Vitali Zhuk Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 (edited) I recalled another Boeing crash. It was on September 1, 1983. U.S. congressman Lawrence McDonald from Georgia, who at the time was also the second president of the conservative John Birch Society, was on the Korean Air Lines Flight 007. Flight 007 has been the subject of ongoing controversy and has spawned a number of conspiracy theories. Many of these are based on the suppression of evidence such as the flight data recorders, unexplained details such as the role of a USAF RC-135 surveillance aircraft, or merely Cold War disinformation and propaganda. Edited July 16, 2015 by Vitali Zhuk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Gaal Posted July 18, 2015 Share Posted July 18, 2015 (edited) MH-17 Mystery One Year Later: A New Tonkin Gulf Case? By Robert Parry Global Research, July 18, 2015 One year ago, the world experienced what could become the Tonkin Gulf incident of World War III, the shoot-down of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 over eastern Ukraine. As with the dubious naval clash off the coast of North Vietnam in 1964, which helped launch the Vietnam War, U.S. officials quickly seized on the MH-17 crash for its emotional and propaganda appeal – and used it to ratchet up tensions against Russia. Shocked at the thought of 298 innocent people plunging to their deaths from 33,000 feet last July 17, the world recoiled in horror, a fury that was then focused on Russian President Vladimir Putin. With Putin’s face emblazoned on magazine covers, the European Union got in line behind the U.S.-backed coup regime in Ukraine and endorsed economic sanctions to punish Russia. In the year that has followed, the U.S. government has continued to escalate tensions with Russia, supporting the Ukrainian regime in its brutal “anti-terrorism operation” that has slaughtered thousands of ethnic Russians in eastern Ukraine. The authorities in Kiev have even dispatched neo-Nazi and ultranationalist militias, supported by jihadists called “brothers” of the Islamic State, to act as the tip of the spear. [see Consortiumnews.com’s “Ukraine Merges Nazis and Islamists.”] Raising world tensions even further, the Russians have made clear that they will not allow the ethnic Russian resistance to be annihilated, setting the stage for a potential escalation of hostilities and even a possible nuclear showdown between the United States and Russia. But the propaganda linchpin to the West’s extreme anger toward Russia remains the MH-17 shoot-down, which the United States and the West continue to pin on the Russian rebels – and by extension – Russia and Putin. The latest examples are media reports about the Dutch crash investigation suggesting that an anti-aircraft missile, allegedly involved in destroying MH-17, was fired from rebel-controlled territory. Yet, the U.S. mainstream media remains stunningly disinterested in the “dog-not-barking” question of why the U.S. intelligence community has been so quiet about its MH-17 analysis since it released a sketchy report relying mostly on “social media” on July 22, 2014, just five days after the shoot-down. A source briefed by U.S. intelligence analysts told me that the reason for the intelligence community’s silence is that more definitive analysis pointed to a rogue Ukrainian operation implicating one of the pro-regime oligarchs. The source said that if this U.S. analysis were to see the light of day, the Ukrainian “narrative” that has supplied the international pressure on Russia would collapse. In other words, the Obama administration is giving a higher priority to keeping Putin on the defensive than to bringing the MH-17 killers to justice. Like the Tonkin Gulf case, the evidence on the MH-17 case was shaky and contradictory from the start. But, in both cases, U.S. officials confidently pointed fingers at the “enemy.” President Lyndon Johnson blamed North Vietnam in 1964 and Secretary of State John Kerry implicated ethnic Russian rebels and their backers in Moscow in 2014. In both cases, analysts in the U.S. intelligence community were less certain and even reached contrary conclusions once more evidence was available. In both cases, those divergent assessments appear to have been suppressed so as not to interfere with what was regarded as a national security priority – confronting “North Vietnamese aggression” in 1964 and “Russian aggression” in 2014. To put out the contrary information would have undermined the government’s policy and damaged “credibility.” So the facts – or at least the conflicting judgments – were hidden. The Price of Silence In the case of the Tonkin Gulf, it took years for the truth to finally emerge and – in the meantime – tens of thousands of U.S. soldiers and millions of Vietnamese had lost their lives. Yet, much of the reality was known soon after the Tonkin Gulf incident on Aug. 4, 1964. Daniel Ellsberg, who in 1964 was a young Defense Department official, recounts – in his 2002 book Secrets – how the Tonkin Gulf falsehoods took shape, first with the panicked cables from a U.S. Navy captain relaying confused sonar readings and then with that false storyline presented to the American people. As Ellsberg describes, President Johnson and Defense Secretary Robert McNamara announced retaliatory airstrikes on Aug. 4, 1964, telling “the American public that the North Vietnamese, for the second time in two days, had attacked U.S. warships on ‘routine patrol in international waters’; that this was clearly a ‘deliberate’ pattern of ‘naked aggression’; that the evidence for the second attack, like the first, was ‘unequivocal’; that the attack had been ‘unprovoked’; and that the United States, by responding in order to deter any repetition, intended no wider war.” Ellsberg wrote: “By midnight on the fourth, or within a day or two, I knew that each one of those assurances was false.” Yet, the White House made no effort to clarify the false or misleading statements. The falsehoods were left standing for several years while Johnson sharply escalated the war by dispatching a half million soldiers to Vietnam. In the MH-17 case, we saw something similar. Within three days of the July 17, 2014 crash, Secretary Kerry rushed onto all five Sunday talk shows with his rush to judgment, citing evidence provided by the Ukrainian government through social media. On NBC’s “Meet the Press,” David Gregory asked, “Are you bottom-lining here that Russia provided the weapon?” Kerry: “There’s a story today confirming that, but we have not within the Administration made a determination. But it’s pretty clear when – there’s a build-up of extraordinary circumstantial evidence. I’m a former prosecutor. I’ve tried cases on circumstantial evidence; it’s powerful here.” [see Consortiumnews.com’s “Kerry’s Latest Reckless Rush to Judgment.”] Two days later, on July 22, the Director of National Intelligence authorized the release of a brief report essentially repeating Kerry’s allegations. The DNI’s report also cited “social media” as implicating the ethnic Russian rebels, but the report stopped short of claiming that the Russians gave the rebels the sophisticated Buk (or SA-11) surface-to-air missile that the report indicated was used to bring down the plane. Instead, the report cited “an increasing amount of heavy weaponry crossing the border from Russia to separatist fighters in Ukraine”; it claimed that Russia “continues to provide training – including on air defense systems to separatist fighters at a facility in southwest Russia”; and its noted the rebels “have demonstrated proficiency with surface-to-air missile systems, downing more than a dozen aircraft in the months prior to the MH17 tragedy, including two large transport aircraft.” Yet, despite the insinuation of Russian guilt, what the public report didn’t say – which is often more significant than what is said in these white papers – was that the rebels had previously only used short-range shoulder-fired missiles to bring down low-flying military planes, whereas MH-17 was flying at around 33,000 feet, far beyond the range of those weapons. The assessment also didn’t say that U.S. intelligence, which had been concentrating its attention on eastern Ukraine during those months, detected the delivery of a Buk missile battery from Russia, despite the fact that a battery consists of four 16-foot-long missiles that are hauled around by trucks or other large vehicles. Rising Doubts I was told that the absence of evidence of such a delivery injected the first doubts among U.S. analysts who also couldn’t say for certain that the missile battery that was suspected of firing the fateful missile was manned by rebels. An early glimpse of that doubt was revealed in the DNI briefing for several mainstream news organizations when the July 22 assessment was released. The Los Angeles Times reported, “U.S. intelligence agencies have so far been unable to determine the nationalities or identities of the crew that launched the missile. U.S. officials said it was possible the SA-11 was launched by a defector from the Ukrainian military who was trained to use similar missile systems.” [see Consortiumnews.com’s “The Mystery of a Ukrainian ‘Defector.’”] The Russians also challenged the rush to judgment against them, although the U.S. mainstream media largely ignored – or ridiculed – their presentation. But the Russians at least provided what appeared to be substantive data, including alleged radar readings showing the presence of a Ukrainian jetfighter “gaining height” as it closed to within three to five kilometers of MH-17. Russian Lt. Gen. Andrey Kartopolov also called on the Ukrainian government to explain the movements of its Buk systems to sites in eastern Ukraine and why Kiev’s Kupol-M19S18 radars, which coordinate the flight of Buk missiles, showed increased activity leading up to the July 17 shoot-down. The Ukrainian government countered by asserting that it had “evidence that the missile which struck the plane was fired by terrorists, who received arms and specialists from the Russian Federation,” according to Andrey Lysenko, spokesman for Ukraine’s Security Council, using Kiev’s preferred term for the rebels. On July 29, amid this escalating rhetoric, the Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity, a group of mostly retired U.S. intelligence officials, called on President Barack Obama to release what evidence the U.S. government had, including satellite imagery. “As intelligence professionals we are embarrassed by the unprofessional use of partial intelligence information,” the group wrote. “As Americans, we find ourselves hoping that, if you indeed have more conclusive evidence, you will find a way to make it public without further delay. In charging Russia with being directly or indirectly responsible, Secretary of State John Kerry has been particularly definitive. Not so the evidence.” But the Obama administration failed to make public any intelligence information that would back up its earlier suppositions. Then, in early August, I was told that some U.S. intelligence analysts had begun shifting away from the original scenario blaming the rebels and Russia to one focused more on the possibility that extremist elements of the Ukrainian government were responsible, funded by one of Ukraine’s rabidly anti-Russian oligarchs. [see Consortiumnews.com’s “Flight 17 Shoot-down Scenario Shifts”and “Was Putin Targeted for Mid-air Assassination?”] Last October, Der Spiegel reported that the German intelligence service, the BND, also had concluded that Russia was not the source of the missile battery – that it had been captured from a Ukrainian military base – but the BND still blamed the rebels for firing it. The BND also concluded that photos supplied by the Ukrainian government about the MH-17 tragedy “have been manipulated,” Der Spiegel reported. And, the BND disputed Russian government claims that a Ukrainian fighter jet had been flying close to MH-17, the magazine said, reporting on the BND’s briefing to a parliamentary committee on Oct. 8, 2014. But none of the BND’s evidence was made public — and I was subsequently told by a European official that the evidence was not as conclusive as the magazine article depicted. [see Consortiumnews.com’s “Germans Clear Russia in MH-17 Case.”] Dog Still Doesn’t Bark When the Dutch Safety Board investigating the crash issued an interim report in mid-October, it answered few questions, beyond confirming that MH-17 apparently was destroyed by “high-velocity objects that penetrated the aircraft from outside.” The 34-page Dutch report was silent on the “dog-not-barking” issue of whether the U.S. government had satellite surveillance that revealed exactly where the supposed ground-to-air missile was launched and who fired it. In January, when I re-contacted the source who had been briefed by the U.S. analysts, the source said their thinking had not changed, except that they believed the missile may have been less sophisticated than a Buk, possibly an SA-6, and that the attack may have also involved a Ukrainian jetfighter firing on MH-17. Since then there have been occasional news accounts about witnesses reporting that they did see a Ukrainian fighter plane in the sky and others saying they saw a missile possibly fired from territory then supposedly controlled by the rebels (although the borders of the conflict zone at that time were very fluid and the Ukrainian military was known to have mobile anti-aircraft missile batteries only a few miles away). But the larger dog-not-barking question is why the U.S. intelligence community has clammed up for nearly one year, even after I reported that I was being told that U.S. analysts had veered off in a different direction – from the initial blame-the-Russians approach – toward one focusing on a rogue Ukrainian attack. For its part, the DNI’s office has cited the need for secrecy even as it continues to refer to its July 22 report. But didn’t DNI James Clapper waive any secrecy privilege when he rushed out a report five days after the MH-17 shoot-down? Why was secrecy asserted only after the U.S. intelligence community had time to thoroughly review its photographic and electronic intelligence? Over the past 11 months, the DNI’s office has offered no updates on the initial assessment, with a DNI spokeswoman even making the absurd claim that U.S. intelligence has made no refinements of its understanding about the tragedy since July 22, 2014. If what I’ve been told is true, the reason for this silence would likely be that a reversal of the initial rush to judgment would be both embarrassing for the Obama administration and detrimental to an “information warfare” strategy designed to keep the Russians on the defensive. But if that’s the case, President Barack Obama may be acting even more recklessly than President Johnson did in 1964. As horrific as the Vietnam War was, a nuclear showdown with Russia could be even worse. Edited July 18, 2015 by Steven Gaal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Gaal Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 (edited) Excellent New Russian MH17 Documentary: Ukraine and West Are Guilty (Video) We couldn’t agree more. It is now quite clear that the Ukrainians shot the plane down, possibly in collusion with Western intelligence agencies. The orchestrated media campaign unleashed after the incident is damning enough on its own, and will rank as one of the most shameful media shams of all time - Goebbels, William Randolph Hearst, and the Spanish-American war included. ================= see http://russia-insider.com/en/politics/excellent-new-russian-mh17-documentary-ukraine-and-west-are-guilty-video/ri8883 Edited July 23, 2015 by Steven Gaal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Gaal Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 (edited) Ex-CIA Philip Giraldi: Dutch Government Report To Blame Russia For Malaysia Airlines Flight MH-17 Shootdown ============= Philip Giraldi, a former CIA officer and Executive Director of The Council for the National Interest, discusses why a Dutch government report on last year’s downing of Malaysia Airlines flight MH-17 over Ukraine will pin the blame on Russia, despite much evidence to the contrary. ============ podcast http://thenewsdoctors.com/ex-cia-philip-giraldi-dutch-government-report-to-blame-russia-for-malaysia-airlines-flight-mh-17-shootdown/ 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 Who Shot Down MH-17? ------------------------------------- Paul Craig Roberts (RINF) – The available evidence convinces me that the Malaysian airliner shot down over Ukraine was a plot hatched in Washington in order to blame Russia, blame which helps Washington’s pressure on Europe for sanctions against Russia. An alternative explanation is that Washington’s stooge government in Kiev in an assassination attempt against Vladimir Putin mistook the Malaysian airliner for Putin’s airplane. The circumstantial evidence in favor of the former explanation is that the Western media was primed and ready to go with stories blaming Russia the minute the news broke that the airliner had been downed. No evidence was available, but the Western media was uniform in accusations against Russia and “Russian-supported separatists.” In making up your own mind, consider these two reports: http://www.globalresearch.ca/support-mh17-truth-osce-monitors-identify-shrapnel-like-holes-indicating-shelling-no-firm-evidence-of-a-missile-attack/5394324 http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/28-07-2015/131502-unanswered_questions-0/ Edited July 30, 2015 by Steven Gaal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evan Burton Posted July 31, 2015 Author Share Posted July 31, 2015 I've seen the nutters claim that the MH370 wreckage could not have ended up on the island, that it must have been "planted". As usual, they are wrong: a prior example: http://hamptonroads.com/node/99661 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Gaal Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 (edited) SOMETHING SMELLS ABOUT THE NON RUSSIAN CHANGE IN FLIGHT PATH , gaal __________________________________________________________________________________________ MH17, One Year On: What Really Happened, And Why By Patrick Henningsen Global Research, July 21, 2015 Sott.net 17 July 2015 http://www.globalresearch.ca/mh17-one-year-on-what-really-happened-and-why/5463625 Edited July 31, 2015 by Steven Gaal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evan Burton Posted August 1, 2015 Author Share Posted August 1, 2015 Funny how the Russians are blocking any attempt to catch those who fired the missile. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Gaal Posted August 1, 2015 Share Posted August 1, 2015 (edited) Funny how the Russians are blocking any attempt to catch those who fired the missile. Proposed Tribunal on MH17 Crash to Become Kangaroo Court for Putin = Experts claim that the proposed UN tribunal on the MH17 plane crash in southeastern Ukraine would descend into a veritable kangaroo court on Russia’s alleged role in what the West believes was a downing by Moscow-backed Ukrainian militias. MOSCOW (Sputnik) — The proposed UN tribunal on the MH17 plane crash in southeastern Ukraine would descend into a veritable kangaroo court on Russia’s alleged role in what the West believes was a downing by Moscow-backed Ukrainian militias, experts told Sputnik on Friday. On Wednesday, Russia blocked a UN draft resolution to set up an international tribunal to prosecute those behind the Malaysian Boeing 777 plane crash in July 2014. Moscow said it would continue to assist the impartial probe into the tragedy that left 298 people dead, but only under the terms of the previous UN resolution on the matter. "The aim of those who wanted to create the tribunal was to make a body of international justice [that would] become a tribunal against the Russian leader [Vladimir Putin]," said Martin Braxatoris, co-chairman of the Slovak news portal DespiteBorders.com. © Sputnik/ Mikhail Voskresensky Kremlin Slams MH17 Tribunal Initiatives As Distraction From Investigation Stevan Gajic, a research fellow at the Institute for European Studies in Belgrade, told Sputnik that Malaysia's tribunal bid, backed by Ukraine, Australia, Belgium and the Netherlands, was effectively aimed at creating "a propaganda machine to blame Russia" and make Putin the "Hitler of the month.""If we take into consideration the statements made by such people as the former UN Secretary General’s Special Envoy for the Balkans, who compared Putin to [Yugoslavian former president Slobodan] Milosevic, I think that those who want to create the tribunal want to blame Russia, but in the end to blame personally Putin," Gajic said. Braxatoris noted that countries behind the Hague tribunal bid had a "ready verdict" on Russia’s involvement even as they floated this idea. It is based on evidence that has never been made public, despite Moscow’s calls for any relevant information to be shared with all the parties concerned. "Therefore I think it could repeat the fate of the Tribunal on former Yugoslavia. There is a serious risk that the work of this organ would have been politicized," he said. The International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia was set up in 1993 to probe war crimes committed on its territory since 1991. Gajic said that it followed a colonial court model that put its creators above the legal process. "I think that this is the reason for the Russian misgivings about the Tribunal on the Malaysian Boeing. Russia smells the malicious intent," he said, adding that Russia would not be in control of the proceedings like some of the other interested parties. Russia has repeatedly stressed that the initiative to create a tribunal is premature and counterproductive. Moscow insists that it is necessary to wait for the Dutch Safety Board to release their final report into the crash. Read more: http://sputniknews.com/analysis/20150731/1025282534.html#ixzz3hXIoImHA Edited August 1, 2015 by Steven Gaal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Gaal Posted August 4, 2015 Share Posted August 4, 2015 (edited) Dutch Safety Board asks for RT’s assistance in MH17 probe after documentary Submitted by IWB, on August 4th, 2015 ===== http://investmentwatchblog.com/dutch-safety-board-asks-for-rts-assistance-in-mh17-probe-after-documentary/ Read more at http://investmentwatchblog.com/dutch-safety-board-asks-for-rts-assistance-in-mh17-probe-after-documentary/#CsEoP4SPqmEtsIXD.99 Edited August 4, 2015 by Steven Gaal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Gaal Posted August 6, 2015 Share Posted August 6, 2015 (edited) The MH17 Pilot’s Corpse: More on the Cover-Up Even His Family Was Blocked from It. Here’s Why. -------------------------- By Eric Zuesse Global Research, August 05, 2015 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- It might be the decisive piece of evidence proving who and what and how and why the MH17 Malaysian airliner over the conflict zone in Ukraine on 17 July 2014 was shot down, but the pilot’s corpse has been hidden even from the people who have the most right to see it. The corpse of the pilot of the MH17 Malaysian airliner might contain in it bullets, or bullet-residues, that can prove a Ukrainian military jet intentionally fired into the pilot; or else it might contain only missile-shrapnel, which would be consistent only with the plane’s having been erroneously shot down by a ground-based missile such as the Ukrainian government says it was; but the Malaysian government has prohibited anyone to see it — not even his relatives, who are still trying to find out how and who murdered their loved-one and the 297 other people who were aboard that tragic plane on July 17th of 2014. Until recently, the Malaysian government itself had had no access to the coroner’s report on the corpse: it was done by a Dutch coroner, in Holland. The corpse has been hidden from everyone, and the Malaysian Government isn’t even being permitted, by the other four nations on the official investigatory commission, to say anything to anyone outside the commission — not even to the pilot’s family. The coroner’s report on the pilot’s body exists, but has been seen by no one outside of the now 5-nation investigatory commission. (The commission was originally just Netherlands, Belgium, Australia, and Ukraine, but Malaysia was recently added. The Dutch government heads the commission. The Dutch government had helped to install the current Ukrainian government, whose Air Force is a suspect in having possibly shot down the MH17 airliner. Netherlands, along with the U.S., and also along with George Soros’s International Renaissance Foundation, had funded Hromadske TV, which propagandized heavily for forcing the democratically elected Ukrainian President, Viktor Yanukovych, to leave his Presidency before the next election would be held, and which then propagandized Ukrainians heavily for the ethnic cleansing operation to get rid of the residents in Ukraine’s Donbass, the only area of Ukraine that had voted 90%+ for Yanukovych. So: the Dutch government had actually helped to install the current Ukrainian government — which might have shot down the MH17, and yet which is a member of the official ‘investigation.’) This cover-up of what might be the decisive evidence in the MH17 case was revealed when Russian Television sent reporters last month to interview the pilot’s family. See the brief Russian documentary interviewing the pilot’s wife here: The pilot’s wife says, at 5:42 on the video, “We were not allowed to open” the coffin. Q: “Not allowed by who?” A: “Not allowed by the [Malaysian] government.” The existing four-nation team had required the Malaysian government to sign onto their secret 8 August 2014 agreement, in order for Malaysia to be allowed to join. This agreement says that Ukraine will have a veto-power over any report that the commission produces — and this veto-power is the reason why the ‘investigation’ continues dragging on. The now-five nation commission can’t yet produce a report that the Ukrainian government will sign onto. Then, the interviewer in the documentary says that she had taken her camera-crew to the crash site two months after the plane’s downing, and says that they saw there, still in the field of grass, the pilot’s chair. This video at 6:21 shows it — its bare frame, because the padding had blown off. Here is the pilot’s chair: Those 30 mm round holes through it are bullet holes; they’re definitely not shrapnel holes, which are larger and very irregular (not at all round). Furthermore, the bullet-holes through the side-panel of the chair’s backrest are fairly head-on instead of at any steep angle; and, so, might have been from stray bullets among the gunner’s fusillade into the left cockpit-side that was focused around the pilot’s belly-area. This chair backrest is thus yet further evidence suggesting that the pilot’s corpse had bullets, or bullet-residues, in it. For more background on the pilot’s corpse’s evidentiary importance to solving this crucial mass-murder case, see this. For my reconstruction of the evidence, and of where it points to regarding guilt and motive, see this. RUSSIA’S GAME ON THIS: On July 29th, Russia vetoed at the United Nations an attempt by the U.S. and its allies to transfer the MH17 investigation to a rigged UN commission that would be set up in order to enable the guilt for the cover-up to be transferred away from Netherlands, Belgium, Australia, and Ukraine, the four nations that set up the existing official corrupt ‘investigation,’ whose ‘findings,’ at this late stage, would be believed only by outright suckers in the West — and that number of people might not be enough now to protect the actual guilty parties in the case. Russia wants the guilty parties to bear the blame not merely for the mass-murder itself, but for the subsequent and ongoing cover-ups. If the official ‘investigation’ finds Russia and/or the people of Donbass to have perpetrated it, then Russia will presumably make public, evidence, which it has thus far withheld just in case America and its allies turn out to be that brazen. So, Russia might even be eager for that to happen. The official ‘investigation’ has already announced that its conclusions will be made public in October. Until then, the commission is doing everything they can to forestall, if not prevent, a scandal-squared, from resulting. (For example: if anything, Richard Nixon’s Watergate cover-up doomed him even more than the Watergate-crime itself did.) Here are some of the typical ways the Western press have reported on Russia’s veto: “Russia threatens UN veto on Julie Bishop’s MH17 tribunal” “Why Russia Vetoed the MH17 Tribunal” “Alternative solution needed for investigating loss of MH17: Russia’s Security Council veto means other means may be used to find those responsible” For some unexplained (though accepted-without-question by the Western press) reason, the Western powers aren’t satisfied for the official ‘investigating’ commission (though itself entirely Western until the recent addition of Malaysia to the commission) to be blamed for producing the official ‘findings.’ Western leaders had wanted the UN to be blamed instead. Russia voted no on the Western proposal (which was fronted by Malaysia, on behalf of the West); China abstained (perhaps in the hope that the West won’t go after them, too). The result is heightened fear within the official ‘investigating’ commission. On 3 August 2015, Russian Television headlined “Dutch Safety Board asks for RT’s assistance in MH17 probe after documentary,”and reported that: The Dutch agency heading the international probe into Malaysia Airlines MH17 crash in eastern Ukraine has contacted RT over the footage used in our recent documentary on the tragedy. RT’s documentary discovered fragments of the plane still in Donetsk. The RT Documentary film, titled “MH17: A year without truth,” showed fragments of the crashed Boeing and pieces of luggage still scattered in the area at the time of filming. The RTD crew collected the parts of the plane’s exterior they spotted, bringing them to the administration of the nearby town of Petropavlovsk. “With great interest we watched your documentary, ‘MH17: A year without truth,’” Dutch Safety Board spokesperson Sara Vernooij wrote to RT. “In this film, RT shows parts of the cockpit roof which were found near Petropavlivka. We would like to gather those pieces and bring them over to the Netherlands so the Dutch Safety Board can use them for the investigation and the reconstruction.” On 17 July 2015, Rupert Murdoch’s Australian Courier-Mail published behind a paywall, and his The Australian republished open on their website, the complete transcript, plus video excerpts, of 17 minutes of video footage that had been taken by the independence fighters in Donbass at the wreckage site while the fires were still aflame on the fateful day, 17 July 2014; and this remarkable footage, never before made public, and published by a lifelong anti-Russian, shows the rebels’ “Commander,” trying to understand what he was seeing, and saying that there are two planes destroyed in the area, one a Malaysian airliner, and the other a Sukhoi fighter-jet, the latter from which had parachuted out five (or else two) people. Someone off-camera in the background is saying, “They decided to do it this way, to look like we have brought down the plane.” In other words: these people speculated immediately that the presence of the downed fighter-jet indicated that the Ukrainian authorities were trying to pin onto the rebels the blame for shooting down the airliner. Here is that link, and the relevant passages in the transcript itself: http://www.news.com.au/national/full-transcript-russian-backed-rebels-ransack-the-wreckage-of-mh17-in-shocking-17-minute-video/story-e6frfkp9-1227444629703 “Full transcript: Russian-backed rebels ransack the wreckage of MH17 in shocking 17-minute video” • JULY 17, 2015 12:01AM • Video [just an excerpt, but the transcript is complete, only excerpts from which are reproduced here:] Cmdr: Yes, there’s 2 planes taken down. We need the second. Background: The second one is a civilian too? Background: The fighter jet brought down this one, and our people brought down the fighter. Background: They decided to do it this way, to look like we have brought down the plane. … Cmdr: Let the firefighters extinguish the flames. (Phone ringing) Yes Kalyian. I understood you, but we’re already at the crash site. A passenger plane was brought down. They brought down the passenger plane and we brought down the fighter. … Cmdr: The parachute jumpers are there. Background: But there are two planes, from my understanding. Background: And what’s the other one? A Sukhoi? Cmdr: A Sukhoi. The Sukhoi brought down the plane and we brought down the Sukhoi. … I mean … the two pilots landed on parachutes. (Phone ringing) Cmdr: Yes, speak. I’m here, I’m in Grabovo. Right at the place. I’m not at the bird site, I’m in the field. I didn’t get there yet. Cmdr: Five parachutes jumped off this plane. Five people jumped off this plane. … Of course, at that chaotic moment, everything was new, and so the assertions by those people (for example, as regards whether there were five parachutists, or only two) were uncertain. One early reader of this article, who looked at that video, made the following insightful observation: “Ironically, the Dutch wanted the piece of cockpit roof of the plane. That piece showed no bullet or shrapnel impacts – which in essence excludes a Buk missile. Buk missiles engage the target from above.” That’s entirely correct. So: Might the Dutch Safety Board actually have been trying to nail down a case so strong against Ukraine, as to now be negotiating with Ukraine Ukraine’s capitulation – the degree of guilt that Ukraine must sign onto in the final report? (Sort of like in a plea-bargain.) How could Obama (whose power stands above all of the nations on the commission) deal with such a situation? CONCLUSION: It’s like the way the West handled the 2008 economic crash: extend-and-pretend. While Western leaders transferred their aristocracy’s investment losses onto future taxpayers and pretended that the enormous governmental debts that resulted from these ‘bailouts’ to the aristocracy won’t destroy the economic future for the public, no one can yet say with certainty that they were lying about that. As ridiculous as extend-and-pretend seems to be, no appropriate historical precedent exists to show with any near certainty that no way will be found for it to ‘succeed.’ Russia has apparently placed its bet that it won’t succeed, in regards to the MH17 case. Russia’s game seems to be: In the short term, we’ll suffer contempt from the West’s suckers while Western leaders keep on doing this; but, the longer the West’s leaders do that, the worse the outcome will be for those leaders. So: will that game on Russia’s part work? The precedents don’t look favorable: After George W. Bush kept lying about “Saddam’s WMD,” and became exposed simply by none being found, did his extend-and-pretend on the truth there hurt his Republican Party? They extended the lie so far that even today most Republicans still think that WMD did exist there in 2002 and 2003, and they even think that WMD were subsequently found there — though none of that was at all true. Even in 2015, 51% of Republicans agree with the statement, “American Forces Found an Active Weapons of Mass Destruction Program In Iraq.” (32% of Democrats do. 46% of Independents do.) (40% of Republicans said it was “Definitely not true” or “Probably not true,” but yet even they continued to label themselves as “Republican,” even after their own Party had deceived them for so long on such a crucial matter, which had produced America’s invasion of Iraq.) Despite such brazen lying, the Republican Party still has as many suckers as before. (And, in the Democratic Party, Barack Obama is still overwhelmingly supported, despite being now exposed, to all open-minded people, to be the best asset the Republican Party has hadwithin recent decades.) Extend-and-pretend can work for a very long time, indeed. Russia’s game could fail. But it might nonetheless be their best chance to win. If the West’s game succeeds, then the entire world will fail as a result. If some power-group — here, the West’s aristocrats — can get away with lying, no matter how long they persist in it, they might as well own the entire world: the public are then just their slaves. The public might as well have no minds at all. Anyone who accepts a politician who has lied is either an aristocrat or an idiot. There are only a few thousand aristocrats in the world, but there are, it is clear, plenty of idiots — perhaps the majority of people — so that everyone else, the decent people, suffer constantly the many idiots who believe the few aristocrats. That combination is toxic to democracy. The MH17 case started before the event itself, as Barack Obama’s desperate attempt to get the EU to agree to hiking the economic sanctions against Russia. It succeeded. Now the world is waiting to see what Obama’s long game is, and whether Putin’s long game (which is the only game he’s got) will beat it. Whatever the outcome, it’ll be interesting. Edited August 6, 2015 by Steven Gaal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Gaal Posted August 17, 2015 Share Posted August 17, 2015 (edited) Bellingcat = nutter(((Nutters come out regarding the latest MAS crash ))),gaal ------------------------------------- Propaganda Explained: Who is the West’s Lead MH17 Investigator? = http://www.activistpost.com/2015/08/propaganda-explained-who-is-the-wests-lead-mh17-investigator.html = ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- By Ulson Gunnar = As tensions once again build in eastern Ukraine where a fragile ceasefire appears to be on the brink of collapsing and the deadly contest of wills between East and West begins anew, the West’s prize propaganda story, downed Malaysian Airlines flight MH17 has again taken center stage. As part of a much wider campaign to demonize Russia and justify further encroachment east, attempts to cement the narrative that Russia was responsible for the incident before long-awaited investigations present their findings is well underway. While Russia has provided all documented evidence it possesses since the incident first occurred, data including recordings and radar readouts from NATO and Ukraine have been suspiciously withheld. Instead of presenting documented evidence, the United States and its partners in NATO have worked tirelessly to stand up innuendo and baseless accusations in its place. Perhaps understanding that appealing to the emotions of the general public rather than their intelligence and reasoning seemed a better strategy to achieve the swaying of global opinion against Russia. And perhaps a lack of actual evidence, or perhaps the existence of self-incriminating evidence has forced the United States and its collaborators to opt for this alternate tack. While Russia drew upon its intelligence community and military assets to acquire and analyze information regarding the MH17 tragedy, the United States and NATO, despite their immense resources have turned instead to literally the most unqualified individual within their borders to lead its own unofficial “investigation.” Since the US and NATO have clearly decided to try Russia in the court of public opinion, it is only suitable that the investigation unfolds there as well. Meet Detective Couch Potato Leading American and NATO efforts to manage public perception regarding MH17 is professional couch-potato Eliot Higgins. Previously a laid-off government worker living in the United Kingdom, Higgins began blogging from home under the pen name “Brown Moses.” His work was not entirely malicious at first. By applying objectivity and serving as a resource compiling vast amounts of information regarding the conflict in Syria he acquired a large following. His work apparently caught the attention of corporate and state media operations, and in particular, the London Guardian. It was his association there and an apparent financial arrangement was struck alleviating his unemployment and causing Higgins to cash in his objectivity to use his somewhat unique brand of citizen journalism as a sort of Trojan Horse. The established media of the US, UK and much of Europe has consistently betrayed and subsequently lost the trust of the public. By cultivating “alternative journalists” to repeat mainstream lies disguised as alternative commentary, it is hoped that lost ground in manipulating the general public can be gained back. Despite Higgins’ complete lack of forensic, military, geopolitical and academic background he is endlessly deferred to and given column space throughout the largest Western papers, magazines and online journals. Finding “Facts” Between the Cushions When in August of 2013 chemical weapons were used in an attack near the Syrian capital of Damascus, the United States and its European allies immediately blamed the Syrian government. With unprecedented speed, the decision to topple the Syrian government through direct military intervention was made. Yet just as fast as the US declared its intents, its pretext for war was dismissed by a skeptical public. When it came time to produce evidence, it was withheld (and is to this day) under the excuse that revealing it would compromise how it was gathered and thus jeopardize future operations. Higgins, in tandem with hired defense contractor Dan Kaszeta, were tasked with building a body of lies inside the void left by the United States’ official refusal to release what they claimed they knew about the attacks. When award-winning journalist Seymour Hersh released his own report on the attack, the closest, most accurate and most credible account to date of what actually happened along the outskirts of Damascus during the summer of 2013, Higgins and his supporters throughout the establishment media shamelessly wrote Hersh off as old fashioned and out of touch. Unlike Higgins, however, Hersh’s report was based on intelligence and security professionals working in the United States government and their reports drawn from some of the best information available … not compilations of YouTube videos, Google Maps, dubious e-mail conversations with unverified anonymous individuals and amateur photographic “forensics.” Is Reading Stains on the Sofa Really Analysis? Higgins’ attention now follows wherever the Western media needs it most. Lately that has been in eastern Ukraine. He has been the star non-witness cum non-expert regarding all matters Ukraine and in particular, MH17. Since the United States and the rest of NATO refuses to release what evidence they claim they have (again), it has been up to Higgins and the growing mainstream media circus surrounding him to once again fill the void. This explains why Higgins consistently only finds faults with Russia’s side of the story. At one point Higgins accused Russia of using Photoshop to doctor satellite images it provided to better illustrate the state of the battlefield when MH17 was downed. German paper Spiegel consulted a real expert to refute Higgins and his “Bellingcat research group’s” accusations. When Jens Kriese, a researcher and professional image forensics expert, was asked what his thoughts were on Higgins’ use of the analysis tool FotoForensic.com, he responded by saying: …[FotoForensic.com’s] founder Neal Krawetz also distanced himself from Bellingcat’s conclusions on Twitter. He described it as a good example of “how to not do image analysis.” What Bellingcat is doing is nothing more than reading tea leaves. Error Level Analysis is a method used by hobbyists. Of course, the practice of “reading tea leaves” is based part on fraud, part on superstition, using one’s fears, ignorance and insecurities to gain advantage over them either socially or financially or both by claiming to hold exclusive insight into what otherwise random tea leaves are telling one about their future fortunes. And that is precisely what Higgins and his dubious methods are all about. He is compiling otherwise random and/or irrelevant facts and interpreting them under the guise of being an “expert” knowing that the general public lacks the experience or expertise to know whether he is being truthful or not. Russia’s evidence can and should be examined and scrutinized. But those that accuse Russia of downing MH17 are not even underpinning these accusations with their own evidence, but, instead, resort to the intentional misinterpretation of circumstances, events and evidence presented by others to suit an already predetermined conclusion. Like Syria in regards to claims Damascus was behind the deadly 2013 chemical attack, or before that in Iraq where the United States claimed the government in Baghdad maintained a dangerous arsenal of “weapons of mass destruction,” the US is again convicting its enemies of crimes with a suspicious lack of evidence. When the United States and Europe find their media, the voice representing their collective civilization across the rest of the globe, deferring to an unemployed couch potato to bolster baseless lies through the blatant, intentional and systematic abuse of research and analysis, new lows have been plumbed that only reflects further on the depravity and intellectual destitution the once champions of science and reason have arrived at. Edited August 17, 2015 by Steven Gaal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Gaal Posted August 29, 2015 Share Posted August 29, 2015 5 August: Even More Certain Now: Obama’s Ukrainian Stooges Did Intentionally Down that Malaysian Airliner = http://rinf.com/alt-news/editorials/5-august-even-certain-now-obamas-ukrainian-stooges-intentionally-malaysian-airliner/#comment-532229 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Dolva Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 (edited) [21+] American-style provocation. Boeing-777 flight MH-17 Дата публикации: 23 Сентябрь 2015, 17:14 Contains previously unpublished footage from the catastrophe scene 07/17/2014. News Front documentary. On July 17, 2014 Malaysian Boeing 777 was flying from Amsterdam to Kuala-Lumpur. But plane doesn’t reach the ultimate goal and crashed in the east of Ukraine in the area of the village Hrabovo, near Torez. On board were 283 passengers and 15 crew members — all of them died. The reaction on the air accident in the media followed almost before when the tragedy happened itself. West categorically blamed the accident on Russia, but still didn’t provide any evidences. [21+] Provokation in US-Manier. Boeing 777, Flug MH17Постоянная ссылка: http://news-front.info/2015/09/23/21-american-style-provocation-boeing-777-flight-mh-17/Благодарим за материал © http://News-Front.info/#1 https://www.youtube.com/embed/p4JCm7gq6eA edit layout Edited September 24, 2015 by John Dolva Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evan Burton Posted September 24, 2015 Author Share Posted September 24, 2015 John, I believe that you consider that - in general - the western media reporting on MH17 is either deliberate disinformation or misguided belief in false facts. You also believe that the Russian reporting on the incident is far more accurate and truthful. I'm pretty much opposite though I don't know who fired the weapon; I think that it is likely that separatists fired the weapon. How they got it is anyones guess. Is there anything that you believe would make you change your opinion on this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Dolva Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 (edited) Evan, like you I don't know who.I have no reason to change my judgement that there was a US supported coup in Kiev that grew out of a popular expression of discontent that was usurped by lumpen elements controlled by wealthy Nazis, very much like the German Nazi Party SA (brown shirts) leading up to the seizure of power in Germany by the Nazi Party, serving the economic interests of Western Capital with an ultimate aim of controlling the vast wealth of Russia and at the same time destroying the elements in society that always fights against a Racist State and austerity as a solution to Capitals crisis, namely progressive proletarian groupings.Like the German Nazis the Kiev Nazis have Racialised society and criminalised the Left and like Nazis they rule by terror.The free Republics are Anti-Fascist. They welcome the help from left wing internationalists in their battalions.The Western interests arm and train the known Ukrainian Nazi Battalions. The msm propagandises favourably for the Kiev Junta.Right from the start the people in the east have asked to be listened to. One of the first things the junta did was to ban the russian language that the majority of their eastern opposition speak.The downing of the plane has been used as a cover to slaughter thousands of people.Clearly the Nazis do not care one bit about the people who died. The US likewise have no sympathy. Mouthpieces of Washington have stated as much.The Nazis fight to control and dominate economic resources. The Rebels fight for a fascist free life.In that context. If the Rebels (, who did not have the weapon nor the means to use them properly, but lets say they did,) had shot a missile that hit the plane they would know that very likely there were satellite photos of the event, likewise they could not know whether or not there were people with cameras etc that recorded the event in some way. Instead they protested right from the start against the categorical statements by pro kiev organs. It would be in the interest of the Nazis to have any anti Rebel material released. Instead it's witheld. If the Nazis shot it down it would be in their interest to suppress anything that showed the truth. In fact that is what looks like what has happened. The necessary proof is not forth coming. As per the documetary, people who can refute the Rebels statements and the statements of eye witnesses have disappeared.Show me otherwise. edit typos Edited September 24, 2015 by John Dolva Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now