Ukraine daily update March 9, 2025

First – you should continue your daily discussion in the thread below regarding the Ukraine war.

Feel free to comment if you like this type of post in between, I posted it on a Sunday so it wouldn’t interfere with your Japanese Gi during the week.

With this post, I want to highlight the amount of disinformation that Russia and its paid agents in the West engage in.

Everyone is familiar with U137, which ran aground at night outside the Karlskrona base, leading to some dramatic days culminating in Torbjörn Fälldin unexpectedly finding his inner cavalryman and commanding the somewhat historic “Hold the Line” for Sweden.

Before that, the coastal artillery, which had almost no crew at all, had set up an experimental radar, and the Russians interpreted it as every coastal artillery battery in Sweden being aimed at their relief forces and that they were in a disadvantaged firing position – which was not the case because the only coastal artillery they had managed to man was an experimental radar and some towed artillery they had brought forward (I’m painting a bit…).

U137 eventually made its way back to Russia, and the alternative narrative started immediately.

You have all followed the mink stories and the herring shoal, as well as the constant mocking of our poor navy that loses itself during the daytime.

To be clear – Gåsefjärden was very suitable, a listening station from the FRA in the vicinity a few islands away, protected on-site with too few summer cottages, important sea cables, and proximity to the Karlskrona naval base, of course.

The Russians were also not known for avoiding risks – during WW2, they navigated in the Baltic Sea by maneuvering among the large rock formations along the seabed after attaching logs to the hull, allowing them to pass directly UNDER the Finnish sea mines. High risk was a bit their thing, simply 😲

There has been an extreme amount of energy put into various explanatory models, and when Anders Jallai discovered that it was beneficial for book sales to claim that it was US submarines that violated our archipelago, it was game over for the truth this time. I am quite disappointed in him, but his books sell, and I work entirely voluntarily without a penny for writing, so who is the real winner.

Then a certain “magazine” has devoted editorial energy to promoting alternative explanatory models, and one almost ends up in the hospital trying to argue with them – I have long emails that are like psychological torture.

The Russians themselves chose the less flattering “drunken sailor” track as an explanatory model, and books have been written on the subject.

Moreover, this was not a regular tour with U137 but a highly ranked officer from the home base was on board along with a group from GUGI. And Gugi were not just anyone – a bit like a British submarine having a group from the SAS on board. Gugi is the Russian unit that deals with underwater operations even in the Atlantic at great depths.

But apparently, the crew felt that a group from SOF and some high-ranking officer on board would not be able to prevent them from a huge drinking spree, so they didn’t know which way was up.

Or maybe the group from Gugi was on board to be landed inside Gåsefjärden perhaps, we will never know?

What I initiated on the Skalman forum was to try to prove that U137 COULD NOT have navigated wrongly, that the probability of that was close to zero.

Here comes the actual thesis, link at the bottom – you need to keep a clear head for this is the summary of an EXTREMELY broad discussion, but the conclusion is indisputable.

So what I am challenging is the possibility/probability of U137 having navigated wrongly.

And if the probability was close to zero, it meant that they did not navigate wrongly regardless of whether Jallai and Russia officially claimed it along with all sorts of others in a mosaic of wild explanatory models.

JHANS U-137 THESIS.

As I see it, the discussion about U137 boils down to two assumptions below, everything else is a side issue,

1 – a large number of consecutive errors, mistakes, misfortunes, and so on were made, which together led to the grounding, and this was therefore navigation error. (if at any one time, over a number of days, with a single instrument, they could have determined their course, the accident would never have happened, they would have sailed where they planned).

– The above sequence is not considered unreasonable, since U137 ran aground, there must have been a navigation error, and no one can be so foolish as to voluntarily sail in there. – The information presented to strengthen the above reasoning is theoretical assumptions or questioning of the information that does not indicate navigation error, and it is believed that a motive picture does not exist and that it is not unreasonable, or impossible, to navigate wrongly.

2 – a single error was made in connection with the grounding, likely after the change to 020 degrees, they had 2 minutes and ended up 8m off course, otherwise it was not navigation error.

– the technical information available is as good as it could ever be because it is the Navigation Journal, and we know it is correct. It has been reviewed by SOU 1995, considered the best investigation of the accident, and they are clearly skeptical of navigation error. Can the above be considered correct?

Since those who believe in Alternative 1, the chain of accidents and mistakes, only need to argue that it is not impossible or unreasonable as the discussion has evolved, the burden of proof lies on Alternative 2. Then it remains for those who believe in Alternative 2 to show as far as possible that one of these consecutive errors, mistakes, misfortunes, and so on is false, then the entire reasoning collapses like dominoes. U137 would have, assuming the right error/mistake is chosen, known where they were and sailed correctly instead. It then doesn’t matter how reasonable or unreasonable an incursion into Gåsfjärden is or that the motive picture is unclear.

– the thesis has failed, U137 did not navigate wrongly, period. Here we stand now, the final battle if you will. Here is my proposal for a false error or mistake that breaks Alternative 1 entirely and collapses the entire thesis,

The Utklippans lighthouse could not be mistaken for a fishing boat, – Those who know their navigation in the thread have unanimously and persistently claimed that Utklippans lighthouse cannot be mistaken for a fishing boat, they are starting to get a bit annoyed now. – SOU 1995 holds the same view as those who know navigation in the thread, one cannot mistake Utklippan lighthouse for a fishing boat. – Utklippans lighthouse was a radio beacon – Utklippans lighthouse was 30m above the water surface – Utklippans lighthouse should not be mistaken for anything other than Utklippans lighthouse http://www.fyr.org/wiki/index.php/Ang%C3%B6ringsfyr – A single hydrophone bearing would have told U137 that it was not a fishing boat.

– U137 passed 4M from Utklippans lighthouse, which is built to be visible from a great distance. – the course change after Utklippans lighthouse occurred in the red-green sector, and those who know their navigation in the thread have unanimously claimed that then you know where you are.

– U137 had this part of the Baltic Sea as a patrol area and should have been familiar with the lighthouses in the area. I believe that the theory of misnavigation is established, those of you who do not think so are welcome to provide information that strengthens why Utklippans lighthouse can reasonably be considered to have been mistaken for a fishing boat. Time, I don’t know, when it dies out I summarize all the arguments that have come in and then we’ll see if we need to reassess. A purely theoretical reasoning that it couldn’t be impossible probably should be considered a bit too vague given where we are now

https://forum.skalman.nu/viewtopic.php?f=22&t=44019&start=15#p742634

—

The discussion was then concluded in a way that the evil team did not provide any further explanations on the subject at all, they lost interest (guess why 😁).

Unfortunately, the media was not the least bit interested at the time, but they have continued to push NATO submarines and misnavigation as likely causes – we submitted this to all daily newspapers and offered to be interviewed but apparently the truth was not of interest to the entire established media in Sweden.

I later managed to uncover a Western psyops where a certain prominent Swedish politician with close ties to the USA was highly involved, and I posted it in the same thread – I’ll see if I can find it again 😀

And then we have Hårsfjärden where a West German submarine followed the Russian invasion fleet (some exaggeration…) and hence the chaos.

We were in the Skalman thread piecing together the information we received from open sources and what was declassified, and we succeeded surprisingly well.

The problem is that even today, those who were involved largely choose not to talk about it – the paper they signed stating that everything was confidential still seems to be taken seriously.

Considering the world situation and that our government has very clearly identified Russia as The Great Satan today, perhaps it’s time for a white paper?

Yes, some individuals in Sweden will not be painted in particularly beautiful colors BUT they are in most cases deceased or in nursing homes at best.

Anyway – at some point I will post an article about the submarine intrusions.

I also want to pitch that if anyone has a story to tell, they are welcome to do so under Johan No.1 with full source protection, contact me via DM on my Bluesky, DM on Substack, or on the website.

Every little puzzle piece is valuable no matter how small, as it always confirms another puzzle piece and we can build further.

Yes, this has faded a bit due to the ongoing war of invasion, but it is our history that has been falsified with the help of Russian subversive activities, and it is always important to clarify such matters.

If you liked the post, feel free to share it on your channels,

If you want a fun comment section that is really starting to pick up and is no longer just me talking it up on Bluesky – johanno1.se.

I recommend everyone who still comments on Substack or Bluesky to switch over to  that thread instead – then your grandchildren will read your historical archive and start to like you.

On Substack, you are more than welcome to become paying subscribers, even those of you who already follow, and it’s great to see that some find it worth reading, appreciate all the work put into this, and took the step to subscribe 👍

ohanno1.se

substack.com/@johanno1

https://bsky.app/profile/johanno1.bsky.social

Then there are the Swedish rescuers, those I have been in contact with operate quietly and deliver supplies to Ukraine. You don’t see them constantly on social media because they are instead working to support Ukraine.

Start