ones. Only the Black See Fleet has been divided between Russia and Ukraine. However, the “Granit” missiles were in service only on the Pacific Fleet and on the Arctic Fleet; so such missiles could not have ended up in the hands of Ukrainians, even theoretically. All the “Granits” must have been inherited by Russia alone. However, to shift blame away from Russia for the Pentagon strike, the Russian officials had no chance than to blame that some “Granit” missiles were allegedly a part of the Black See Fleet and for sometime they were allegedly in the temporary possession of the Ukrainians during the turmoil caused by the Soviet Union collapse and by the consecutive dividing of its property (nuclear weapons and the Black See Fleet inclusive). For this reason the Russian secret service concocted a bogus back-dated paper-work which “revealed” that one of the heavy cruisers of the Black See Fleet was allegedly scheduled to be re-armed with the “Granit” missiles and for that reason in the last years of the Soviet rule several “Granit” missiles were allegedly transferred to the Black See Fleet and were kept there and eventually they allegedly ended up with the Ukrainians after the break up of the Soviet Union. And, from these Ukrainians these “Granit” missiles were allegedly “stolen” and thus ended up with the terrorists (who eventually fired one of such missiles into the Pentagon on 9/11). This version is ridiculous because even if you imagine that several “Granit” missiles were indeed kept in Ukraine, intended for the re-armament of that heavy-cruiser, as claimed, these missiles would never be kept in storage with their nuclear warheads attached. In accordance with the rules, in the Soviet Union, missiles were kept in one place, while the nuclear warheads were kept in another location, moreover, under control of a different department of the military. Only lay people who know nothing about the Soviet Armed Forces and their rules could believe such a version that it was allegedly possible for the “reckless Ukrainians” to lose the missiles and the nuclear warheads at the same time. The missiles with the attached nuclear warheads could only be stolen from one place – from a submarine in service. However, it seems that some responsible security officials believe (or “pretend to believe”) this ridiculous version with the “Ukrainian trail” which seems to successfully exonerate the Russians.

Kursk Submarine

In this case the Russians are not guilty at all. Some “bad guys” who stole the missiles from Ukraine (and not from Russia) are allegedly guilty. Now they need the actual “bad guys”. Who, do you think, fits the bill? You guessed it, the infamous “Merchant of Death” and the “Lord of War”, thanks to the fact that his personality has been demonized long ago and everyone would easily believe that it was indeed Victor Bout who sells not only weapons, but NUCLEAR and even THERMONUCLEAR weapons to the highest bidder. That is exactly why the Russians and the Americans got into this seemingly strange agreement – to frame Victor Bout. It is not so strange in reality, if you try to analyze the actual circumstances – because both parties badly need to close the Pentagon case and they simply can not find any one better than Victor Bout for the role of the scapegoat who could sell such a missile to the terrorists. There is simply no one else in the world who could fit this role.

Let´s move to Bout´s alleged partner in the FARC deal, Andrew Smulian, who was arrested along with Victor. What happened to him?

The so-called “co-conspirator Smulian” was Bout´s former friend and a former business-partner. But in this particular case, Smulian was a “co-conspirator” of the DEA agent-provocateurs who framed Victor, rather than a Victor Bout “co-conspirator”. Unlikely you can be a “co-conspirator” to the one who is innocent. This is a clarification of terminology usage, if you don’t mind me being pedantic with such a correction. Andrew Smulian was the one who visited Victor in Moscow several times and presented him with business offers – particularly, he promised to find good customers for the last plane in Victor´s possession, still parked in UAE and which Victor dreams to get rid of in exchange for badly needed cash. As an aside, keep in mind that Victor was totally broke even before his arrest in Bangkok and to sell his last aircraft was a big deal for him.

Eventually Smulian lured Victor to Bangkok – to finally negotiate with the prospective buyers. During the negotiations, according to the US government documents presented in his case, Smulian introduced Victor to several people who allegedly looked Latin American and who allegedly spoke Spanish. These people were alleged to be from a Colombian revolutionary organization named FARC – which is basically a Marxist guerilla movement fighting the capitalist government of Colombia for decades. The deal to sell the plane was held in the hotel business-center. A few minutes after the meeting began, the Thai police and the American DEA agents from the US local Embassy barged in and arrested everyone – Victor Bout, his “friend” from Moscow (who was found to be an FSB colonel), and Andrew Smulian. Out of the three only Victor was naturally arrested and detained. Victor’s FSB colonel friend was immediately released, put on the first available flight and appeared in Moscow the next morning.

Andrew Smulian allegedly escaped (i.e. escaped from the custody of the Thai police) and disappeared. Keep in mind, he allegedly escaped from a locked down hotel guarded by over 150 Thai commandos. Then, without anyone noticing his disappearance, he alleged flagged a taxi to the airport, with his hands handcuffed behind his back. Once at the airport, he allegedly bought a ticket with no money and no passport to the United States, the only country in the world that if arrested, he would be looking at 30 years to life in prison. This is the American version of the events. Mr. Andrew Smulian suddenly “appeared” in America and was arrested in New York for being an alleged “co-conspirator” of Victor Bout. There is confirmed information that Andrew Smulian has been turned to be a prosecution witness who would testify against his former friend. Smulian is not in jail in America – he is in a “protective custody”.

What is your opinion of Bout’s two lawyers: Lak and Chamroen?

Lak has been my lawyer for many years and naturally, I know him very well. I am the one who recommended him to Victor for his case in the first place. Lak was introduced to Victor on March 7, 2008 when Victor was first brought to the police station, i.e. before he was first brought to the court. When he was brought to the court Lak was there and the first defense statements – both spoken and written – were made by Lak. Lak was also the one who managed to get back Victor’s passport and all his personal belongings – mobile phones and Victor´s personal computer, even though the Americans demanded these items to be transferred to the United States. Lak managed to make a good deal with the local police to get all of these invaluable items back almost immediately to the United States government’s chagrin and disbelief. Later Lak was also working hard on Victor’s further defense in the criminal case and also on the extradition case, as well as on Victor’s own complaint for illegal detention. However, thanks to clandestine efforts of the Russian secret service, Lak was dismissed from the case and replaced with a new lawyer – Chamroen.

Viktor Bout wearing a bullet-proof vest amid concerns for his safety.

Chamroen was a shill for the American DEA and was introduced to Victor through a long chain of people who worked for the DEA as unofficial agents. But make no mistake – Chamroen, being a 100% proven shill for the Americans, was introduced by none other than the Russian secret service officials who were well aware of what they were doing: the Russians who introduced Chamroen to Victor KNEW FOR SURE that he was the American shill and, DESPITE this KNOWLEDGE, they still introduced him to Victor and highly recommended to use his services. Chamroen was the one who resisted and blocked all positive attempts to defend Victor and who conducted Victor’s defense in the extradition case in the most wrongful manner. He managed to make Victor to technically lose a 100% winnable case. In addition, Chamroen did his best to prevent what you called above “Bout’s camp” from submitting to the Thai court documents that might clarify the ridiculousness of the US charges and to serve as a real defense for Victor.

As you might sincerely expect, Chamroen was not cheap either – he cost Victor well over 100 thousand US dollars which is an absolutely fabulous amount of money by Thai standards. During the time when lawyer’s work was important – i.e. during the time the court of first instance was hearing witnesses and accepting documents – the case was under control of Chamroen. I was able to re-introduce Lak back to the case by a strange trick: he was no longer a lawyer of Victor, but a lawyer of Victor’s wife Alla, who submitted to the court an additional complaint against the illegal detention of her husband that was joined with the main extradition case.

In this capacity, Lak managed to get back to the case at the last moment; however, it was too late by then – the case was effectively lost by Chamroen, who intentionally failed to call right witnesses for the defense and who sabotaged cross-questioning of the witnesses of the prosecution. Despite being only Alla’s lawyer and not Victor’s, Lak, nonetheless, managed to somehow turn this case into something more favorable in the very last moment: instead of making Alla only a witness in the illegal detention’s case, he managed to make her the most important witness in the extradition case, despite all efforts of Chamroen to the contrary.

Alla’s testimony was probably the most powerful evidence ever added to the extradition case, thanks to Lak. Furthermore, Lak managed to object to the latest set of new “evidence” that the Americans attempted to submit to the judge at the last moment, when the hearing of the case was almost over. The Americans actually submitted the last set of new “evidence” under the silent approval of Chamroen, but Lak managed to stand up and loudly voice his objections (despite actually being a lawyer in a different case – i.e. technically having no right to do so) and thus the most dangerous addition to the case by the Americans was not accepted by the Thai court. So, you can make you own conclusions what is Lak and what is Chamroen. And eventually when Victor lost the case and was about to be extradited to America, Chamroen simply disappeared and it was Lak who managed to prevent Victor from being immediately extradited to the United States.

Just to clarify, did the jet actually arrive to Bangkok or did it turn back shortly after taking off from the United States?

The actual jet with the armed US court marshals arrived, but, thanks to Lak, went back empty.

A US jet waits at the Don Mueang air force base to fly Vikor Bout to America.

What you are saying is absolutely shocking. Not as much for the treason of both the Russian government and Victor´s lawyer, but for the collective stupidity of people involved in the case. Why on Earth didn´t you say something and how is it possible that Victor and his wife didn’t realize what was being done to them? I am sorry, but this sounds utterly implausible.

For me it also sounds implausible and I could only wonder how could it happen that way. But, taking into consideration purely psychological aspects of the problem and also the fact that Victor and his wife are not seasoned criminals, but merely innocent people, it could be explained. The problem is that Victor does not know that he is the one who allegedly “sold” the missile that hit the Pentagon to the “terrorists”. It seems that only now, when he lost the case in the Court of Appeal (as I told him would long time ago), he began to slowly realize what really happened with him and who stood behind the entire affair with this frame-up. But before, he was confident that he was winning the case because his vigilance was effectively lulled by the false promises and by the irresponsible assurances of the Russian officials, which Victor, nonetheless, took seriously. Just imagine yourself in his shoes. You are behind bars and you are being constantly assured by officials from your country that everything is “OK” and everything is “under control”, moreover, you wife also constantly conveys you similar messages from the Russian officials in Moscow who promise the same things (don’t forget that while in Moscow Alla Bout was always invited by high-ranking government- and secret service officials and the mere fact that such “big guys” condescended to talk to her and, moreover, to assure her that everything was allegedly “under control” created the desired effect). Just imagine yourself in such a situation: would you doubt when the secret service officials and the government officials promise you all help possible and they promise it on behalf of the president of the state and all of it is being accompanied by corresponding public statements of the Foreign Ministry. Wouldn’t such a performance blunt your vigilance too?

Alla Bout and Dimitri Khalezov organizing press kits with documents relating to Viktor Bout right before they were handed out to the media.

Victor and his wife had simply no reason to suspect the Russian officials in any wrongdoing in those days. You must be a cynic to be able to suspect the Russian officials in this situation, but Victor is simply too nice and too innocent for this. Furthermore, the Russians appointed to harm Victor’s position in the Thai court were professionals from the secret service and they know their job very well. They know how to make their lies sound plausible and convincing. It is difficult to deal with this type of the professionals when you yourself are simply an innocent person who has no criminal background, no previous convictions, not even encounters with the legal system prior to this, and no experience with the inner workings of the secret service. When you are an innocent person you simply can´t realize how dirty the actual world of the secret service is. Add here that neither Victor, nor his wife are lawyers and therefore the ridiculous method of defense that the Russian officials enforced on them might look quite “reasonable” for them and they failed to notice the dirty game behind it.

You know more about this case than anyone else. USG knows how dangerous you are. So does the Russian government. Have these governments tried to buy your silence or threaten you?

Yes, they have. The Americans on several occasions tried to either threaten me with the prospect of being arrested and charged with something or with some offers of cash. At first, they promised me an undisclosed amount of money if I would help them to get Victor to America by secretly harming his case in the court – in the same manner Chamroen did. When I refused, they said that they could still pay me for doing nothing, as long as I withdrew from this case, stopped visiting Victor in prison, stopped attending the court hearings and giving Victor and his wife advise. I refused that as well.

But when it comes to the Russian Government, they did not dare to offer me any money or to try to threaten me, because it would be just too dangerous for their own story. Don’t forget that while the Americans were open enemies of Victor, the Russians were openly “Victor’s friends”, so while the Americans could afford to offer money or to try to threaten someone who helps Victor and it would look natural, the Russians could not afford doing so, because otherwise they would betray themselves.

The Russians have never showed their dissatisfaction with my activities openly, they rather tried to harm my reputation by spreading vicious rumors about my alleged “cooperating with the Americans” and “Dimitri can not be trusted” and so on. In fact, these efforts yielded some result in the initial stage of the case – at one point I noticed that Victor’s wife suddenly stopped trusting me, and also as I have said that the Russians managed to get Lak dismissed and replaced with a new lawyer based on the same thing.

Alla Bout, family friend and de-facto lawyer Dimitri Khalezov and lawyer Lak Nittiwattanawichan.

How valuable is Victor Bout to the United States?

If you mean that Victor Bout is allegedly “valuable” to America as an alleged “Merchant of Death” and a “Lord of War” you are dead wrong. Many people, who believe Western propaganda, think that Victor Bout is allegedly wanted in America for his involvement with illegal weapons trade as alleged by the Hollywood film, the book, and by hysterical Western publications. It is not true at all. You have to understand that Victor has never sold any weapons, whether legally or illegally, in Africa, in Asia or anywhere else. In his entire life he has never sold even a single Makarov pistol or a single AK-47, not to mention large quantities of Soviet-made or any other weapons. Yes, on several instances airlines controlled by Victor Bout and by his brother Sergei Bout indeed transported weapons, munitions, and even armed troops, but the problem is that these were NOT THEIR weapons, these were weapons of THEIR CUSTOMERS. Moreover, all of such customers were LEGAL CUSTOMERS. Wherever Victor’s or Serguei’s airlines transported weapons or armed troops it was ALWAYS governmental troops and the weapons always belong to the governments! Not once, did Victor Bout´s or his brother Serguei´s aircraft transported weapons of any illegal customers!

But people seem not to realize this obvious fact. Victor Bout can´t be turned into “an illegal weapons trader” by the hysterical Western media. Only the court verdict could do this. But not once during all these years has Victor Bout receive a summons to any court of law whereby someone sued him for being an illegal weapons dealer. There was not even a single attempt by any government, or by any public prosecutor, or by UN, or by any other organization, or by even a private individual to sue Victor Bout for his being an alleged “Merchant of Death”.

Why not, you ask? The answer is very simple: because no solid evidence exists that could be admissible in a court of law. The image of Victor Bout being an alleged “Merchant of Death” is based exclusively on the Hollywood movie, on Douglas Farah’s book, and on the bogus “UN report” concocted by a certain unscrupulous inspector, Johan Peleman. A number of Mr. Peleman´s former associates are willing to come forward and testify in the court of law that in every UN report, Victor Bout´s name was added to the final version of the report and that his name was absent in every preliminary UN report on arms trafficking. You simply can’t sue Victor Bout for being an illegal weapon trader based on the evidence compiled by the shameless Johan Peleman or bring to court the movie “Lord of War” as a substitute for the evidence. That is exactly why the Americans do not want Victor Bout for any illegal weapons trade as appears to many people around the world. If they really wanted him for that they would have done it long time ago. The evidence is simply not there.

The Americans wanted Victor for something else. And for this “something” his apparent Hollywood-inspired image of the “Merchant of Death” was not enough due to this being legally inadmissible in the American court of law. Certain REAL and PROVABLE charges must have been created in order to get him arrested for real. And the American officials found nothing better than to employ the DEA (Drug Enforcement Administration) for that reason. Since the DEA area of operations are drugs and drug dealers, their modus operandi is corresponding – to plant drugs on a victim and thus, to get the victim arrested. The very same approach was used in Victor Bout’s case: the DEA agent-provocateurs created a certain provocation that looked perhaps “normal” for a typical drug-policeman, but ridiculous to anyone else. The DEA sent their agent to meet Victor Bout. This agent, turned out to be Bout´s former friend, Andrew Smulian, who offered him a deal. But, instead of planting drugs on Victor Bout, the DEA planted bogus documents and falsified “intercepts” of alleged e-mail exchanges and alleged telephone conversations claiming that Victor Bout allegedly: 1) had in his possession portable anti-aircraft missiles; 2) was willing to sell them to FARC rebels in Columbia; 3) in doing so he was planning of- and willing to participate in murdering (sic) the US citizens/US officials working in Columbia.

Despite the fact that compared to the typical planting of real heroin on their clients the DEA failed to plant any actual anti-aircraft missiles on Victor, this ridiculous case was judged by the DEA superiors to be “solid” enough to be brought to court. And only after THIS provocation of the DEA, the US officials dared, at last, to arrest Victor Bout and to pass this matter to the court of law. Before that, they have simply nothing in their hands that would be admissible in the court-room. Therefore we can not even talk about alleged former “criminal activities” of Victor Bout in Africa or elsewhere in connection with his current case in the court. The current case is purely about his alleged attempt to sell the alleged “portable anti-aircraft missiles” to FARC in Columbia and nothing else besides that.

This is the official “open” part of the story. However, there is also an official but “secret” part of the same story. Victor Bout is not really wanted in America for these absurd and non-existent portable anti-aircraft missiles. This ridiculous frame-up could never be successfully won by the US government in the US court. Victor, in reality, is wanted for something far more serious that can not be made public and can not be discussed in the courtroom in any open proceedings. I mean you can compare it with the case of the infamous nuclear bomber Timothy McVeigh who was openly indicted of using the Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD, but in a form of the Ryder truck loaded with cheap fertilizer) against US citizens, but whose case was strangely conducted behind closed doors. The same thing is with Victor Bout’s case.

Of course, the US officials and especially those US officials responsible for legal matters are apparently reasonable enough to realize that they would never be able to win the ridiculous case against Victor based on the proceeds of the abovementioned DEA provocation primarily because no actual anti-aircraft missile have ever been found and not even an attempt to find such missiles has been made by the DEA.

Why do you think that is?

Because they knew that the entire story was invented and no missiles would be found anywhere. That is why they did not even attempt to go after the missiles. The real cause of the extradition attempt against Victor Bout is not these non-existent portable anti-aircraft missiles. The real cause is that the US Government in collaboration with the Russian Government secretly blamed an individual named “Victor Bout” for selling to the terrorists a Soviet-made “Granit” missile that struck the Pentagon on 9/11. And THIS is the real truth behind Victor’s case. And THIS secret part of the case the American legal experts plan to win in the US court behind closed doors. Because it appears that the Russian FSB has secretly concocted some “plausible” evidence that implicates Victor Bout in that alleged deal and the US officials appear to be gullible enough to believe the Russian colleagues and to believe that such “evidence” would lead to the successful conclusion of the still pending 9/11 Pentagon case. In addition, Victor is being secretly accused of selling portable nuclear weapons – known as “mini-nukes” or “suite-case nukes” to various terrorist organizations, ranging from the Columbian FARC to Osama bin Laden´s Al-Qaeda. Apparently, several recent real and alleged mini-nuclear bombings are secretly being blamed on Victor Bout. The most important of them is the infamous “El Nogal” nuclear bombing in Bogotá that was presented to the uninitiated as a “car-bombing”, in which, according to the US security officials, the same type of a mini-nuke was used as in the 1995 Oklahoma bombing.

The 1995 bombing of Oklahoma City

Dimitri, you are a former nuclear intelligence officer of the 12 Chief Directorate of the Russian armed forces. Public Prosecutor’s August 26, 2009 appeal stated that BOUT conspired to provide GUIDED BALLISTIC MISSILES to the FARC. Are they suggesting that BOUT is involved in nuclear terrorism?

Yes. This is just a slip of the tongue. The Freudian syndrome. In the official paperwork of Victor Bout’s case in the Thai court, as well as in the official (a/k/a “public”) part of the US extradition request they do not talk about any “guided ballistic missile”. They talk about “portable anti-aircraft missiles” (that are small enough to be launched from one’s shoulder). However, behind closed doors, the US officials tried to convince their Thai colleagues that while the anti-aircraft missiles provocation against Victor Bout was indeed very crude and ridiculous, the real cause of the extradition for which Victor is wanted are far more serious, but, unfortunately, can not be disclosed to the general public or discussed in the court-room in open proceedings.

So, the US officials in order to convince the Thais to accept the extradition case despite total lack of evidence and despite numerous violations of Thai law, had no choice but to reveal the “awful truth” to at least some of the Thai officials. Therefore high-ranking Thai police and security officials, as well as a select few amongst Thai public prosecutors, know very well that Victor is wanted not for selling the small portable anti-aircraft missiles, but for selling the cruise missile with an unexploded 500 kiloton thermo-nuclear warhead that hit the Pentagon on 9/11 and narrowly missed incinerating the entire Washington D.C. thanks to its broken detonator.

But since Thailand is a non-missile and non-nuclear state, the Thais don’t see much difference between a cruise missile and a ballistic missile, so the public prosecutor mistakenly believed that the Pentagon was hit by a ballistic missile with a thermo-nuclear warhead, while in reality it was hit by a cruise missile with a thermo-nuclear warhead. But it is forgivable for the Thais to make such a mistake, because it is not really a big difference in this sense. However, there is a big difference when you compare a portable shoulder-launched anti-aircraft missile that weighs just a few kilograms with a tens-of-meters-long ballistic missile that weighs many tons. While it is forgivable for a Thai public prosecutor (who is a military officer, by the way) to confuse the first two, considering that he is Thai, it is not forgivable for him (considering that he is a military officer) to mistake the second two with each other.

A hypothetical depiction of a RA-115 Suitcase mini-nuclear device according to Congressman Kurt Weldon.

In the Security Council of Thailand there was a discussion that Bout is being blamed for the entire Pentagon attack on 9/11 – for both the missile and its thermo-nuclear warhead. Apparently, the public prosecutor picked up this idea from them and as a slip of the tongue, when he composed his appeal, he accidentally mentioned the “guided ballistic missile” instead of the “politically correct” “portable anti-aircraft missile(s)”. To answer the second part of your question – yes, Victor Bout is apparently wanted for nothing less then NUCLEAR TERRORISM. He is being secretly blamed for at least: 1) selling the Soviet-made “Granit” missile with the half-megaton thermo-nuclear warhead to the terrorists who later launched it against the Pentagon on 9/11; 2) selling at least 3 or more Soviet-made mini-nukes known as “RA-115” and “RA-116” to terrorists prior to 9/11 (at least so it appears from the “El-Mundo” newspaper’s article as of 16 of September, 2001, and also from John D. Negroponte’s [the former director of the US National Intelligence] official communiqué released right after Victor Bout’s arrest in Bangkok in March, 2008 – available here: http://www.csis.org/media/csis/pubs/tnt_03-08.pdf ); and 3) selling of weapon-grade enriched Uranium to terrorists – as appears from the actual course of actions against the FARC and particularly against Raul Reyes’ group in the Ecuadorian jungle only 5 days before Victor was actually lured to Bangkok to be arrested there.

For our readers’ benefit, can you explain the difference between ballistic missile with the thermo-nuclear warhead and cruise missile with the thermo-nuclear warhead.

A ballistic missile is launched vertically and it travels with speeds comparable to the first cosmic velocity well above the Earth atmosphere on a ballistic trajectory – meaning its engines bring the ballistic missile into what we call “space” and then its warhead falls towards its target from space in the same manner as would a meteorite. You can roughly compare a trajectory of a ballistic missile with a trajectory of a football when a goalkeeper strikes it from his area into the other half of the football pitch. A cruise missile is much slower when compared to the ballistic missile – its speed is just sub-sonic or slightly super-sonic and a missile travels to its target (and delivers its warhead to it) in the atmosphere – in the same manner as would do a typical jet-fighter. In the case of particularly the “Granit” missile which is very expensive and very advanced, its speed is about 2.5 Mach while traveling in the cruise altitude and it is decreased to only 1.5 Mach when the missile descends and sets itself to the final path of attack – that is parallel to the ground (exactly as it was demonstrated in the actual 9/11 Pentagon strike). But when it comes to the actual thermo-nuclear warhead there is no difference. You will not feel any difference when a half-megaton thermo-nuclear warhead suddenly produces a blinding white flash and in the next few milliseconds incinerates you with its intensive thermal radiation. It does not matter if such a half-megaton warhead was delivered by a ballistic missile falling from space, or by a horizontally flying cruise missile. The effects of the actual thermo-nuclear explosion and the destruction caused by it will be undistinguishable.

Victor Bout’s name is often mentioned along with the alleged sale of X-55 missiles to Iran and China. Can you tell us more?

This is a kind of “controlled leak of information” that was afforded on purpose in order to create some “grounds” and so to convince some officials who are not entitled to know the full truth, but who could be fed some half-truth. The story with the X-55 illegal sale was just a cover-up story that was concocted to distract attention from the real culprit – the awful “Granit” missile. To talk about the “Granit” missile that hit the Pentagon is TABOO. It is off limits. Only very few high-ranking US security officials (as well as high-ranking security officials of Russia and of some highly-trusted US allies) are entitled to know that it was the “Granit” missile. For the rest, it is taboo to know this word. But many people know that it was the missile (and many also know that it was a certain Russian- or Soviet-made missile) that hit the Pentagon. But the problem is that those who know or suspect the awful truth are much more than those who are entitled to know it in full detail. Therefore to feed the “half-truth” for those not entitled to know the full truth, the story with the alleged X-55 has been concocted.

The Soviet-era Kh-55 missiles – also known as X-55s

Secondly, even from the technical point of view the story with the X-55 can not be true – that missile is not technically capable of penetrating 6 (six!) capital walls of the Pentagon as was demonstrated in the 9/11 attack. Only one missile in the world – the “Granit” – could achieve such a penetrating feat. That is to say that the Americans and the Russians together are trying hard to cover up the real truth behind the Pentagon attack, while trying in the same time to apprehend and to bring to justice someone [allegedly] responsible for the actual attack. Hence the persecution against Victor Bout. Hence the ridiculous stories about the alleged illegal deal with the X-55 missiles (that are also nuclear-capable, by the way – don’t miss this point: the fact that X-55 missiles are nothing less than “nuclear-capable” is always being diligently mentioned along with the claims that Victor Bout and his companions allegedly sold these missiles from Ukraine to Iran).

I understand that the first question the DEA asked Bout during their interrogation of him is the name of the cruise missile he had sold to Iran. Why would they ask him that?

Yes, it is true. The first question asked of Victor after his arrest was not about the ridiculous deal with the non-existent shoulder-launched anti-aircraft missiles that were allegedly intended for the Columbian FARC. The first question was about the alleged cruise missile Victor allegedly sold to Iran. This was because those mid-ranking DEA operatives were low enough not to be entitled to know the full awful truth – about the “Granit” cruise missile, but were fed by their superiors the half-truth – about the alleged “X-55” cruise missile that was discussed in the previous question.

A great deal of effort has been made by mainstream US and European press to link Bout with FARC and uranium. What do they have to do with Bout?

The US security officials have a double task actually. One: they have to close the case with the missile that hit the Pentagon on 9/11. Two – they also have to close several cases where mini-nukes were really or allegedly used in disguise of the so-called “suicide” and “non-suicide” “car-bombings”. The most important – the case of nuclear bombings of the US Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998 on an anniversary of Hiroshima bombing, the 1996 Khobar Tower nuclear bombing, the 1995 Oklahoma nuclear bombing, the 2002 Bali nuclear bombing, the 1993 first nuclear bombing of the World Trade Center in New York, several recent nuclear bombings in Iraq, Pakistan, Algeria and Saudi Arabia that were reported to the gullible plebs as “car-bombings”, and also the El-Nogal nuclear bombing in Bogotá in 2003, as well as the previous nuclear bombing in Bogotá in November 1999, both blamed on the FARC. As not too many specialists in nuclear weapons are available for consultation, it is possible to present to the lay people a notion that it is allegedly possible to produce a self-made low-caliber nuclear bomb made out of Uranium (while in reality all mini-nukes are made exclusively out of Plutonium and have nothing to do with any Uranium).

Well, is it possible to produce a homemade low-caliber nuclear bomb?

Thanks to the general ignorance of the people (many security officials and high-ranking politicians inclusive) in regard to the nuclear weapons, the abovementioned mistaken belief is widespread: indeed many security officials and politicians sincerely believe that it is possible to obtain 50 kg (single critical mass) of highly-enriched Uranium-235 on the black market and to make a mini-nuke out of it. In reality it is impossible to make any “mini-nuke” out of Uranium even in an industrial process, not to mention in the cottage industry, but many gullible folks believe to the contrary. Therefore a few unscrupulous individuals who really stood behind those nuclear “car- and truck-bombings” shamelessly exploit such gullibility. In the particular case with the FARC group led by Raul Reyes they planted on them almost 50 kg of weapon-grade Uranium-235 that was hidden around Reyes’ camp in the Ecuadorian jungle, then they murdered Reyes and additionally created some bogus computer files planted into Reyes’ computer where it was claimed that Reyes and his group were allegedly responsible for the 2003 nuclear bombing in Bogotá and were also seeking more weapon-grade Uranium. The gullible security officials who understand little about the real nuclear weapons technology would not miss the point as was suggested – when they encounter the 50 kg of REAL weapon-grade Uranium around Reyes’ camp while knowing for sure that both – 1999- and 2003- bombings in Bogotá were indeed mini-nukes bombings. However, this theater should not mislead serious people: both bombings in Bogotá, as well as 1995 Oklahoma bombing and the rest of well-known and little-known nuclear “car-bombings” was made with mini-nukes made out of PLUTONIUM and NOT URANIUM, and so the 50 kg of Uranium-235 planted to Reyes’ camp should not dupe any serious person into believing otherwise.

When it comes to Victor Bout if you carefully review available public sources you will find out that: 1) Victor Bout’s alleged connection with the FARC was mentioned in the same list of “evidence” allegedly “found” in Reyes’ computer right next to Reyes’s attempt to buy 50 kg (single critical mass enough to make one atomic bomb of Hiroshima yield) of weapon-grade Uranium-235 and alleged Reyes’ responsibility for the El-Nogal “car-bombing” (that is known to be nuclear to any and every security official); and 2) Alleged “international channels” by which the alleged “portable anti-aircraft missiles” of Victor Bout were allegedly transported – namely: Russia-Armenia-Romania-Denmark-Netherlands’ Antilles-Columbia strangely coincides to the country with the alleged rout of transportation of the weapon-grade Uranium that was obtained by Reyes and indeed found around his camp after Reyes was murdered by the Americans on March 1, 2008 – just 5 days prior to Victor Bout’s arrest in Bangkok. Anyone is welcome to make his own conclusions.

Cruise missile exit

Add here that the US officials actually exploit two levels of the “truth” in regard to the WTC demolition during 9/11 events. Just imagine that there are quite a lot of mid-ranking security officials and politicians who are advanced enough to know that kerosene can not “melt steel” into fluffy microscopic dust and that “ground zero” in pre-9/11 English language had no other meaning than “a place of a nuclear explosion”. Therefore these types of people would not swallow the plebeian version of the “planes brought down the towers 9/11 truth”. Some “higher” and more plausible version of the “truth” needed to be invented to satisfy them. So according to the intermediate level of the 9/11 “truth” (that is intended to satisfy the mid-ranking security officials and mid-ranking politicians both in America and abroad), the Twin Towers of the WTC, as well as the building #7 of the WTC, were demolished by 3 mini-nukes that allegedly belonged to Osama bin Laden’s operatives. You can find a confirmation of what I mean in the article “Mi Hermano bin Laden”, published in the Spanish daily, El-Mundo, on September 16, 2001. However, once you claim that the WTC was demolished by the three Soviet mini-nukes allegedly bought by Osama from Ukraine, then, being a responsible security official, you should also find Russian or Ukrainian nationals who first stole these mini-nukes for the Soviet nuclear arsenals and who actually sold such awful weapons to the terrorists. Isn’t’ it? Hence another attempt of the Americans – to implicate Victor Bout into trading in mini-nukes and in weapon-grade nuclear materials, in addition to the missiles with half-megaton thermo-nuclear warheads that usually fly around and strike pentagons. It appears that Victor Bout was made a scapegoat just for everything that is nuclear. Add here is where the Americans began their unprecedented persecution against Victor Bout only after 9/11 and in an apparent connection with 9/11. Read the “nuclear” communiqué of John D. Negroponte (available here: http://www.csis.org/media/csis/pubs/tnt_03-08.pdf ) that was released immediately after Victor’s arrest in Bangkok in March 2008 and that was directly connected to his arrest and moreover, entirely devoted to his arrest. And compare that communiqué by John D. Negroponte with the abovementioned “El Mundo” article about the 3 mini-nukes bought by Osama from Ukraine and allegedly used for destroying the three WTC buildings on 9/11 and surely you will not miss the main point. There are two more additional moments that could clarify the alleged “nuclear” connections of Victor Bout, FARC, and actual so-called “car-bombings” and “truck-bombings” (spots of which are being strangely called by the strangest nuclear name “ground zero”). First of them occurred soon after Victor Bout’s arrest.

About two weeks after his arrest there was a video published on YouTube showing Russia Today footage titled “Merchant of Death denied bail in Bangkok”. As you know, anyone registered as a YouTube user could post a comment under a video. Guess what was the very first comment published by some alleged “Victor Bout’s friend” under that video? This is what the comment said: “180 Compact Russian Nukes are missing, soon US will get a nuclear apocalypse up its ass”. How do you like the comment? Or you prefer to believe in coincidences? In the world of intelligence there is a saying: There are well made and badly made operations. Coincidences do not exist. Especially when soon after this comment appeared, a real nuclear explosion occurred in Dubai on March 26, 2008 – in the city where Victor Bout was kicked from and where he lost all his former airline business. You can see details of this nuclear explosion on YouTube here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KRws9eHvVgw or you can read (between the lines) here: http://www.arabianbusiness.com/514699-explosion-in-al-quoz-in-dubai?ln=en – please notice words such as “mushroom cloud” and “civil defense” in that article. By the way – when I noticed that YouTube provocation and compared it against the mini-nuke’s explosion in Dubai a few days later I immediately complained about this to the security official at the local Russian Embassy in Bangkok. And what do you think happened? The next day the provocative comment/promise about “180 stolen mini-nukes” and the “nuclear apocalypse” was removed from YouTube.

Luckily, I made a screenshot of the YouTube web page with that comment still there, so I still have it. Oh, I almost forgot it. Since I was involved with Victor Bout’s legal defense here in Bangkok right from the next day following his arrest – i.e. from March 7, 2008, I understandably attracted a lot of attention from the US side. The local DEA officer – Mr. Derek Odney, responsible for Victor’s apprehension in Bangkok on March 6, 2008, invited me to drink coffee and to “discuss something” around mid-April. Since I was curious to know what they would ask me about Victor and also perhaps I could have a chance to ask them something that would clarify the mystery of the case I agreed “to drink coffee”.

Derek showed up with someone who appeared to be from another department, perhaps from the US military intelligence or may be from the CIA. The conversation began in a roundabout way and with no mention of Victor Bout. They asked me to help the DEA to catch certain drug dealers in Bangkok. On the surface it may seem logical, considering what the DEA does, but certainly not normal, considering the actual circumstances – I was helping Victor Bout and his case had nothing to do with drugs. Anyway, this discussion about the drugs and drug-dealers slowly moved on to something different: Derek´s companion asked me if I knew anything about a black market nuclear materials, particularly enriched Uranium and how much, in my opinion, such weapon-grade Uranium could cost on such a black market. Out of politeness I expressed my humble opinion on the subject, adding that it is only my humble opinion, but I don’t know the exact figures, because I am not involved in illegal trade in nuclear materials.

In turn, I asked them if they were asking me this question because of highly-enriched Uranium that was found around Reyes’ camp in the Ecuadorian jungle? They told me that yes, they wanted to know the answer to that question for exactly that reason, because the US Government took that matter very seriously. The most laughable was that no alleged “portable anti-aircraft missiles” were mentioned during that conversation, but only the FARC Uranium alone (and neither any “portable anti-aircraft missiles” in connection with Victor Bout were mentioned in Reyes’ computer, but only the weapon-grade Uranium purchase deal and the FARC responsibility for the nuclear “car-“bombings…) This was my first conversation with Mr. Derek Odney.

The most provocative, prohibited and proven 9/11 video.

Let´s fast forward to today, Dimitri. Where is Victor at and what´s left for him as far as his defense options.

Victor Bout is still in Bangkok, to be more exact in Nonthaburi province (on the outskirts of Bangkok) inside the high-security Bangkwang prison, known to many people as “Bangkok Hilton” thanks to the famous movie of the same name. He was transferred there from the Bangkok Remand Prison on August 20, the day his court verdict which ordered the extradition was read.

To answer the second part of your question is not so easy. Several defense options are available but I would prefer not to disclose them publicly, because the Americans will read this interview with great interest and they might take certain countermeasures. But surely something is pending when it comes to the legal means to defend Victor Bout. His lawyer, Lak, is still there and he is working hard on his defense. Despite Victor´s extradition case appearing to be “final” after the Appeals’ Court verdict, it is not so “final” in reality. Many things can still be done, God willing.

Further Reading:

The most provocative, prohibited and proven 9/11 book written:

911thology by Dimitri Khalezov

SHADOW MASTERS by Daniel Estulin