by Gordon Duff, Senior Editor with Ian Greenhalgh, Assistant Managing Editor and Jeff Smith, Science Editor and Particle Physicist

VT has concluded an investigation on the November 2018 Kerch incident and now believes NATO planned to bring down the massive new bridge with a 4th generation nuclear mine.

Earlier reports of this had been laundered, debunked, faked, spun and pushed into the twilight zone, a full court press for one reason.  The story is true.  Ride along, get that seat belt tight, you are now on the bus to Crazytown:

Something very strange happened a few days ago.  I republished an article on tactical nuclear weapons written by Ian and Jeff which included the most advanced data on newer low yield clean nukes ever released.

Then we got a comment from a reader which included some highly classified information.  Now wait for it, in response to this, an EU website funded by governments to “debunk disinformation,” attacked us by publishing a video account by April la June.

The material used was attributed to both South Front and VT, major enemies of the EU fake debunking/censorship efforts. There is one problem, our material covered none of this, not at South Front nor at VT, not until our two month long investigation ended.

We were attacked long in advance for stories we had never written but for good reason.  We now believe the stories are true, and the magical advance debunking by paid censorship groups tied to Intel agencies are a part of our mosaic, a small part, but helped push us in the right direction. Thanks idiots!

The video was posted on, according to YouTube, November 26, 2018:

Let’s take a larger look:

“Intel Drop” is a trade mark of Gordon Duff.  The problem is, the article being “debunked” wasn’t to be written for over two more months.  We now have an Einsteinian problem, an EU paid shill organization attacking me in advance for something I only wrote on February 9, 2019, based on research done within the last 4 days, not in November.

The video used by Bellingcat to attack VT:

On November 25, 2018, several Ukrainian vessels attempted to push their way into the Sea of Azov on a “navigation exercise.”  Russia stopped them, using massive force, blocking the passage under the Crimea bridge that Ukraine had threaten to destroy (with nuclear weapons they aren’t supposed to have) over and over.

A huge controversy is raging over a story no American knows of, one VT believes it can prove is valid, that British operatives planned, back in November 2018, to use Ukrainian boats attempting to ram their way through a Russian blockade, as cover for planting a nuclear mine to blow up the massive Kerch Bridge.

The CIA controlled EUdisinfo.eu site published a denial of a story that now has gained “legs.”  Let the deniers tell the story for us, or at least lay it out.  I love it when idiots start playing James Bond:

Summary of Disinformation

Russia seized Ukrainian vessels in the Sea of Azov because they were carrying a SADM (Special Atomic Demolition Munition) device that belongs to NATO. This portable nuclear device was transported by Ukrainian and British special forces to the Kerch Strait with intent to use it on the Crimea bridge, which NATO hates. The device was tracked by Russia and that is why it stopped the Ukrainian ships. Ukraine regularly provokes Russia with no effect, but this time Russian FSB and special forces reacted to stop the provocation that might have led to WW3. There might be a direct NATO intervention to cover it up. The UK has been psychologically preparing their people for a war with Russia.

Below are the original publication/media links on:

• Russia-Ukraine Black Sea Military Crisis: On The Brink Of War
• BREAKING! Russia Just Intercepted NATO SADM Transported By Ukraine!

• WAY BACK MACHINE: Russia-Ukraine Black Sea Military Crisis: On The Brink Of War
• WAY BACK MACHINE: BREAKING! Russia Just Intercepted NATO SADM Transported By Ukraine!

In order to “disprove” the assertion, now backed by intelligence sources around the world, the CIA/EU paid debunking site referred us to “Bellingcat.”

“Bellingcat,” like the White Helmets and Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, was long “outed,” even in the mainstream UK press as fake.  From the UK Independent:

“Well, let’s start with Bellingcat, which has presented itself in the past as a microcosm of well-meaning and very British amateurishness, based in a Leicestershire bedroom, producing results that put the professional sleuths to shame. In fact, Bellingcat has grown rather a lot beyond its shoestring origins. It has money – where from? It has been hiring staff. It has transatlantic connections. It has never, so far as I am aware, reached any conclusion – whether on the downing of the Malaysian plane over eastern Ukraine, or chemical weapons use in Syria, or now, with the Skripals – that is in any way inconvenient to the UK or US authorities.”

And in this article by the Off Guardian:

“Then there’s Bellingcat, the organization founded by one Eliot Higgins: Media Studies drop-out and author of – I feel a professional slight here, having taught digital arts at Sheffield University – digitally altered images that serve NATO objectives in an ongoing Russia demonisation which endangers us all.

(Worse by far of course is the fact his amateurish  images – these for instance, offered as proof that Malaysian Airlines flight MH17 was downed in July 2014 by Russian missiles – would have earned him a fail in my Photoshop class.)”

You see, in order to protect us all from “disnfo,” Google, Microsoft, Facebook and others have pulled in Deep State operatives to “launder” any prohibited facts from the net and to see to it that CIA/Mossad/MI6 fabrications from petty hacks living in their mom’s basements (who eventually get millions in dirty cash) turn into fake media giants.

Then there is this story, laundered but found, that makes Bellingcat and so many others, liars:

In order to have a rudimentary understanding of current weapons capabilities, and, moreover, to understand how much the public is lied to, the following highly authoritative and quite readable article on nuclear weapons needs to be read.

Many of you have looked at this article.  It is time you read all of it.  Please do so and pass it on to your local media:

Ultimate Leaks: The History of Nuclear Weapons Design 1945-2016

A few days ago, I was contacted through good friends in the intelligence community, names all of you know well.  A vital piece of intelligence is “out there,” being offered by another famous individual who needs to “buy” his way out of very serious trouble.

The information involves the theft of nuclear material and the illegal manufacture of weapons of mass destruction.  These weapons may be in the hands of terrorists.

The information was offered, first to the US government, and it is my belief that no one there would touch it, even though it is vital to national security.  We may be hit with another 9/11 because of this and I suspect that some around President Trump are complicit, but this is a suspicion.

I have a list of names and very good reasons and no one in Washington will discuss this.

There is also a 100% blackout in the news media.  The information I have has been given to the Washington Post and CNN.  Remember, back in 2014, the secret files of 9/11 as a nuclear event went to CNN first.  They only came to me because nobody else would touch them.

The control over media is 100% with only occasional “bleed through” in the alternative media, which isn’t VT. There is also 100% internet scrubbing, not just Google, who censors everything, but it goes further.

I have included 3 videos below.  They show the boats involved in the Kurch incident, the deployment of Russian defenses to Crimea in advance of a suspected NATO led nuclear terror attack and the 2018 destruction of a captured NATO underwater drone

That said, we begin with a comment that set us going, one traced to a source in the UK, one that indicated the level of extreme news block involved, something we will be exploring here. From a VT reader.  Some areas of the comment below have checked out too well.  Others indicate something else:

“Stick with me on this, I am going somewhere with it –
According to various sources – some even ‘Official’, but mostly both the Mainstream Media and Alt-Media, – Russia was apparently directly targeted by a mini/micro nuke attack (recently).

Even though the Russians clearly knew in advance of the pending attack (a major operation was already in play to prevent the deployment of a device), and even though the device was not detonated, they kicked up a mighty diplomatic and media storm afterwards to play up what appeared to be a simple bit of foolishness by the Ukrainians, into a major international diplomatic incident leading to the deployment of Nuclear arms in Crimea.

Russian Psychological warfare operatives went into overdrive to slowly and gently inform Westerners about the ‘truth’ of the Kerch Strait incident and then to prepare (gentle and ignorant) Western minds for subsequent 9/11 disclosure.

By the standard of reporting these ‘secret nuclear events’ (or failed deployment in this case) the Russians went well over the proverbial top.

Even when Russian personnel have been killed they don’t create, and maintain, diplomatic storms. That they did over the Kerch Strait incident is an indicator (to even the simple mind) that something other than sailing a few boats under a bridge had gone on.

After the event the Russians ensured that Mainstream International Media got to know about (and importantly were then ‘allowed’ to report) the actual existence of ‘mini-nukes’ (even hinting at 9/11 disclosure for those paying attention!).

Since then we have seen considerable efforts to ‘trickle feed’ information into even the dumbest parts of the mainstream regarding the existence of real mini-nukes, and how they were to be deployed during the Cold War. Again, this is simple psychological priming for those who understand these things.

Many articles in various International English language mainstream media outlets (including surprisingly x2 major British Newspapers too!) have appeared since late December 2018 describing such seemingly exotic and secretive things as ‘cold war nuclear backpacks’, and NATO suicide nuclear demolition teams, and other similar and apparently bizarre (to the uninformed masses) things.

ALL of the mainstream articles I have seen (approx 12 to date, including a good one on Sputnik News and a more recent one on 15th Jan in the British Daily Mail) have used the term ‘SADM’ in the article.

Also, all articles have used a photo of at least one backpack nuke or ‘diver deployable device’. They also mentioned quite clearly that these devices have been available for use since the 1950’s (these terms are another bit of careful and intelligent psychological priming).

The European Union, the CFR, the Atlantic Council, and many other ‘deep-state’ associated establishments and agencies have also mentioned, quote, “Russian propaganda and disinformation regarding a nuclear device allegedly carried by British Special Forces aboard Ukrainian boats crewed by Intel Officers, and to be deployed against the Crimea Bridge. An operation which was foiled by Russian Special Forces”.

These counter-psychological-warfare comments by powerful western groups (all available to read on the net) have failed and only played into the hands of the Russian disclosure psy-op by drawing this matter to the attention of the non-conspiratorial types (ie people who live in bubbles of cognitive dissonance).

The Crimea Bridge mini-nuke attempted false flag ‘conspiracy theory’ is still ongoing – I believe because this time the ‘deep-state’ went too far by targeting Russia directly. I believe that full 9/11 disclosure will be trickle fed by the Russians into the consciousness of the masses through intelligent psychological operations for as long as it takes for people with influence to begin to force answers.

Remember – Lavrov was asked about the nuclear conspiracy component of the Crimea Bridge directly during an interview, and although he smiled and said he was aware of the conspiracy theories (his actual words), he declined to confirm nor deny it. That in itself is a big psyop play for those who understand these things!

Key issues here:

• Mention of articles on SADM and other “redline” press issues…fully confirmed
• Buildup of Russian defenses for predicted NATO use of a tactical nuke…partially confirmed
• Russian methodologies…fully confirmed

I then set Ian Greenhalgh to review this.  Before this, I sat down with America’s top expert on SADM munition, VT Editor Colonel James Hanke, founder of the US Special Forces HALO training center.  Hanke has jumped with SADM nuclear munitions and commanded NATO nukes in Europe.

Then we got this childish disinformation denial from the UK Guardian, more than proving the point:  https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/dec/10/russia-paved-way-for-ukraine-ship-seizures-with-fake-news-drive

“Russia ‘paved way for Ukraine ship seizures with fake news drive’

EU’s security commissioner says Moscow spread false claims for at least a year before last month’s seizures

Daniel Boffey in Brussels

The Kremlin launched a year-long disinformation campaign to soften up public opinion before its recent seizure of three Ukrainian ships and their crews in the Sea of Azov, the EU’s security commissioner has alleged.

Julian King said Russia had paved the way for its decision to fire on and board two artillery ships and a tug boat through the dissemination of fake news.

Ukraine had infected the sea with cholera and that its secret services had been trying to transport a nuclear bomb to occupied Crimea, the British commissioner said.

King said the European commission’s East StratCom unit, responsible for highlighting disinformation, had discovered a complicated web of untruths emanating from Russian sources.

“If you thought that incident came out of nowhere, you would be wrong,” King told an audience in Brussels. “The disinformation campaign began much earlier, more than a year ago, when Russian media started pushing claims that the authorities in Kiev were dredging the seabed in the Sea of Azov in preparation for a Nato fleet to take up residence.”  (more)

Our problem here, of course, is that the Guardian, late as they often are, is cleaning up a mess Google fixed long before, scrubbing the net of any mention whatsoever.  This article, an intel specialist, is tantamount to a confession of NATO complicity in exactly what is denied.

Then Ian went to Defense News and a December 2018 article by Matthew Bodner:

Nukes, Syria, Trump and Ukraine: Putin tackles topics in marathon Q&A session

“Russian President Vladimir Putin on Thursday sat down with 1,700 Russian and foreign journalist for his annual marathon question-and-answer session that lasted, as these things usually do, about four hours. Though Putin seemed bored at times when reciting domestic statistics on agriculture production, he livened up whenever talk of nuclear war came his way.”

This is more of the pre-staging we were told about in the initial comment, how media has been laying the groundwork.

Then this came from the Guardian, another nail in the NATO/CIA/MI6/Bellingcat coffin:

“Brussels has launched an investigation into the apparent hacking of the EU’s diplomatic communications network after thousands of sensitive cables were made public, including descriptions of Donald Trump as a “bully” and Crimea as a “hot zone” where nuclear weapons may be present.

The dump of confidential cables on a public site laid bare the concerns of EU diplomats and officials over the Trump administration and its dealings with Russia and China.

Among the reports made public was a warning on 8 February that Crimea had been turned into a “hot zone where nuclear warheads might have already been deployed”.”

This is more that is withheld from American audiences, laundered from the media, nothing on CNN, nothing on Fox, neither Trump’s friends nor enemies touched this story.  Why?

Then, only two weeks after the November incident, this Ukraine news source planted the following story claiming the bridge was “mis-designed” and would simply “snap” in half and that Russia had made up the story of a nuclear mine being planted.

Problem is, of course, the nuclear mine story wasn’t released yet. Note that the UK Guardian is used to push this fake story forward.

Kerch Strait Bridge to “snap in one moment”

Expert explains “point of no return”

Moscow would not recognize reports of technology violations during bridge construction, while it’s much more convenient for Russia to accuse Ukraine, claiming that the Ukrainians “mined” it, “taking this as a pretext for declaring war.”

Long before the Kerch crisis and aggression against Ukraine in the Black Sea, Russia had been preparing information-wise for the escalation of the conflict and justification of its maritime aggression through various fake stories, including around the problematic Kerch Strait bridge, according to Taras Berezovets, a political technologist, head of Berta Communications and co-founder of Ukrainian Institute for the Future.

“This is absolutely true. In fact, these fakes began to appear back during the construction of the Kerch Bridge, starting from 2015, when Russian television, Russian speakers, especially the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and [Russian Foreign Minister Sergei] Lavrov, started claiming that Ukraine had allegedly been plotting terror attacks, even training ‘combat divers,’ and that mines would be planted under the bridge, etc,” the expert told the Segodnya newspaper, commenting on the relevant publication in The Guardian.

“In my opinion, the Russian Federation does this primarily because it is looking for a pretext to declare war. The bridge itself, according to satellite data, began to shift. Tectonic plates running along the bottom of the Kerch Strait is as if your two legs stand on two different shores: one is on the Kerch peninsula, and the other – on the Taman one.

Then the upper platform on which you are standing starts to move upwards, while another one – downwards. Almost the same is happening with the bridge, that is, it will simply snap in one moment,” he said. At the same time, explaining the Kremlin’s propaganda logic, Berezovets noted that Russia would not recognize reports of technology violations during bridge construction, while it’s much more convenient for the Russian Federation to accuse Ukraine, claiming that the Ukrainians “mined” it, “taking this as a pretext for declaring war.”

This is almost like reading the 9/11 report except with no airplanes, oh, and no dissolving buildings either.

One week later, we get this story from The Bulletin, which now tries to blame Russia for “fixin’ to” use tactical nuclear weapon, perhaps against itself? This is pure disinformation and provides, by our analysis, substantial proof, considering the source, that our assertion was correct:

“Let us suppose that Russia attempts to take over all of Ukraine or the NATO-allied Baltic states. Or even Poland. Despite Trump’s tweets, NATO would be obligated by treaty to defend its member states against attack. NATO forces would be marshaled to counter Russian forces. Presumably Russia would stand up rump states that would formally invite in Russian forces.

Now we would have Russian and NATO forces facing each other across some demarcation line. One side might eventually launch an attack to fully evict the other. This would presumably start as a conventional war with tanks, conventional artillery, missiles and aircraft. Some of the missiles and aircraft would likely emanate from Russian and NATO bases, which themselves would naturally become targets for conventional attack.

Suppose that the Russians, by dint of their much shorter supply chain, were able to push back NATO troops. Would NATO initiate the use of tactical nuclear weapons? In the opposite case, in which superior NATO technology helps to push back Russian troops, would Russia resort to tactical nuclear weapons? It seems likely, under current policy, that if one side used tactical nuclear weapons on the battlefield, the other would retaliate in kind. Then each would likely attack the other’s nearby bases with nuclear weapons. Of course, these bases are populated by, and surrounded by, human beings who would be incinerated, and fallout would begin to spread. There would be intense pressure on the leadership of both sides to launch a decapitating nuclear strike against the “criminals who had perpetrated this horror.”

Once the first tactical nuclear weapon is used in Ukraine or the Baltics, under current nuclear policies such a battle would have a high probability of ending in Armageddon. The same story would apply to Taiwan, South Korea, and Japan, with perhaps a moderately reduced version of Armageddon, but unacceptable horror nonetheless. And of course it is this story, and its frightening conclusion, that prevents conventional wars from growing past some limit, as we hope will pertain in Ukraine today.

Nuclear-armed states need to adopt a uniform declaratory nuclear policy that is stabilizing in these cases, strongly reducing the circumstances under which nuclear weapons would be used initially, and also strongly delimiting the cases where they would even be used to retaliate against nuclear attack.

It should also de-motivate the preparations for nuclear war fighting that make such a war more likely. A well-verified universal ban on nuclear weapons, as called for in the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, would surely be the most stabilizing, but the prospect for nuclear-armed states to sign and ratify this treaty seems to be long-term.

Second best would be a “no first use” of nuclear weapons declaratory policy, including, in addition, limitations on nuclear retaliation to nuclear attack. However, such a policy faces resistance from our allies and partners, something that President Obama experienced in the waning months of his administration.

It might even motivate more of our allies and partners to construct their own nuclear armaments, leading to additional risks of nuclear confrontation. (Remember that the UK and France have already gone down this path.) On the other hand, the absence of a clear, stabilizing nuclear declaratory policy by the existing nuclear-armed states raises risks of nuclear conflict between them, and increases the motivation for non-nuclear-armed states to develop nuclear weapons, making the situation even worse.”

What we have done here at VT is go much further than put a dot connecting or mosaic story together. We studied the weapons, went inside Russian intelligence and noted when they bolstered defenses against a suspected nuclear assault on Kerch.

It is all there.

Then we looked at NATO, deployment of special operations units, culminating in the January 2019 deployment of the USS Fort McHenry, capable of supporting another try on the bridge with more advanced tech.

The US has been testing underwater drones in the Black Sea, and has been playing every cat and mouse game imaginable. So has Russia, as we all remember from the disabling of the USS “Donald Duck” some years ago.

The game has gotten out of hand with Porshenko pushing for a war to save his own tail, a war that may kill us all.

To be continued: G

Gordon Duff

Gordon Duff posted articles on VT from 2008 to 2022. He is a Marine combat veteran of the Vietnam War. A disabled veteran, he worked on veterans and POW issues for decades.

Gordon is an accredited diplomat and is generally accepted as one of the top global intelligence specialists. He manages the world’s largest private intelligence organization and regularly consults with governments challenged by security issues.

Duff has traveled extensively, is published around the world, and is a regular guest on TV and radio in more than “several” countries. He is also a trained chef, wine enthusiast, avid motorcyclist, and gunsmith specializing in historical weapons and restoration. Business experience and interests are in energy and defense technology.

• Gordon’s Archives:  2008-2015
• Gordon’s Archives:  2016-2022