"Fierce fighting continued to rage near the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant, where several UN inspectors remained after Thursday’s IAEA visit"
A report on this operation indicates UK involvement
1. Attempt by 60 Ukraine special forces, trained in the UK, to seize Zaporozhye NPP on Sep 1. They crossed from north of Kakhovka reservoir to south shore in boats, landing 3 km from NPP⚛️to capture berths for reinforcements.
2. If successful, the Armed Forces of Ukraine had a chance to gain a foothold at the nuclear power plant literally an hour before the arrival of the delegation from the IAEA..
Why?
3. So that Western media could then confirm that it is not Ukrainian, but Russian troops that are shelling the ZNPP!
However, the UK planned propaganda coup did not work
4. Another recent report
Russia Says It Foiled Ukrainian Attempt to Seize Nuclear Plant
Does this mean poor little Fauci Wauci was in fact a degenerate Chicom/PNAC (Project for the New American Century) double agent cum puppet?
His Italian ancestors in Sciacca and Naples must be vomiting in their graves..
Talking of PNAC...
PNAC advocated
"advanced forms of biological warfare that can 'target' specific genotypes may transform biological warfare from the realm of terror to a politically useful tool"
1. On 19 July 2022, in the middle of a war, the Ukrainian parliament adopted Draft Law 5371, which abolished labour rights for 94% of Ukrainian workers.
2. This law introduced extreme liberalisation of labour relations, depriving workers of union protection.
The Ukrainian trade unions actively opposed this anti-labour draft law for two years.
3. Despite many warnings from the International Trade Union Confederation @ituc & the European Trade Union Confederation @etuc_ces & the International Labour Organization @ilo
This concerted disinformation campaign has been given life once again by some virologists who fear a prospective ban on research & are more concerned about their own funding than on the safety and welfare of humanity.
"Experts at the WHO, however, are reluctant to take the new research as the final word on the matter. the WHO’s emergencies director Michael Ryan.. said that “all hypotheses remain on the table. This is a scientific detective story that goes on."
As published, the paper is now a damp squib. Gone is all the certainty of the preprint. Where the preprint claimed ‘dispositive evidence for the emergence of Sars-CoV-2’, the paper now cites ‘insufficient evidence to define upstream events’