http://vineyardsaker..co.nz/2014/08/detailed-expert-analysis-of-mh17-downing.html

Detailed expert analysis of the MH17 downing



Dear friends,

It is a huge pleasure for me to submit to you a detailed analysis made by "CDN" of the circumstances of the downing of MH17.

You will notice that CDN's analysis does not agree with my own hypothesis. The difference being that CDN does have the professional expertise (accident investigation) to write such a report while I do not. Still, CDN has specifically asked me to "please encourage readers to be critical of my analysis" which I indeed encourage you to do: his analysis does not pretend to be The One And Only Truth but instead a basis for discussion.

You can download his full report by clicking on either one of the following links:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0ByibNV3SiUoobnpCVDduaHVORHM/edit?usp=sharing

http://www.mediafire.com/view/61qa99yt6v3dq64/MH17Analysis_Parts_1_and_2.pdf

I am getting increasingly frustrated and angry at the fact that clearly the Dutch and the British, obviously under the orders of Uncle Sam, are sitting on the data of the flight data recorders and not releasing them. At the very least, the following countries have the recordings of the radio contacts between MH17 and the Kiev ATC:

1) The junta's SBU
2) The USA
3) Russia

and then two more countries - France and Switzerland - which probably have them too. Even if these recordings are destroyed, there are enough people out there who by now who know what happened. The truth will come out sooner or later. In the meantime, the main task is not to discover The One And Only Truth, but first to disprove the complex of lies of the Empire and, then, to gradually get close and closer to the truth.

We all owe a huge debt of gratitude to CDN who produced a professional-grade report and made it available for us for the sole reward of advancing the cause of truth and justice. I am personally deeply grateful to CDN for choosing this blog to release his report.

I ask you all to share with us your comments, especially your critical ones, to make it possible for CDN to refine his analysis. This would be the best way to thank him for his truly excellent work.

The Saker

When your lies that falling like a pack of cards, your narrative gets more desperate and bizarre.....

Just read what these neo-nazis are now saying........Tory don change!...

The official MH17 narrative still prevails: the “pro-Russian rebels” shot down Malaysian airlines MH17 with a Buk missile system provided by Russia.

In a new and rather unusual twist, however, according to the Kiev regime, the Donetsk militia did not intend to shoot down Malaysian airlines MH17. What the “pro-Russian rebels” were aiming at was a Russian Aeroflot passenger plane.

The MH17 was shot down “by mistake” according to an official statement by the head of Ukraine’s Secret Service, Valentyn Nalyvaichenko (Ukraine News Service, August 7, 2014)

According to SBU Chief Nalyvaichenko:


“Ukraine’s law enforcement and intelligence agencies have established during the investigation into a terrorist attack on the Boeing… that on that day, July 17, and at that time military mercenaries and terrorists from the Russian Federation planned to carry out a terrorist attack against a passenger aircraft of Aeroflot en route from Moscow to Larnaca… as a pretext for the further invasion by Russia,”

“This cynical terrorist attack was planned for the day when the [Malaysia Airlines] plane happened to fly by, planned by war criminals as a pretext for the further military invasion by the Russian Federation, that is, there would be a casus belli,” he added.

Thus, according Nalyvaichenko, the terrorists downed the Malaysian airliner by mistake.” (Ukraine Interfax News, August 8, 2014)

Nalyvaichenko said that the Kiev government reached this conclusion “in the course of its own investigation into the downing of MH17″.

According to Britain’s foremost news tabloid, The Mail on Sunday, quoting the head of Ukraine intelligence, the insidious design of the pro-Russian rebels (supported by Moscow) was to shoot down a Russian commercial airline plane, with a view to blaming the Ukrainian government. The objective of this alleged “false flag” covert op was to create a justifiable and credible pretext for Vladimir Putin to declare war on Ukraine.




In an utterly twisted logic, according to Ukraine’s head of intelligence:


“the [Donesk] rebels were meant to down [the] Aeroflot plane… to justify the invasion [of Ukraine by Russia]“,

Valentyn Nalyvaichenko (below), head of Ukraine intelligence confirms that the pro-Russian rebels were “aiming at a Russian passenger plane “so Putin had reason to invade”.



“the crime was planned as a ground for bringing of Russian troops into Ukraine, that is – CASUS BELLI for the Russian military invasion.” (Official statement of Ukraine Security Service, in annex below)

In a bitter irony, the alleged “false flag” covert op got muddled. The Donesk rebels got it all wrong and hit the MH17 plane by mistake.

That’s the “official line” now emanating from Kiev’s “intelligent” Secret Service (SBU), yet to be corroborated by their Western intelligence counterparts including the CIA and Britain’s MI6 which are actively collaborating with Ukraine’s SBU.


The head of Ukraine’s secret service has claimed rebels intended to down a Russian airliner to give Vladimir Putin a pretext for invasion – but blasted Flight MH17 out of the sky by mistake. (ibid)

In its authoritative report, the British news tabloid fails to beg the important question: why on earth would pro-Russian rebels who are at war with the Kiev regime shoot down a Russian passenger plane AFL-2074 allegedly with a view to harnessing Russia’s support?

What’s more, according to SBU Chief Valentyn Nalyvaichenko’s statement, Moscow was helping the pro-Russian rebels in their alleged false flag op to shoot down Russia’s Aeroflot plane by providing them with a Buk missile system, which had been discretely smuggled across the border to the Donesk region of Eastern Ukraine. The Aeroflot plane was slated to be “shot down over territory controlled by Ukrainian government troops”:


Valentyn Nalyvaichenko said that Russian-backed fighters were supposed to take their BUK rocket launcher – which had been transported across the Russian border – to a village called Pervomaiskoe in Ukrainian-held territory west of Donetsk.



Image source: Mail on Sunday, August 10, 2014

But they “screwed up”. The Buk rocket launcher was apparently positioned in the wrong rural location (see image above) and because of that it targeted the MH17 by mistake:


Instead, they mistakenly positioned it in a rebel-controlled village of the same name to the east of the city.

Got it wrong? Valentyn Nalyvaichenko claims pro-Russian rebels targeted the wrong civilian airliner


If they had gone where they had been ordered, he said, they would have hit an Aeroflot flight carrying civilians travelling from Moscow to Larnaca in Cyprus.

Crucially, the crash site would have been in Ukrainian-held territory. (Mail on Sunday)

The pro-Russian rebels had allegedly planned an Operation Northwoods type “false flag” with utmost proficiency. The covert op consisted in downing a Russian passenger plane with Moscow’s support. The alleged objective was for Moscow to place the blame on the government of Ukraine which had ordered the downing of the Aeroflot plane (resulting in the deaths of Russian tourists), thereby creating a “useful wave of indignation” across the Russian Federation.

The “false flag” implemented by the Donetsk rebels would then spearhead public support for a Russian invasion of Ukraine, with patriotic Russian troops coming to the rescue of the pro-Russian separatists:


The mass killing of Russian tourists could then have been blamed on the Ukrainian army, giving Moscow a justification for invasion, said Mr Nalyvaichenko, head of the Ukrainian intelligence service, the SBU. (ibid)

The official SBU report states that the


“Russian side would need a compelling argument for such a step, for example accusation of the Ukrainian government in mass murder of the Russian citizens [on the plane]” (See complete SBU statement in Annex below).

According to the head of Ukraine’s Secret Service: “It is incredibly cynical that the act of terrorism was planned [by the rebels] against peaceful innocent Russian citizens who were on the way to their holidays with children”:


‘This cynical terrorist act was intended to justify an immediate military invasion by the Russian Federation,’ he said.

Aeroflot flight AFL2074 was close to Malaysia Airlines flight MH17 when it was blown out of the sky on July 17, killing all 298 on board, he said.

… He claimed this was a significant conclusion of Kiev’s probe into MH17’s downing. (Ibid)

It is worth noting that an earlier GR report pointed to the possibility of an Operation Northwoods type False Flag undertaken by the Kiev regime (in liaison with Washington) with a view to blaming Russia for the downing of flight MH17.

While there is no firm evidence as yet of a Kiev sponsored false flag, reports confirm unequivocally the presence of at least one Ukrainian military aircraft in proximity of the flight path of MH17.

Mainstream Media Response to Kiev regime’s accusations

Normally, the Western media would provide ample coverage and commentary to an official Kiev statement pertaining to MH17.

With the exception of Ukraine News Service and London’s Mail on Sunday report, the official statement of the head of Ukraine’s Secret Service has gone largely unnoticed. Normally, a declaration of this nature would be picked up by the wire services with syndicated reports flooding the front page of the Western news chain.

Was the mainstream media instructed to temporarily “put a hold” on reporting on the revelations of Ukraine’s Secret Service.

The Kiev regime’s allegations are far-fetched: the Donesk rebels –largely involved in combat operations– have neither the capabilities nor the desire to undertake a complex intelligence operation of this nature. What purpose would it serve?

Was Washington consulted before the release of the dodgy SBU False Flag report?

Did they give their Green Light to the release of the SBU report as a means to “Frame Russia”.

Were the CIA and MI6 consulted? Britain’s Secret Service MI6 has access to the plane’s black box, which was handed over by the Dutch task force to an unnamed partner entity in the UK.

Sofar, neither the White House nor the mainstream media, not to mention the US intelligence community, have commented on the Ukraine’s SBU statement. The latter has been endorsed by the Kiev government.

It is worth noting that the statement of Ukraine’s intelligence service was made following the release of evidence by the OSCE mission that there were “machine gun like bullet holes” in the fuselage indicating that the MH17 had been brought down by cannon fire from a military aircraft.

Ukraine’s Chief Spy Valentyn Nalyvaichenko confirms that the SBU report on the alleged “false flag” has been submitted to the MH17 investigation task force headed by The Netherlands.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Annex

Official Statement of Ukraine’s Security Service (August 7, 2014)

Terrorists and Militants planned cynical terrorist attack at Aeroflot civil aircraft

During the investigation of Malaysia Airlines Boeing-777 downing the law enforcement and intelligence bodies established that terrorists and militants have cynically planned the terrorist attack at Aeroflot civil aircraft, AFL-2074 Moscow-Larnaca, which was flying over the territory of Ukraine at that moment. Hereof informed the Head of the Security Service of Ukraine Mr. Valentyn Nalyvaichenko during the briefing today.

He underlined – the crime was planned as a ground for bringing of Russian troops into Ukraine, that is – CASUS BELLI for the Russian military invasion.

According to the official Ukrainian data, June 17, 2014, at the mentioned time two regular international flights were operating over the territory of Ukraine following the filed requests for aircraft clearance – MAS17 plane of the Malaysia Airlines and AFL-2074 one of Aeroflot.

The routes of the mentioned international flights were approaching the sky over Donetsk. At 16:09 in the area of Novomykolaivka town the routes of the mentioned flights crossed. It is worth noting that the flight specifications of the aircrafts were almost identical – the Malaysian aircraft flew at a height of 10,100 m at a speed 909 km/h, while the Russian one – at a height of 10,600 m at a speed 768 km/h.

At 16:20 from the area of ‘Pervomaiske’ village, north-east from Donetsk, near the town of Torez, terrorists shot down the Malaysian jet, which then crashed near Grabove, Donetsk region.

According to the intercepted and published data about the ‘Buk” missile system, the terrorists had received an order to place the system near ‘Pervomaiskoe’ village, V. Nalyvaichenko mentioned. The namesake village is located about 20 km to the north-east from Donetsk.

The terrorists (most of them are not locals, but the Russian mercenaries) misrecognized the namesake villages and moved the other way, the SSU Head said. The odd route of the ‘Buk’ missile system on the territory of Ukraine proves that fact. The system crossed the Russia-Ukraine border in Luhansk region, then was deployed westward to Donetsk and moved back to the border between Donetsk and Luhansk regions afterwards.

By setting up the ‘Buk’ missile system in ‘Pervomaiske’ village located to the west from Donetsk and taking into consideration the military specifications of the weapon, the terrorists could have shot down the Russian civilian jetliner with its further crashing on the Ukrainian territory controlled by the ATO forces.

In that case Russia would receive an opportunity to accuse the Ukrainian authorities of downing the Russian plane, assaulting the Russian citizens and would use this irresistible proof for its invasion into Ukraine.

Russian side would need a compelling argument for such a step, for example accusation of the Ukrainian government in mass murder of the Russian citizens.

“A peculiar cynicism appears in the fact that the terrorist act was planned just against the peaceful, innocent Russian citizens, who were flying with their children on vacation”, – V. Nalyvaichenko, stressed.

Intelligence data proved that on July 18 the militants have already waited for the introduction of Russian Armed forces into the territory of Ukraine. The Russian side had been giving grounding for such developments for the several previous days. The Russian Mass Media had massively published information about the alleged shelling of the RF territory from the Ukrainian side.

For further details see

http://www.sbu.gov.ua/sbu/control/en/publish/article;jsessionid=73352780A12C97E27DD0BF852482D3C0.app1art_id=129860&cat_id=35317

and the plot thickens

From http://vineyardsaker..com/
MH17 - gone missing again

Did you notice that MH17 is completely out of the news? We were promised voice and data recorder analyses, we were told that experts would be visiting the area and investigating the scene. We were told that various kind of proofs of this and that will be provided. And then *nothing*. Silence.

Needless to say, except for the TV-watching zombies who get their news from the idiot-tube, everybody knows what really happened. First, as I said it many times here, the USA and Russia know for sure, and there is a good chance that so do France and Switzerland. Then, there are a lot more people who don't have the proof of what happened, but who also know. And I bet you that many reporters and journalists in Kiev also know. As for the Internet/blogosphere, while there are some disagreements over what exactly happened, nobody that I am aware of seriously believes that the Resistance did it. So that leaves only one option: the Ukies did it.

So why not finally say so?

Because the AngloZionists are buying as much time to the junta as possible.

They *know* that there is no stopping this story, but they also know that unless and until the true account of what happened to MH17 makes it into the MSM it might as well never have happened. But the clock is running out. If we can fully expect the Dutch and the British to do and say whatever Uncle Sam tells them, I would not at all be so sure about the Malaysians. For one thing Malaysia is hardly a pro-US country, especially in its public opinion, and, second, the Malaysians will inevitably wonder why their people were chosen as the sacrificial lambs in this US-run false flag operation.

This is also, I believe, the reason the Russians just said the very minimum to disprove the ridiculous version which Washington and Kiev proclaimed only hours after MH17 was shot: they know that if they say something it will be dismissed as "propaganda", but if the Malaysians do, then it is going to be awfully hard to dismiss them. I also believe that the Russians have leaked whatever is needed to the Malaysians to make sure that the latter are not duped by the AngloZionists.

My hope and belief is that in the not too distant future the Malaysians will blow the cover on the AngloZionist fairytale and that they will officially accuse the junta of that mass murder. At which point, Uncle Sam and his European minions will simply say that "they have come to different conclusions" and use the MSM to bury it all in the collective memory hole. That, at least, is the plan. Whether the Empire will succeed in covering it all up in anybody's guess.

UPDATE: EXPLAINING THE SILENCE.

Holland, Belgium, Australia & Ukraine signed a “Non-Disclosure Agreement” 10 days ago that prevents any of them from disclosing the results of the MH17 investigation and gives any one of them arbitrary veto power over disclosure which is binding on the other signatories. It's still fuzzy about Malaysia; at first Malaysia "categorically refused to sign”, then it might have signed in a hush-hush manner. No official confirmation from Kuala Lumpur.

http://strategia-22.livejournal.com/39522.html?nojs=1

UPDATE: EXPLAINING THE SILENCE.

Holland, Belgium, Australia & Ukraine signed a “Non-Disclosure Agreement” 10 days ago that prevents any of them from disclosing the results of the MH17 investigation and gives any one of them arbitrary vet...o power over disclosure which is binding on the other signatories. It's still fuzzy about Malaysia; at first Malaysia "categorically refused to sign”, then it might have signed in a hush-hush manner. No official confirmation from Kuala Lumpur.

Russia focuses in UN SC on need to make Ukraine air crash probe international


August 19, 9:37UTC+4

The Malaysia Airlines Boeing 777 airliner from the Dutch city of Amsterdam to Malaysia’s capital, Kuala Lumpur, crashed in Ukraine’s Donetsk region on July 17, killing all 298 people onboard




Russian Ambassador to the UN Vitaly Churkin
© EPA/JASON SZENES





SC chair: interim results of MH17 crash probe to be ready at end of August


THE UNITED NATIONS, August 19. /ITAR-TASS/. Russia focused at a media briefing in the UN Security Council on the need to make the probe of the July 17 crash of a Malaysian Boeing airliner in Ukraine international, Russian Ambassador to the UN Vitaly Churkin told ITAR-TASS in comments on the results of the UN Security Council meeting which Russia initiated on Monday.

UN Under-Secretary-General for Political Affairs Oscar Fernandez-Taranco did not produce much information in a report at the UN Security Council meeting, Churkin said. “But this was important for us to focus once again on the need to make the investigation international. This seems to us that the UN Secretariat can play its role in this issue. They pledged to supervise it once again,” the diplomat noted.

Now Russia “does not have a quite clear idea,” which role the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) plays in the probe into the aircrash, as UN Security Council Resolution 2166 envisages participation of the organization in the investigation. “As we know, the ICAO stays aside from the investigation which is being conducted,” the Russian ambassador said. The Russian delegation also explained at the UN Security Council meeting that the Interstate Aviation Committee (MAK) where Ukraine is a member-state deals with such issues on the post-Soviet space. “We asked to recheck whether it (Kiev) is conducting specific cooperation with MAK into the probe,” the diplomat noted.



UN high-ranking official heading for Kiev for talks on assistance to peace


At the UN Security Council meeting, Russia also asked why “nothing is known about the record of talks between Ukrainian flight controllers” before the crash of the Malaysian Boeing airplane, Churkin said. In this regard, UN Under-Secretary-General for Political Affairs Jeffrey Feltman who will go to Kiev on Wednesday was instructed to learn how Kiev was cooperating with international experts. “The agreement is that he will also ask about this issue. How are Ukrainians making their contribution in this international investigation? First of all, they should produce the records of talks between their flight controllers, so that this would be possible to understand why they directed the Malaysian airplane in the conflict zone,” Churkin said.

The UN Security Council meeting convened on Russia’s initiative was useful and now council’s members will wait for an intermediate report on progress of the air disaster probe that is expected to be presented at the end of this month. British Permanent Representative earlier presiding in the UN Security Council Mark Lyall Grant told reporters that the report on the aircrash investigation would not be confidential.



The Malaysia Airlines Boeing 777 airliner from the Dutch city of Amsterdam to Malaysia’s capital, Kuala Lumpur, crashed in Ukraine’s Donetsk region on July 17, killing all 298 people onboard.

On July 22, the UN Security Council has adopted Resolution 2166 which envisaged an independent probe into the aircrash in line with the basic principles of international civil aviation. The document urged the parties to the conflict in east Ukraine to stop all military actions in the air crash area and to provide full access to the air crash site to experts.

Cover-Up? Why Have the Media and Obama Administration Gone Silent on MH17?



By Niles Williamson

Global Research, August 18, 2014

World Socialist Web Site


Region: Russia and FSU

Theme: Media Disinformation


The deafening silence of the US media and government about the investigation into the downing of Malaysian Airlines Flight MH17 one month ago reeks of a cover-up.

In the hours and days immediately after the crash, without a single shred of evidence, US officials alleged that the passenger jet was shot down by an SA-11 ground-to-air missile fired from pro-Russian separatist-held territory in eastern Ukraine. They launched a political campaign to obtain harsh economic sanctions against Russia and strengthen NATO’s military posture in Eastern Europe.

Picking up on the scent, the CIA attack dogs in the US and European media blamed the crash squarely on Russian President Vladimir Putin. The cover of the July 28 print edition of German news magazine Der Spiegel showed the images of MH17 victims surrounding bold red text reading “Stoppt Putin Jetzt!” (Stop Putin Now!). A July 26 editorial in the Economist declared Putin to be the author of MH17’s destruction, while the magazine ghoulishly superimposed Putin’s face over a spider web on its front cover, denouncing Putin’s “web of lies.”

Anyone comparing the media’s demonization of Putin with their treatment of Saddam Hussein or Muammar Gaddafi had to conclude that Washington was launching a campaign for regime change in Russia like those it carried out in Libya and Iraq—this time, recklessly pushing the United States towards war with a nuclear-armed power, Russia.

Having built up the crash into a casus belli against Russia, however, the US media suddenly dropped the matter completely. The New York Times has not found it fit to print a word on the MH17 crash since August 7.

There is no innocent explanation for the sudden disappearance of MH17 from the media and political spotlight. The plane’s black box has been held in Britain for examination for weeks, and US and Russian spy satellites and military radar were intensively scanning east Ukraine at the time of the crash. The claim that Washington does not have detailed knowledge of the circumstances of the crash and the various forces involved is not credible.

If the evidence that is in Washington’s hands incriminated only Russia and the Russian-backed forces, it would have been released to feed the media frenzy against Putin. If it has not been released, this is because the evidence points to the involvement of the Ukrainian regime in Kiev and its backers in Washington and the European capitals.

From the outset, the Obama administration presented no evidence to back up the incendiary charges that Putin was responsible for the MH17 crash. In his press briefing on July 18, the day after the crash, President Obama stated that it was still “too early for us to be able to guess what the intentions of those who might have launched this surface-to-air missile might have had.”

While cynically exploiting the crash to pressure and threaten Russia, Obama warned that “there will likely be misinformation” in the coverage of the crash. In a backhanded acknowledgment that he had no evidence to support his claims, he said: “In terms of identifying specifically what individual or group of individuals or personnel ordered the strike, how it came about those are things that I think are still going to be subject to additional information that we’re going to be gathering.”

In the event, the misinformation on the MH17 crash came from the Obama administration itself. Secretary of State John Kerry went on a media blitz on July 20, arguing that the pro-Russian separatists and the Russian government were responsible for the shoot-down.

The sole evidence he presented were a few, dubious “social media records” posted to the Internet. He presented unauthenticated audio recordings of separatists speaking of a plane crash, edited and released by Ukraine’s SBU intelligence agency, which works closely with the CIA; YouTube video clips showing a truck moving unidentified military equipment along a road; and a retracted social media statement claiming responsibility for shooting down a plane attributed to separatist leader Igor Strelkov.

Very quickly, the US government’s story line on MH17 began to collapse. At a press briefing on July 21, State Department spokesperson and former CIA Middle East analyst Marie Harf declared that the Obama administration’s conclusions regarding the downing of the plane were “based on open information which is basically common sense.” Challenged by reporters to provide the evidence, she admitted that she could not: “I know it’s frustrating. Believe me, we try to get as much out there are possible. And for some reason, sometimes we can’t.”

After a month during which Washington has failed to release evidence to support its charges against Putin, it is clear that the political offensive of the NATO governments and the media frenzy against Putin were based on lies.

If pro-Russian separatists had fired a ground-to-air missile, as the US government claims, the Air Force would have imagery in their possession confirming it beyond a shadow of a doubt. The US Air Force’s Defense Support Program utilizes satellites with infrared sensors to detect missile launches anywhere on the planet, and US radar posts in Europe would have tracked the missile as it shot through the sky. These satellite and radar data have not been released, because whatever they show does not fit the storyline concocted by the US government and media.

What has emerged, instead, is a drumbeat of evidence pointing to the US-backed regime in Kiev’s role in the MH17 shoot-down. The day after Kerry made his remarks, the Russian military presented radar and satellite data indicating that a Ukrainian SU-25 fighter jet was in the immediate vicinity and ascending towards MH17 as it was shot down. This claim has not been addressed, let alone refuted by the American government.

NSA whistle-blower William Binney and other retired American intelligence agents issued a statement at the end of July calling into question the social media data presented by Kerry, and demanding the publication of satellite imagery of the missile launch. They added, “We are hearing indirectly from some of our former colleagues that what Secretary Kerry is peddling does not square with the real intelligence.”

On August 9, the Malaysian New Straits Times published an article charging the Kiev regime with shooting down MH17. It stated that evidence from the crash site indicated that the plane was shot down by a Ukrainian fighter with a missile followed by heavy machine gun fire.

While it is too early to say conclusively how MH17 was shot down, the preponderance of the evidence points directly at the Ukrainian regime and, behind them, the American government and the European powers. They created the conditions for the destruction of MH17, backing the fascist-led coup in Kiev this February that brought the current pro-Western regime to power. The Western media then supported the Kiev regime’s war to suppress opposition to the putsch in east Ukraine, turning the region into a war zone in which MH17 was then shot down.

After the murder of the 298 people aboard MH17, in which they played an important if as-yet unexplained role, Western governments and intelligence agencies seized upon the tragedy in a reckless and sinister maneuver to escalate war threats against the Putin regime. Silence denotes consent, and the deafening silence of the Western media on the issue of Kiev’s involvement in the MH17 crash testifies to the criminalization not only of the foreign policy establishment, but also of its media lackeys and the entire ruling class.

Obama Should Release Ukraine Evidence

July 29, 2014


With the shoot-down of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 over Ukraine turning a local civil war into a U.S. confrontation with Russia, U.S. intelligence veterans urge President Obama to release what evidence he has about the tragedy and silence the hyperbole.

MEMORANDUM FOR: The President

FROM: Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS)

SUBJECT: Intelligence on Shoot-Down of Malaysian Plane

Executive Summary

U.S.–Russian tensions are building in a precarious way over Ukraine, and we are far from certain that your advisers fully appreciate the danger of escalation. The New York Times and other media outlets are treating sensitive issues in dispute as flat-fact, taking their cue from U.S. government sources.

Twelve days after the shoot-down of Malaysian Airlines Flight 17, your administration still has issued no coordinated intelligence assessment summarizing what evidence exists to determine who was responsible – much less to convincingly support repeated claims that the plane was downed by a Russian-supplied missile in the hands of Ukrainian separatists.


Secretary of State John Kerry addresses reporters on July 23, 2014, in Ramallah, West Bank. (U.S. government photo)

Your administration has not provided any satellite imagery showing that the separatists had such weaponry, and there are several other “dogs that have not barked.” Washington’s credibility, and your own, will continue to erode, should you be unwilling – or unable – to present more tangible evidence behind administration claims. In what follows, we put this in the perspective of former intelligence professionals with a cumulative total of 260 years in various parts of U.S. intelligence.

—

We, the undersigned former intelligence officers want to share with you our concern about the evidence adduced so far to blame Russia for the July 17 downing of Malaysian Airlines Flight 17. We are retired from government service and none of us is on the payroll of CNN, Fox News, or any other outlet. We intend this memorandum to provide a fresh, different perspective.

As veteran intelligence analysts accustomed to waiting, except in emergency circumstances, for conclusive information before rushing to judgment, we believe that the charges against Russia should be rooted in solid, far more convincing evidence. And that goes in spades with respect to inflammatory incidents like the shoot-down of an airliner. We are also troubled by the amateurish manner in which fuzzy and flimsy evidence has been served up – some of it via “social media.”

As intelligence professionals we are embarrassed by the unprofessional use of partial intelligence information. 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. His statements seem premature and bear earmarks of an attempt to “poison the jury pool.”

Painting Russia Black

We see an eerie resemblance to an earlier exercise in U.S. “public diplomacy” from which valuable lessons can be learned by those more interested in the truth than in exploiting tragic incidents for propaganda advantage. We refer to the behavior of the Reagan administration in the immediate aftermath of the shoot-down of Korean Airlines Flight 007 over Siberia on August 30, 1983. We sketch out below a short summary of that tragic affair, since we suspect you have not been adequately briefed on it. The parallels will be obvious to you.

An advantage of our long tenure as intelligence officers is that we remember what we have witnessed first hand; seldom do we forget key events in which we played an analyst or other role. To put it another way, most of us “know exactly where we were” when a Soviet fighter aircraft shot down Korean Airlines passenger flight 007 over Siberia on August 30, 1983, over 30 years ago. At the time, we were intelligence officers on “active duty.” You were 21; many of those around you today were still younger.

Thus, it seems possible that you may be learning how the KAL007 affair went down, so to speak, for the first time; that you may now become more aware of the serious implications for U.S.-Russian relations regarding how the downing of Flight 17 goes down; and that you will come to see merit in preventing ties with Moscow from falling into a state of complete disrepair. In our view, the strategic danger here dwarfs all other considerations.

Hours after the tragic shoot-down on August 30, 1983, the Reagan administration used its very accomplished propaganda machine to twist the available intelligence on Soviet culpability for the killing of all 269 people aboard KAL007. The airliner was shot down after it strayed hundreds of miles off course and penetrated Russia’s airspace over sensitive military facilities in Kamchatka and Sakhalin Island. The Soviet pilot tried to signal the plane to land, but the KAL pilots did not respond to the repeated warnings. Amid confusion about the plane’s identity – a U.S. spy plane had been in the vicinity hours earlier – Soviet ground control ordered the pilot to fire.

The Soviets soon realized they had made a horrendous mistake. U.S. intelligence also knew from sensitive intercepts that the tragedy had resulted from a blunder, not from a willful act of murder (much as on July 3, 1988, the USS Vincennes shot down an Iranian civilian airliner over the Persian Gulf, killing 290 people, an act which President Ronald Reagan dismissively explained as an “understandable accident”).

To make the very blackest case against Moscow for shooting down the KAL airliner, the Reagan administration suppressed exculpatory evidence from U.S. electronic intercepts. Washington’s mantra became “Moscow’s deliberate downing of a civilian passenger plane.” Newsweek ran a cover emblazoned with the headline “Murder in the Sky.” (Apparently, not much has changed; Time’s cover this week features “Cold War II” and “Putin’s dangerous game.” The cover story by Simon Shuster, “In Russia, Crime Without Punishment,” would merit an A-plus in William Randolph Hearst’s course “Yellow Journalism 101.”)

When KAL007 was shot down, Alvin A. Snyder, director of the U.S. Information Agency’s television and film division, was enlisted in a concerted effort to “heap as much abuse on the Soviet Union as possible,” as Snyder writes in his 1995 book, “Warriors of Disinformation.”

He and his colleagues also earned an A-plus for bringing the “mainstream media” along. For example, ABC’s Ted Koppel noted with patriotic pride, “This has been one of those occasions when there is very little difference between what is churned out by the U.S. government propaganda organs and by the commercial broadcasting networks.”

“Fixing” the Intelligence Around the Policy

“The perception we wanted to convey was that the Soviet Union had cold-bloodedly carried out a barbaric act,” wrote Snyder, adding that the Reagan administration went so far as to present a doctored transcript of the intercepts to the United Nations Security Council on September 6, 1983.

Only a decade later, when Snyder saw the complete transcripts — including the portions that the Reagan administration had hidden — would he fully realize how many of the central elements of the U.S. presentation were false.

The intercepts showed that the Soviet fighter pilot believed he was pursuing a U.S. spy aircraft and that he was having trouble in the dark identifying the plane. Per instructions from ground control, the pilot had circled the KAL airliner and tilted his wings to order the aircraft to land. The pilot said he fired warning shots, as well. This information “was not on the tape we were provided,” Snyder wrote.

It became abundantly clear to Snyder that, in smearing the Soviets, the Reagan administration had presented false accusations to the United Nations, as well as to the people of the United States and the world. In his book, Snyder acknowledged his own role in the deception, but drew a cynical conclusion. He wrote, “The moral of the story is that all governments, including our own, lie when it suits their purposes. The key is to lie first.”

The tortured attempts by your administration and stenographers in the media to blame Russia for the downing of Flight 17, together with John Kerry’s unenviable record for credibility, lead us to the reluctant conclusion that the syndrome Snyder describes may also be at work in your own administration; that is, that an ethos of “getting your own lie out first” has replaced “ye shall know the truth.” At a minimum, we believe Secretary Kerry displayed unseemly haste in his determination to be first out of the starting gate.

Both Sides Cannot Be Telling the Truth

We have always taken pride in not shooting from the hip, but rather in doing intelligence analysis that is evidence-based. The evidence released to date does not bear close scrutiny; it does not permit a judgment as to which side is lying about the shoot-down of Flight 17. Our entire professional experience would incline us to suspect the Russians – almost instinctively. Our more recent experience, particularly observing Secretary Kerry injudiciousness in latching onto one spurious report after another as “evidence,” has gone a long way toward balancing our earlier predispositions.

It seems that whenever Kerry does cite supposed “evidence” that can be checked – like the forged anti-Semitic fliers distributed in eastern Ukraine or the photos of alleged Russian special forces soldiers who allegedly slipped into Ukraine – the “proof” goes “poof” as Kerry once said in a different context. Still, these misrepresentations seem small peccadillos compared with bigger whoppers like the claim Kerry made on August 30, 2013, no fewer than 35 times, that “we know” the government of Bashar al-Assad was responsible for the chemical incidents near Damascus nine days before.

On September 3, 2013 – following your decision to call off the attack on Syria in order to await Congressional authorization – Kerry was still pushing for an attack in testimony before a thoroughly sympathetic Senate Foreign Affairs Committee. On the following day Kerry drew highly unusual personal criticism from President Putin, who said: “He is lying, and he knows he is lying. It is sad.”

Equally serious, during the first week of September 2013, as you and President Vladimir Putin were putting the final touches to the deal whereby Syrian chemical weapons would be given up for destruction, John Kerry said something that puzzles us to this day. On September 9, 2013, Kerry was in London, still promoting a U.S. attack on Syria for having crossed the “Red Line” you had set against Syria’s using chemical weapons.

At a formal press conference, Kerry abruptly dismissed the possibility that Bashar al-Assad would ever give up his chemical weapons, saying, “He isn’t about to do that; it can’t be done.” Just a few hours later, the Russians and Syrians announced Syria’s agreement to do precisely what Kerry had ruled out as impossible. You sent him back to Geneva to sign the agreement, and it was formally concluded on September 14.

Regarding the Malaysia Airlines shoot-down of July 17, we believe Kerry has typically rushed to judgment and that his incredible record for credibility poses a huge disadvantage in the diplomatic and propaganda maneuvering vis-a-vis Russia. We suggest you call a halt to this misbegotten “public diplomacy” offensive. If, however, you decide to press on anyway, we suggest you try to find a less tarnished statesman or woman.

A Choice Between Two

If the intelligence on the shoot-down is as weak as it appears judging from the fuzzy scraps that have been released, we strongly suggest you call off the propaganda war and await the findings of those charged with investigating the shoot-down. If, on the other hand, your administration has more concrete, probative intelligence, we strongly suggest that you consider approving it for release, even if there may be some risk of damage to “sources and methods.” Too often this consideration is used to prevent information from entering the public domain where, as in this case, it belongs.

There have been critical junctures in the past in which presidents have recognized the need to waive secrecy in order to show what one might call “a decent respect for the opinions of mankind” or even to justify military action.

As senior CIA veteran Milton Bearden has put it, there are occasions when more damage is done to U.S. national security by “protecting” sources and methods than by revealing them. For instance, Bearden noted that Ronald Reagan exposed a sensitive intelligence source in showing a skeptical world the reason for the U.S. attack on Libya in retaliation for the April 5, 1986 bombing at the La Belle Disco in West Berlin. That bombing killed two U.S. servicemen and a Turkish woman, and injured over 200 people, including 79 U.S. servicemen.

Intercepted messages between Tripoli and agents in Europe made it clear that Libya was behind the attack. Here’s an excerpt: “At 1:30 in the morning one of the acts was carried out with success, without leaving a trace behind.”

Ten days after the bombing the U.S. retaliated, sending over 60 Air Force fighters to strike the Libyan capital of Tripoli and the city of Benghazi. The operation was widely seen as an attempt to kill Colonel Muammar Gaddafi, who survived, but his adopted 15-month-old daughter was killed in the bombing, along with at least 15 other civilians.

Three decades ago, there was more shame attached to the killing of children. As world abhorrence grew after the U.S. bombing strikes, the Reagan administration produced the intercepted, decoded message sent by the Libyan Peoples Bureau in East Berlin acknowledging the “success” of the attack on the disco, and adding the ironically inaccurate boast “without leaving a trace behind.”

The Reagan administration made the decision to give up a highly sensitive intelligence source, its ability to intercept and decipher Libyan communications. But once the rest of the world absorbed this evidence, international grumbling subsided and many considered the retaliation against Tripoli justified.

If You’ve Got the Goods…

If the U.S. has more convincing evidence than what has so far been adduced concerning responsibility for shooting down Flight 17, we believe it would be best to find a way to make that intelligence public – even at the risk of compromising “sources and methods.” Moreover, we suggest you instruct your subordinates not to cheapen U.S. credibility by releasing key information via social media like Twitter and Facebook.

The reputation of the messenger for credibility is also key in this area of “public diplomacy.” As is by now clear to you, in our view Secretary Kerry is more liability than asset in this regard. Similarly, with regard to Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, his March 12, 2013 Congressional testimony under oath to what he later admitted were “clearly erroneous” things regarding NSA collection should disqualify him. Clapper should be kept at far remove from the Flight 17 affair.

What is needed, if you’ve got the goods, is an Interagency Intelligence Assessment – the genre used in the past to lay out the intelligence. We are hearing indirectly from some of our former colleagues that what Secretary Kerry is peddling does not square with the real intelligence. Such was the case late last August, when Kerry created a unique vehicle he called a “Government (not Intelligence) Assessment” blaming, with no verifiable evidence, Bashar al-Assad for the chemical attacks near Damascus, as honest intelligence analysts refused to go along and, instead, held their noses.

We believe you need to seek out honest intelligence analysts now and hear them out. Then, you may be persuaded to take steps to curb the risk that relations with Russia might escalate from “Cold War II” into an armed confrontation. In all candor, we see little reason to believe that Secretary Kerry and your other advisers appreciate the enormity of that danger.

In our most recent (May 4) memorandum to you, Mr. President, we cautioned that if the U.S. wished “to stop a bloody civil war between east and west Ukraine and avert Russian military intervention in eastern Ukraine, you may be able to do so before the violence hurtles completely out of control.” On July 18, you joined the top leaders of Germany, France, and Russia in calling for an immediate ceasefire. Most informed observers believe you have it in your power to get Ukrainian leaders to agree. The longer Kiev continues its offensive against separatists in eastern Ukraine, the more such U.S. statements appear hypocritical.

We reiterate our recommendations of May 4, that you remove the seeds of this confrontation by publicly disavowing any wish to incorporate Ukraine into NATO and that you make it clear that you are prepared to meet personally with Russian President Putin without delay to discuss ways to defuse the crisis and recognize the legitimate interests of the various parties. The suggestion of an early summit got extraordinary resonance in controlled and independent Russian media. Not so in “mainstream” media in the U.S. Nor did we hear back from you.

The courtesy of a reply is requested.

Prepared by VIPS Steering Group

William Binney, former Technical Director, World Geopolitical & Military Analysis, NSA; co-founder, SIGINT Automation Research Center (ret.)

Larry Johnson, CIA & State Department (ret.)

Edward Loomis, NSA, Cryptologic Computer Scientist (ret.)

David MacMichael, National Intelligence Council (ret.)

Ray McGovern, former US Army infantry/intelligence officer & CIA analyst (ret.)

Elizabeth Murray, Deputy National Intelligence Officer for Middle East (ret.)

Todd E. Pierce, MAJ, US Army Judge Advocate (Ret.)

Coleen Rowley, Division Counsel & Special Agent, FBI (ret.)

Peter Van Buren, U.S. Department of State, Foreign Service Officer (ret.)

Ann Wright, Col., US Army (ret.); Foreign Service Officer (resigned)

http://vineyardsaker..com/2014/08/we-cannot-let-mh17-be-forgotten-please.html


We cannot let MH17 be forgotten - Please help us!

Dear friends,

Those who organized the MH17 false flag have now clearly given the instruction to their propaganda machine (aka MSM) to forget about this tragedy and to pretend like it never happened. Sure, there are a few courageous sources, such as the World Socialist Web Site, which do ask the right question "Why have the media and Obama administration gone silent on MH17?", but even most of the "alternative" media has really turned the page and forgotten about MH17.

We cannot allow this.

The Russian Team and the website Polismi in Russia have jointly translated the full detailed expert analysis of the MH17 downing into Russian and they are now asking for our - *your* - help in disseminating it in the Russian media worldwide and with all our - *your* - Russian-speaking friends, relatives and colleagues. The full document in Russian is available here:

http://www.vineyardsaker.ru/?p=749

I ask you to do everything you can to share this document as widely as possible. One of the most disgusting and outrageous things about this false flag massacre is that most of our elites know what truly happened, but that they apparently have all agreed to cover it up, each one for their own reasons. We cannot allow that to happen and we have to continue to demand answers and full access to all the data, including the recordings of the conversations between MH17 and the Kiev ATC, all the flight data recorders, and all the signal and radar data held by Russia, the USA, NATO, and the junta in Kiev.

Please join us in demanding that the full truth be told about the murder of the people of MH17.

Send the link above, along with this appeal, to all your Russian speaking friends, post it on your blogs, websites, Twitter and Facebook pages, share it on mailing lists, send it to your local Russian newspaper or radio station, etc. We need maximal exposure and visibility to force those in power to react.

Many thanks,

The Saker

PS: a new, updated, version of the video analysis made by John Martin about MH17 which I had posted here is now available here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=czqmeMhWyFo make sure to also check it out!

Crashes of Convenience: MH17 Fully Exposed – The Shocking Truth About the Ukraine False Flag

By James Corbett
Global Research, August 28, 2014
The Corbett Report 26 August 2014

When Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 went down on July 17, 2014, we were immediately inundated with base propaganda trying to convince us that the shootdown could be traced back to the Kremlin. But what was this rush to judgement based on? What have we learned about the crash since then? Why has MH17 completely disappeared from the news cycle? And who really stood to benefit from the disaster? Find out the answers to these questions and more in this week’s edition of The Corbett Report.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gWlAARb0fN4

Camouflage and Coverup: The Dutch Commission Report on the Malaysian MH17 Crash is “Not Worth the Paper it’s Written On”



By Peter Haisenko

Global Research, September 11, 2014

Anderweltonline.com (German) and Global Research



“Weasel wording” consists in using “words and phrases aimed at creating an impression that a specific and/or meaningful statement has been made, when in fact only a vague or ambiguous claim has been communicated, enabling the specific meaning to be denied if the statement is challenged.” … “Some weasel words may also have the effect of softening the force of a potentially loaded or otherwise controversial statement through some form of understatement.” (Gary Jason 1988)

One thing must be stated outright: This report does not lie.

It just can’t lie since there is nothing new in it. I myself have never seen such a meaningless plane crash report. What comes as a surprise, however, is the report’s diplomatic, sophisticated choice of words, which loses itself in ambiguous terminology.

It was probably planned this way, so each party can continue to defend their version of what happened with zeal.

Let’s take a closer look at this report.

At the beginning we find, as usual, detailed statements about the plane, who it belonged to, that it was in perfect condition and details about the crew.

Technical issues or weather conditions are excluded as causes for the crash.


Then, it confirms that the flight recorders were virtually undamaged and that they have not been tampered with.

The report continues with the description of the debris scattered over a vast area and from this observation is drawn the amazing conclusion that this aircraft had blown up in the air.

I apologize for the slight sarcasm, but I will have no choice but to continue to make some sarcastic remarks about this “report”.

14 minutes of silence in the cockpit is absolutely impossible

It is reported that the cockpit section was probably completely broken off from the aircraft because it fell almost vertically from the point of shelling to the ground and was found at some distance from the rest of the debris.
[img]http://www.globalresearch.ca/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/mh17pilot1.jpg[/img]
The report indicates that the damages done by external forces were recorded almost exclusively in the front of the plane, namely the cockpit, and this led to the breakup of the aircraft.

So far so good, nothing new. Then there is a transcript of the radio communication between MH017 and air traffic control taken from the voice recorder.

At this point the expert starts to ask himself questions.

The transcript of the radio communication starts at 13:08:00 and ends at 13:22:02, a 14 minute time frame.

From my experience as an aircraft captain I cannot imagine that during 14 minutes no other dialogues or sounds were picked up in the cockpit by the voice recorder.

When the cockpit receives radio transmissions from other aircraft, those are also recorded by the device. As I said, there are no lies, but in all likelihood, not everything is being said. The published conclusion points out that:


“Crew communication gave no indication that there was anything abnormal with the flight.”

Everything was normal, but the possible (and very probable) conversation in the cockpit is concealed, as well as radio transmissions from other aircrafts.

High Energy Objects – and other hazy formulations

The conclusion of this report is a prime example of a situation in which one knows something with certainty, but the facts are presented in such a way that nothing is revealed:


The damage observed in the forward section of the aircraft appears to indicate that the aircraft was penetrated by a large number of high-energy objects from outside the aircraft. It is likely that this damage resulted in a loss of structural integrity of the aircraft, leading to an in-flight break up.”

Aha! says the astonished reader. We knew that already. We must take a closer look at this conclusion. In fact, it is not a conclusion.

The report speaks of possibilities and probabilities: “appears to indicate”, “it is likely”. But this is the less enigmatic part.

The wordings “penetrated” and especially “high-energy objects” are interesting. It remains unclear how far these “objects” entered, or even if they went through the entire cockpit and came out on the other side of it, thus completely “penetrating” the cockpit. The background picture of the cockpit section shown in this report is of lower quality and in smaller scale than the one I provided myself and published in my analysis.

“Weasel Wording”

Again it must be noted: The report does not lie, but the Commission shows less information than it has at its disposal.

The term “high-energy objects” is totally “original”. What is this?

I myself know this term from astrophysics or quantum physics. Otherwise, I have not commonly seen it in the context of aviation or plane accidents. So how should this concept be understood? I asked English speakers about this. They spontaneously replied bullets, projectiles from a cannon or fast moving freight trains. They also noted that this term is unusual in “normal”, colloquial terms, except in astrophysics or quantum physics. This strange wording leaves everything open.

License to interpretations – The explanation appears different
[img]http://www.globalresearch.ca/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/csm_mh17-einschu__sse_c43fcedbcc.jpg[/img]
Those who want to follow the Western description can conclude that a surface-to-air missile discharges “high-energy-objects”. This is precisely the interpretation that I observed in the German media today.

Our newspapers are reciting like a creed the American version of the cause of the disaster, issued immediately after the MH 017 crash, by claiming that the present report confirms that the Boeing 777 was shot down by a surface-to-air missile.

That is not exactly what the report states, but it allows this interpretation – and that’s probably the point of this very flexible choice of words. Everybody can interpret what they want to believe according to their own taste. Especially if they are not native English speakers who spontaneously think of bullets.

This “report” is not worth the paper it is written on.

This is not surprising, because the Kiev Maidan government had to give their OK to what could be published.

The report leaves open everything which could actually contribute to an explanation. The MH 017 could have been hit by a missile, whether surface-to-air or air-to-air. It could have been shot down by a fighter jet or, sarcastically, according to the astrophysics or quantum physics terms, by a large number of “high-energy objects” that rained down on the cockpit from the far reaches of the universe.

You can download the report in the original PDF here to make up your own mind.

More articles on MH 017:

Read Peter Haisenko’s earlier article:

Shocking analysis for launching the Malaysian MH 017 - Here you will find the high resolution image of the cockpit section, of which only a portion is shown in the report.

Original in German.

translation: Julie Lévesque for Global Research

http://russia-insider.com/en/politics_ukraine_opinion_media_watch/2014/09/29/06-07-33pm/why_silence_mh17

[size=18pt]Why the Silence on MH17? [/size]

Adam Locksley |


Common sense dictates who is responsible for shooting MH17 out of the sky over a conflict zone in Ukraine.

Common sense says it was the Ukrainian military or Ukrainian extremist militias waging war in east Ukraine on Kiev's behalf.

However that is a truth no one wants to discuss.

The US says MH17 was shot down from inside Ukraine. That appears to rule Russia out.

MH17 was shot down by an aircraft or a surface to air missile. The rebels have no aircraft. There is no convincing evidence the rebels have surface to air missiles capable of shooting down aircraft at the altitude MH17 was flying. Ukrainian intelligence has produced photos culled from social media it says show such surface to air missiles in rebel hands. That sort of evidence is worthless since it is so easy to fake. If the rebels had neither the aircraft nor the missiles then they cannot have shot MH17 down.

By contrast there is absolutely no doubt the Ukrainian military had both the aircraft and the missiles available to shoot MH17 down.

Common sense says Washington knows most of the story and knows who is responsible.

Common sense says Moscow knows the truth too, though it is very careful when making the truth known to the public.

Common sense says the floundering regime of Petro Poroshenko in Kiev knows the truth as well.

So, why is there a conspiracy of silence? The reason is that the western media is stonewalling.

Western mainstream media went into one of its most sensualist modes of hysteria on record when MH17 was reported lost and destroyed. Without facts or evidence Russia was instantly blamed for the tragedy.

Within days Russia provided the world with its interpretation of how MH17 and its passengers were shot down (though it was careful to avoid apportioning blame). Russia also provided a host of intelligence material including satellite imagery. The west and its media took little notice. The US has refused to do the same.

That should surprise no one. The west and its media simply are not interested in truth or facts. Spin and manipulating the narrative are their objectives.

Why all the silence since the tragedy?

There is no evidence that the Kiev regime was directly behind the downing of the plane. However, there is a mountain of evidence the Kiev regime has not been in control of its military and the extremist militias in much of the country. Washington and Moscow both know this. Both most probably have evidence of this.

However for Washington the truth is an embarrassment. Its plans for regime change in Ukraine have been an utter disaster. Admitting the truth would compound that disaster exposing the criminal behaviour of its Ukrainian proxies and their inability to control their own forces.

It's the same for Poroshenko. He isn’t in control and will fade into post-Soviet history like others who trust the west. It is only a matter of time.

As for Moscow, well let’s apply a western, even American, standard: Innocent until proven guilty. There is no evidence, thus no guilt. A competent judge in the west would throw out any case against Russia due to the lack of evidence.

Unfortunately western politics and media don’t work that way.

[size=18pt]Western News-Suppression about the Downing of MH-17 Malaysian Jet[/size]
By Eric Zuesse
Global Research, November 06, 2014


The cause of the shooting-down of the Malaysian passenger plane MH-17 on July 17th (while that plane was flying over the conflict-zone during Ukraine’s civil war) is becoming clearer and clearer, despite the rigorous continuing attempts by Western ‘news’ media to cover it up and to hide from the public the evidence that clearly shows what brought down this airliner.

In the months since I headlined on August 24th the news, “MH-17 ‘Investigation’: Secret August 8th Agreement Seeps Out: Perpetrator of the Downing in Ukraine, of the Malaysian Airliner, Will Stay Hidden,” explaining why the leaders of Western nations want these black-box and other basic data to remain hidden, additional evidence has nonetheless become public, and all of it confirms and adds yet further details to the explanation that was first put forth by the retired German Lufthansa pilot Peter Haisenko, whose independent investigation had concluded that Ukrainian Government fighter-jets intentionally shot down this civilian plane.

Precisely how they did it is gradually becoming clearer, despite this continuation of Western secrecy regarding the contents of the black boxes, and of the U.S. satellite images, and of the Ukrainian air-traffic-control radar recordings, and of other evidence-sources that are held by the West and not made available to their ‘news’ media nor to anyone outside a tight official circle of those Western nations’ intelligence agencies.

Russia has thus been releasing its own investigations regarding MH-17; and, in the process, Russia is not only providing further details as to how the downing actually happened (it wasn’t by mistake, as the West contends it was), but they are also exposing the absurd impossibility of the Ukrainian Government’s ‘explanation’ of this event, which is the ‘explanation’ that is still being parroted unquestioningly and unflinchingly by officials in Washington, Europe, and NATO, and also by Western ‘news’ media. (As my news-report explained, that secret August 8th agreement was signed by the three governments that were handed the black boxes to study — Ukraine, Britain, and Netherlands — and it granted to the Ukrainian Government a veto over anything that the team’s official report would say, which is probably the reason why the subsequent officially released report on those black boxes said essentially nothing. It was a brazen insult to the 298 victims’ families.)

Though Russia doesn’t possess those black boxes, they do possess, and they publicly reveal, evidence that’s conclusive on its own; and it is 100% consistent with Haisenko’s reconstruction of the event. Russian Television issued a 25-minute documentary recently on the event, and it starts with people whom they interviewed in that region, who were describing their having seen at least one and perhaps two planes rising toward the airliner, and then the airliner coming down from the sky. Other witnesses told them that they saw an SU-25 fighter plane take off in that general area just minutes before the airliner came down.

The BBC had previously posted to their website on 23 July 2014, just six days after the event itself, a news report in Russian via their Russian service, about the downing, but they quickly removed it without explanation. Fortunately, however, some Russian-speakers had managed to download it before it was yanked; and one of those downloads is still up at youtube, having been posted there on July 28th, with English subscripts, and with the headline, “UKRAINE Eyewitness Confirm Military Jet Flew Besides MH17 Airliner: BBC Censors Video 25Jul2014”. (Actually, there were several witnesses interviewed there, not just one “Eyewitness.”)

Furthermore, Global Research posted on September 10th a transcript of it, headlining, “Deleted BBC Report. ‘Ukrainian Fighter Jet Shot Down MHI7’, Donetsk Eyewitnesses.” So, this valuable eyewitness-testimony to the event is available despite Western ‘news’ media (or propaganda-media), and the reason for the news-suppression is clear from anyone who views that BBC report, which presents several eyewitnesses, all of whom were interviewed separately as individuals, not as a group, and yet all of whose testimonies report having observed the very same basic narrative, of at least one military jet rising toward the airliner just before it came down. In other words: BBC had yanked this piece because it didn’t confirm the West’s story-line, which says that Ukrainian pro-Russian separatists fired a “Buk” ground-based missile at the airliner, thinking that the civilian plane was a Ukrainian Government war-plane about to bomb them and their families. But, first of all, the Ukrainian Government was virtually admitting there that they were bombing these villagers, which means that they were perpetrating an ethnic cleansing there, which indeed that Government was doing; but, secondly, the Ukrainian Government’s statement also acknowledged that if the event had happened in that way, it would have been unintentional, a tragic accident on the part of the rebels there. So, then, why did “the international community” respond with massive economic sanctions against Russia on account of this downing? The whole Western propaganda position was designed for a public of sheer fools, if not of outright psychopathic ones, who cared not a bit about the plights of the victims of an ethnic-cleansing campaign. The West’s basic storyline doesn’t make sense without recognizing that we are financing ethnic cleansing to clear the land in southeastern Ukraine, and that any support that Russia would be providing to those separatists would be defensive in nature, not offensive. Yet Russia gets the blame when this passenger jet goes down? In any case, that storyline is false, from start to finish.

Here is how outright ludicrous it actually is, and sound reason in itself that anyone in the military had to have known, from the very get-go, that the “Buk” ‘explanation’ was a line of pure malarkey:

The Russian documentary was titled, “MH-17: The Untold Story,” and it presents videos of several “Buk” missiles being fired. Here’s one:



That passage shows the missile, a 9K37 Buk SA-11 Gadfly, which is a bit longer than ten yards (30 feet) – this large (and certainly not inconspicuous) missile — being launched from its standard launch-base.

The documentary then notes:


And then this:



And then this:


And then this:



Continue reading here:

A summary of the key events and circumstances (and recent developments) surrounding the downing of MH17 suggesting that it was a false flag

Malaysian Airlines MH17 Downed by Ukrainian Military Aircraft. Kiev Regime False Flag

[size=18pt]Dutch government refuses to reveal ‘secret deal’ into MH17 crash probe[/size]

Published time: November 20, 2014 12:41
Edited time: November 20, 2014 18:48
Get short URL

Emergencies Ministry members walk at the site of a Malaysia Airlines Boeing 777 plane crash, MH17, near the settlement of Grabovo in the Donetsk region, July 17, 2014. (Reuters/Maxim Zmeyev)


Tags
Accident, Conflict, EU, Human rights, Law, Planes, Politics, Protest, Scandal

The Dutch government has refused to reveal details of a secret pact between members of the Joint Investigation Team examining the downed Flight MH17. If the participants, including Ukraine, don’t want information to be released, it will be kept secret.

The respected Dutch publication Elsevier made a request to the Dutch Ministry of Security and Justice under the Freedom of Information Act to disclose the Joint Investigation Team (JIT) agreement, along with 16 other documents. The JIT consists of four countries - the Netherlands, Belgium, Australia and Ukraine - who are carrying out an investigation into the MH17 disaster, but not Malaysia. Malaysian Airlines, who operated the flight, has been criticized for flying through a war zone.

Part of the agreement between the four countries and the Dutch Public Prosecution Service, ensures that all these parties have the right to secrecy. This means that if any of the countries involved believe that some of the evidence may be damaging to them, they have the right to keep this secret.

“Of course [it is] an incredible situation: how can Ukraine, one of the two suspected parties, ever be offered such an agreement?” Dutch citizen Jan Fluitketel wrote in the newspaper Malaysia Today.

Despite the air crash taking place on July 17 in Eastern Ukraine, very little information has been released about any potential causes. However, rather than give the public a little insight into the investigation, the Dutch Ministry of Security and Justice is more worried about saving face among the members of the investigation.

"I believe that this interest [international relations] is of greater importance than making the information public, as it is a unique investigation into an extremely serious event," the Ministry added, according to Elsevier.

Other reasons given for the request being denied included protecting investigation techniques and tactics as well as naming the names of officials who are taking part in the investigation. The Ministry said it would be a breach of privacy if they were revealed. “If the information was to be released then sensitive information would be passed between states and organizations, which would perhaps they would be less likely to share such information in the future,” said the Ministry of Security and Justice.

Dutch MP Pieter Omtzigt, who is a member of the Christian Democratic Party, has made several requests for the information to be released to the public.

“We do not know what the Netherlands has committed itself to. The government neither published the agreement when we asked for it, nor did it show it to parliament,” he said in reaction to the ministry’s decision. “It is perfectly normal that the Netherlands cooperate with other countries in this complex investigation. Yet they even kept the existence of the agreement secret a first and that was unnecessary."

Journalists walk behind parts of the Malaysia Airlines plane Flight MH17 as Dutch investigators (unseen) arrive near at the crash site near the Grabove village in eastern Ukraine on November 11, 2014 (AFP Photo)



Malaysia is the only country to have directly negotiated with the anti-Kiev militias in the East of Ukraine, while the country’s Ambassador to the Netherlands said he was unhappy that Malaysia had not been included within the JIT. Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte flew to Kuala Lumpur on November 5, but Malaysia says it still did not receive an invitation to join.

"We must first be included in the JIT, otherwise it would be hard for us to cooperate in the investigation. The parties inside the investigation must include us in the team, right now we are just a participant," said the Malaysian Inspector-General of Police Khalid Abu Bakar in Kuala Lumpur on Wednesday, which was reported by the New Straits Times.

A preliminary report by the Dutch Safety Board, which was released September said the MH17 crash was a result of structural damage caused by a large number of high-energy objects that struck the Boeing from the outside.

Dutch investigators added that “there are no indications” that the tragedy was triggered “by a technical fault or by actions of the crew.”

MH17: Malaysia’s Barring from Investigation Reeks of Cover-up
[size=18pt]MH17: Malaysia’s Barring from Investigation Reeks of Cover-up[/size]


Column: Politics Region: Southeast Asia Country: Malaysia
3545343It was a Malaysian jet, carrying Malaysian passengers, flown by Malaysian pilots, yet after Malaysia Airlines flight MH17 was shot down over Ukraine in July 2014, Malaysia has been systematically blocked from participating in the investigation, leaving an overwhelmingly pro-NATO bloc in charge of the evidence, investigation and outcome as well as the manner in which the investigation will be carried out.

Despite the integral role Malaysia has played during several pivotal moments in the aftermath of the disaster, it appears that the closer to the truth the investigation should be getting, the further Malaysia itself is being pushed from both the evidence and any influence it has on the likely conclusions of the investigation. With the downed aircraft in question being Malaysian, Malaysia as a partner in the investigation would seem a given. Its exclusion from the investigation appears to be an indication that the investigation’s objectivity has been compromised and that the conclusions it draws will likely be politically motivated.

Joint Investigation Team Includes, Excludes Surprising Members

With the Dutch leading the investigation, the logic being that the flight originated from the Netherlands and the majority of the passengers were Dutch, it has formed a Joint Investigation Team (JIT). At the onset of its creation it seemed obvious that Malaysia would too be included, considering it lost the second largest number of citizens to the disaster and the plane itself was registered in Malaysia. Instead, JIT would end up comprised of Belgium, Ukraine, and Australia, specifically excluding Malaysia.

Malaysia was both surprised and has protested its exclusion from JIT, and has repeatedly expressed a desire to be included directly in the investigation.

Malaysia’s Star newspaper would report, “Malaysian Ambassador to the Netherlands Datuk Dr Fauziah Mohd Taib said Malaysia had not been invited to officially join the Dutch-led Joint Investigation Team (JIT), which is undertaking the criminal probe.” It would also report that, “Transport Minister Datuk Seri Liow Tiong Lai said recently that Malaysia had expressed its stand very clearly that it must be part of the criminal investigation team and had informed Dutch authorities of its intention.”

The Malaysian Insider cited Malaysian scholar Dr. Chandra Muzaffar who believes the decision to exclude his country from the investigation is politically motivated, aiming at excluding members that may urge caution and objectivity instead of draw conclusions first and bend the investigation’s results around those conclusions. In particular, Dr. Muzaffar believes that the investigations is intentionally being skewed to target Russia.

Ukraine’s involvement in the investigation is particularly troublesome. Had MH17 crashed in Ukraine under different circumstances, Ukraine’s role would be welcome. However, it was apparently shot down specifically in a conflict in which Kiev itself is a participant. With both sides of the conflict possessing anti-aircraft weapons and with Kiev itself confirmed to possess weapons capable of reaching the altitude MH17 was flying at when it was allegedly hit, Kiev becomes a possible suspect in the investigation. Kiev’s inclusion in JIT represents a monumental conflict of interest.

Imagine a potential suspect leading an investigation into a crime they may have committed. The possibilities to cover up, skew, spin, tamper with or otherwise distort both the evidence and the outcome of the investigation are endless.

And to compound this already glaring conflict of interest, it was revealed recently that an alleged “secret deal” was struck by JIT in which any member could bar the release of evidence. With all members of JIT being pro-NATO and decidedly arrayed against Moscow, such a “deal” could prevent crucial evidence from being revealed that would effect an otherwise distorted conclusion drawn by the investigators aimed specifically at advancing their greater political agenda in Eastern Europe. Had Malaysia been a member of JIT, the ability of other members to withhold evidence would have been greatly diminished and it is likely such a bizarre deal would not have been conceivable, real or imaged, in the first place.

Malaysia’s Exclusion Foreshadows Politically Motivated Outcome

With the ongoing conflict in Ukraine perceived as a proxy war between NATO and Moscow, JIT’s membership including the NATO-backed Kiev regime itself (a possible suspect), two NATO members (Belgium and the Netherlands) and Australia who has passed sanctions against Russia over the conflict, is a textbook case of conflict of interest.

Those nations and international organizations calling for an investigation and for justice but who ignore the obvious problem of participants in a conflict investigating a key incident that may benefit their agenda directly, indicates that such calls for justice are disingenuous and instead, what is being done is not an investigation, but a politically motivated witch-hunt aimed at serving an ulterior motive.

Malaysia is not generally perceived to be a stanch ally of Moscow, but it is neither a loyal client state of Washington, London or Brussels. On many issues, Malaysia has exhibited an independence in foreign policy that has perturbed the so-called international order maintained by the West. And Malaysia’s internal politics have long wrestled to stem inroads by Washington’s favorites including Anwar Ibrahim and his political faction, Pakatan Rakyat.

Its inclusion in the investigation would provide a much needed, impartial counterweight to an otherwise fully pro-NATO JIT membership.

To casual observers, the current investigation led by NATO members and Kiev, a possible suspect, would be no different than the Donetsk People’s Republic and Russia leading it. Few would consider a DPR or Russian led investigation impartial, and few should see a NATO-led investigation as impartial. Had Malaysia been included in the process, an argument could have been made that an actual investigation was taking place rather than a complex propaganda campaign.

Malaysia’s exclusion is a troubling sign for the victims of the MH17 disaster, meaning the true culprits will never be known. The overt politically motivated nature of the investigation will on one hand help fuel NATO’s propaganda war, but on the other hand, fuel the doubts of millions worldwide over the true events that took place in the skies of eastern Ukraine that day. Like so many other events in human history that took place amid a high stake political struggle, the downing of MH17 will be shrouded in mystery, mystery draped over the truth by the irresponsible leadership of NATO, and those in Washington, London and Brussels egging on the conflict in Ukraine to this very day.

Ulson Gunnar, a New York-based geopolitical analyst and writer especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

New details continue to emerge. Meanwhile the once frenzied Western media that was initially all too willing to point fingers at Russia is AWFULLY QUIET......


[size=18pt]Kiev ignored EU request to close E. Ukraine airspace days before MH17 crash – report[/size]
Published time: December 07, 2014 20:27
Get short URL


Journalists look at parts of the Malaysia Airlines plane Flight MH17 as Dutch investigators (unseen) arrive at the crash site near the Grabove village in eastern Ukraine on November 11, 2014 (AFP Photo/Menahem Kahana)

Trends
Ukraine turmoil

Tags
Conflict, Crime, EU, Military, Ukraine

European air traffic control regulator urged Kiev to close the south-east of the country for civilian aircraft days before the MH17 flight was downed near Donetsk, but the plea was ignored by the Ukrainian authorities, a new report claims.

Eurocontrol experts spoke privately to their Ukrainian colleagues about the danger of the situation in the east of the country, unnamed sources in the organization told the Sunday Times newspaper.

They were reportedly concerned that by that time anti-Kiev militias had already downed about 20 Ukrainian military planes; that the communication frequencies were jammed in the Donetsk Region; and that the Russian and Ukrainian air-traffic controllers couldn’t exchange information.

However, Eurocontrol lacks power to affect national governments’ decisions, and Kiev continued to allow civil planes to use airspace over war-torn Donetsk and Lugansk regions, the report said.

Ukraine only agreed to raise the minimum height, at which civilian aircraft were required to fly over the region from 8 to 9.7 kilometers.


Investigators watch as a piece of wreckage from the Malaysia Airlines flight MH17 is transported at the site of the plane crash near the village of Hrabove (Grabovo) in Donetsk region, eastern Ukraine November 20, 2014. (Reuters/Antonio Bronic)



On July 17, Malaysia Airlines MH17 flight crashed in south-eastern Ukraine, killing all 298 people on board.

The victims came from 10 nations, with the majority of the passengers having been citizens of the Netherlands.

The investigations by the Dutch Safety Board and an international investigation team are still underway, with Kiev and the militias trading blame for the tragedy.

The Boeing 777 was allegedly shot down, but it still unclear if it was done by a surface-to-air missile or by a military plane.

The families of some of the MH17 victims are suing Ukraine in the European Court of Human Rights for refusing to shut down the airspace over the battle zone.

READ MORE: Mother of German MH17 crash victim sues Ukraine in EU court

“I blame the Ukrainian authorities for not closing the airspace and Malaysia Airlines for not taking a decision to avoid it,” Robby Oehlers, who lost a cousin in the crash, told Sunday Times.

The lives of passengers of Malaysian jet were lost due to financial and political reasons, Elmar Giemulla, a lawyer for the families of four German victims.



Members of a group of international experts inspect wreckage at the site where the downed Malaysia Airlines flight MH17 crashed, near the village of Hrabove (Grabovo) in Donetsk region, eastern Ukraine August 1, 2014. (Reuters/Sergei Karpukhin)

“Presumably the Ukrainian authorities wanted to avoid losing the revenue from transit fees — up to $1 billion per year — and also for political reasons, as shutting your airspace means admitting a loss of control and a loss of sovereignty,” Giemulla said.

Eurocontrol (European Organization for the Safety of Air Navigation) coordinates and plans air traffic control for all of Europe since 1960.

The organization currently has 40 member states, with Ukraine having joined in 2004.

This could lend credence to the theory that MH17 was brought down by a BUK battery operated by the Ukranians and then finished off with cannon fire...

http://www.globalresearch.ca/ukrainian-soldier-confirms-ukraines-military-shot-down-malaysian-mh17-plane/5420559

[size=18pt]Ukrainian Soldier Confirms: Ukraine’s Military Shot Down Malaysian MH17 Plane[/size]

A Ukrainian soldier who was part of the crew that operated the supposed missile-battery that the Ukrainian Government claims shot down the Malaysian MH17 airliner on July 17th has testified publicly for the first time, saying that the missile-battery was operated by the Ukrainian military, not by the rebels as asserted, and that he and his former crew-mates who operated it laughed when they heard their Government say that this missile-battery was operated by rebels and had shot the airliner down.

An English-translated transcript of the December 15th Russian-language interview with this soldier was posted at UkraineWar.Info on December 17th by Michael Collins, an investigative journalist with UkraineWar.Info who has been following very closely the multiple investigations that are proceeding into the cause of the downing.

This testimony confirms the accumulating prior, already overwhelming and even-more-convincing evidence, which is linked to in my latest article on the topic, here, all of which evidence indicates that either one or else two Ukrainian fighter-jets intentionally shot this airliner down — that it was not an error by rebels who had mis-identified this airliner as being a bomber from the Ukrainian Government, such as the Ukrainian Government and its sponsor the U.S. Government claim.

Regarding the reason why the Ukrainian Government did this, it, too, is clear: U.S. President Obama needed a startling incident in order to obtain from the EU and other U.S.-allied nations their participation in heavily increased economic sanctions to weaken Russia. As soon as this plane was downed, both the Ukrainian Government and the Obama Administration claimed that they possessed convincing proof that it had been downed by pro-Russian rebels in Ukraine’s former southeast. All U.S. allies got on board with that and agreed to hiked sanctions against Russia.

This “false flag” event (as such government fakeries are called in the intelligence communities) succeeded, just as did Hitler’s burning down the Reichstag and blaming it on leftists, which was the event that enabled him to seize total power in Germany.

THIS JUST IN (3:21PM Eastern time in U.S.) from Michael Collins: “George [Eliason, a third member of our team at UkraineWar.Info, and a resident inside the conflict-zone] says that due to the pub from the article, the ukraine govt took down their ‘damning’ pic of BUK 312 today and that the reporter who did the interview is underground and fleeing the country.”

So, the reason why Ukrainians are reluctant to go public about their lying Government is obvious. And, all of the ‘news’ media there are owned by Ukrainian, or, in some cases, by American, oligarchs. (The American ones do it through ‘nonprofit’ foundations they create, which are co-funded by the American Government. The U.S. oligarch then gets tax-write-offs, plus co-funding by U.S. taxpayers, to save him still more money on his scheme.)

Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author, most recently, of They’re Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records, 1910-2010, and of CHRIST’S VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that Created Christianity.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TRTxKVdV4Jo




https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oQRvINebeok

Again, news you will never see in Western mainstream papers. Slowly but surely the truth will be exposed. In this modern age of the internet and social media, it is getting increasingly difficult for these evil shadow elites to carry out dastardly acts such as these without holes punched in the official narrative.

They got away (almost though) with 911 and with the murder of JFK but this time around we are unto them!


[size=18pt]Another MH17 Cover-Up: Hiding a Key Autopsy[/size]

http://rinf.com/alt-news/editorials/another-mh17-cover-hiding-key-autopsy/

2014/12/23 0 849 Views

Eric Zuesse

Decisive evidence as to how the July 17th shooting-down of the MH17 Malaysian airliner occurred is being hidden by the four-nation team that’s doing the official ‘investigation’ into the plane-downing incident.

This decisive evidence is the coroner’s report on the corpse of the airliner’s pilot. If the pilot was killed by bullets, then the standard ‘explanation’ of the downing (that the plane was downed by a ground-fired missile) isn’t just false, it’s an outright hoax. So: where’s the pilot’s autopsy?

This investigation is important because stringent economic sanctions against Russia were instituted immediately after the downing; these sanctions were based upon never-substantiated charges from the Ukrainian Government, and from its sponsor the U.S. Government, alleging that the plane had been downed by rebels who were supported by Russia. (The “Buk” missile launcher charged by Ukraine as the cause was actually manned by Ukraine’s soldiers.)

The same Government, the U.S., that had lied its way into invading Iraq, might now be orchestrating still-more-dangerous frauds, with the potential even for a nuclear war against Russia.

The four nations doing the official investigation and report into the airliner-downing are: Ukraine, Australia, Belgium, and Netherlands. All four are U.S. allies; and, one of them, Ukraine, is one of the two main suspects in this case, the other being separatists against the Ukrainian Government. (They’re not represented in this ‘investigation.’) The United States and Ukraine say that the airliner was downed by separatists who mistakenly thought that they were shooting down a Ukrainian bomber instead of an airliner. (Even if that had been true, the U.S. would still have been the ultimate cause of the downing. The whole cover-story was designed to be believed only by fools.)

However, the Ukrainian Government, which until now has maintained steadfastly that there is only one possible explanation for the downing — their explanation, that it had been downed by a “Buk” ground-fired missile controlled by the rebels — finally changed their tune on December 21st, and announced that maybe it wasn’t. Apparently, the other three nations on the team are refusing to sign their names onto a joint report from all four (according to the secret agreement signed by them all on August 8th, this report will be unanimous or else it won’t be at all) that commits to Ukraine’s ‘explanation,’ because the real evidence is overwhelmingly against it — as will herein be explained and documented.

According to London’s Daily Mail on December 5th, a video documentary from a Russian journalist “suggested” that, “pieces of 30mm rounds were found in the bodies of the pilots.” 30mm bullets are the same size of bullets that come from the types of fighter-jet planes that are in the Ukrainian Air Force, including the following jets: Su-25, Su-27, and Mig-29. 30mm bullets are very different from missile-shrapnel, which the U.S. and Ukraine allege had brought down this airliner.

A retired Lufthansa pilot, Peter Haisenko, examined a remarkably clear photo of the key piece of evidence on the downing, which is the side-panel of the fuselage right next to the pilot; this panel was riddled with what he said were 30mm bullet holes, shot right into the spot where the pilot’s belly would be. Apparently (if Haisenko is correct), the airliner’s pilot was machine-gunned to death, his belly was ripped into by a hail of bullets, after which the attacking jet or jets fired a missile into the airliner’s body, and the airliner then promptly plummeted to earth. No ground-fired missile was involved. (The ground-fired “Buk” would have been 33,000 feet below, much too far away for precise targeting at the plane’s pilot; and shrapnel-holes are not round; they’re very different from bullet-holes.)

What’s in question is whether the approximately two-foot-diameter gash into the fuselage right next to the pilot was the result of hundreds of bullets fired into the pilot’s belly, as Haisenko alleges. If any bullets at all were involved in this downing, then the Ukrainian Government is the guilty party in it, because only they have an Air Force; the separatists do not. The separatists had no way to machine-gun the plane’s pilot to death. The separatists were never that close to the airliner.

Because of the allegation in the Daily Mail, I consulted the source of that allegation, which was a documentary film that had been made by Russian journalist Andrei Karaulov. Because it’s in Russian, I engaged a Russian translator, who found that the source of the Daily Mail’s allegation was at 3:51-4:19 on this video.

It says there:

“Judging by the cockpit fragments photos, the cockpit was shot by 30-mm cannon projectiles. There should be plenty of them in the pilots’ bodies. As announced, the bodies of the passengers were transferred to relatives, but the bodies of both main and support jet crews (currently kept in the Netherlands), were in bad condition due to (1) heavy shelling targeted at the cockpit, and (2) crashing to earth. The projectiles must have been found by now, most certainly. Their type must have been definitely ascertained. Why are these findings not announced? There is but one inference: the high professionals on the international investigation board are severely pressured by some powers, which don’t want certain of the findings to be publicly disclosed.”

Also: “One month ago [from the time of shooting the video] the international commission announced that it found certain ‘objects’ in pilots’ bodies. I believe these were 30mm cannon projectile particles. When we were in Copenhagen, we were told by the international investigation commission that investigation results would be made public on 9 October. To this day it hasn’t been done.”

So: Where’s this crucial autopsy-report? We’ve seen the side-panel with its bullet-holes; were bullets lodged in the corpse?

What we have gotten instead is the Ukrainian Government backing away from the ‘explanation’ that U.S. President Barack Obama, who installed their regime, endorsed, and used as his excuse for the EU to hike sanctions against Russia — an act of war, which now has been followed by the President and Congress virtually declaring war against Russia by taking over Ukraine on Russia’s very border. Based totally on lies.

Evidently, Obama believes that if George W. Bush could fool the American public into invading Iraq, Obama can fool them into invading Russia. Can it be: he’s aiming to out-do even Bush?

—————

Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author, most recently, of They’re Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records, 1910-2010, and of CHRIST’S VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that Created Christianity.

[size=18pt]Meet The Pilot Who Shot Down Malaysian Boeing MH-17 - Vladislav Voloshin: "The Plane Was In the Wrong Place at the Wrong Time"[/size]
Captain Voloshin Vladislav Valerjevych
[img]http://2.bp..com/-DTFA5tkVfFA/VJijdqHXDMI/AAAAAAAAKIk/5ydegr_LhTg/s1600/889475.jpg[/img]
Vladimir Sungorkin, Dmitry Steshin, Nikolay Varsegov for Komsomolskaya Pravda

In the "case of Malaysian Boeing" a "secret witness" stepped forward whose testimony remove all charges from the militia and Russia. And explain the mysterious behavior of Western experts.

This man came to the editorial office of "Komsomolskaya Pravda" by himself. We checked his papers - he is not an actor and not a fake person. We can not yet reveal his personal information - he still has relatives in Ukraine and is afraid of revenge and blackmail. Judging by what Alexander (let's name him that) told us, the fear is substantiated. We provide a transcript of our conversation virtually uncut:


THE FIGHTER RETURNED WITHOUT MISSILES


- Where were you on July 17, 2014, the day Malaysian Boeing was shot down?

- I was on the territory of Ukraine, in the city of Dnepropetrovsk, the village Aviatorskoye. It is a regular airport. There at this time were based fighter jets and helicopters. Planes regularly flew on bombing missions, Su-25 attack aircraft bombed Donetsk, Lugansk. This lasted a long time.

- The aircraft flew every day?

- Daily.

- Why did you assume that these airplanes could be related to the downing of the "Boeing"?

- A few reasons. Out of the eight airplanes, which were based there, only two had "air-to-air" missiles. They were suspended.

- Why? Were there any aircraft battles in the air?

- No, the aircraft was fitted with missiles to cover themselves in the air. Just in case. Mostly they had air-to-ground ammunition. NURS, bombs.

-Tell us about July 17.

- Airplanes flew regularly. All day since the morning. In the afternoon, about an hour before the downing of the "Boeing", three attack fighters were raised into the air. I don't remember the exact time. One of the airplanes was equipped with such missiles. It was a Su-25.

- Have you personally seen it?

- Yes.

- Where was your vantage point?

- On site. Cannot tell you exactly.

- Did you have an opportunity to see specifically what the pylons of the aircraft where fitted with? Could you confuse "air-to-air" and "air-to-ground" missiles?

- No, I couldn't confuse it. They vary in size, plumage, coloration. With a guidance head. Very easy to recognize. Anyway, after a short time, only one airplane returned, two were shot down. Somewhere in the East of Ukraine, I was told. The airplane that came back, was the one with those suspended missiles.

- It returned without the missiles?

- Without the missiles. That pilot was very scared.

- Do you know this pilot, have you seen him?

- Yes.

- Can you tell us his name?

- Last name Voloshin.

- Was he alone in the airplane?

- Yes. The airplane is designed for one person.

- Do you know his name?

- Vladislav, I think. Don't remember exactly. Captain.

- Captain Voloshin came back. What happened next?

- Came back with blank ammunition.

- No missiles left?

- Yes.


"NOT THE RIGHT PLANE"


- Could you tell us, Alexander, the airplane came back from the mission, you still do not know about the loss of the "Boeing", but you were somehow surprised by the absence of "air-to-air" missiles. Why?

- These "air-to-air" missiles are not included in the basic ammunition package.

They are used only with a special order. Typically, the aircraft with such rockets were not to allowed into the air. Because this missiles should not be frequently transported in the air.

In all two such missiles can fit on this plane. Never before they had been applied. They were written off previously. But literally on the eve, a week before this incident (the loss of "Boeing" - Ed.) the use of these missiles was urgently renewed. And they put again into service. They have not been used for many years.

- Why?

- They were expired. Made back in the Soviet years. But by the urgent order their expiration date was extended.

- And on this day they were put on the plane?

- They always stood with these missiles.

- But didn't fly?

- Tried to let them in the air less frequently - every flight depletes the resource. But on this day, the plane flew.

- And came back without them?

- Yes. Knowing this pilot a little bit... (quite possibly, when the other two airplanes were shot down in front of him), he just had a frightened reaction, inadequate. Could out of fright or in revenge launch the missiles into a Boeing. Maybe he took it for some other combat aircraft.

- Are these missiles with self-guiding heads?

- Yes.

- When he launched them, they began to look for a target?

- No. The pilot himself finds the target. Then launches the missile, and it flies at the target.

- Could the pilot use these missiles against ground targets?

- It's pointless.

- What else do you remember this day? What did the pilot say?

- He said a phrase, when he was lead out of the airplane: "It was not the right plane." And in the evening there was a phrase to a question from one pilot to him, to Voloshin: "What's up with the plane?" To which he replied: "The plane was in the wrong place at the wrong time."


"AND AFTER THE TRAGEDY THE FLIGHTS CONTINUED"


- Did this pilot serve there for a long time? How old is he?

- Voloshin is about 30 years old. His base is in Nikolaev. They were transferred to Dnepropetrovsk. Before they were sent to Chuguev near Kharkov. And all this time they bombed Donetsk and Lugansk. And, according to one of the officers of the Nikolaev base, they still continue to do so.

- Did the pilots have good combat experience?

- Those who were there, had experience. Nikolaev base was even one year, in my opinion, 2013, the best base in Ukraine.

- Was the story about the "Boeing" discussed among the pilots?

- All attempts to discuss were immediately stopped. And the pilots mostly talked among themselves only, they are so... stuck-up...

- After everyone learned about this "Boeing" what happened to this pilot, captain Voloshin?

- After all of this flights continued. And the pilots did not rotate. The same faces.


"THERE WAS NO FLIGHTS... BUT IT WAS SHOT DOWN"


- Let's try to recap the events. How could it develop? Three airplanes left on a combat mission. They were roughly in the same area, as Boeing. Two airplanes were shot down. This captain Voloshin was nervous, got scared, and possibly he mistook the Boeing for combat aircraft?

- Possible. The distance was long, he may have not seen specifically what kind of aircraft.

- What distance do these missiles need?

- At 3-5 kilometers they can find the target.

- And what is the speed difference between combat aircraft and the Boeing?

- No difference: the rockets have pretty good speed. Very fast rocket.

- Will catch up anyway? And height?

- It may easily at its maximum altitude - to 7 thousand meters - quite easily focus on the target.

- To reach it higher?

- Yes. The aircraft can simply lift the nose up, and can find the target with no problems and launch the rocket. The range of this missile is more than 10 kilometers.

- At what distance from the target does this rocket explodes? Does it hit the fuselage and explodes?

- Depending on the modification. Literally could when it hits the body or at a distance of 500 meters.

- We worked at the crash site and noticed that the fragments were trapped in the hull of the aircraft very closely. It seemed like it exploded literally two feet away from the Boeing.

- There is such a missile. The principle of fragments - it breaks, and the fragments hit. And then hits the main warhead of the rocket.

- Ukraine announced that on this day they had no combat flights. We checked different aggregate sources on the downed airplanes, Ukraine denied everywhere that its military aircraft flew on this day.

- I know about this. Ukraine also announced that two of these airplanes were shot down on the 16th, and not the 17th. And many times the date was changed. But actually, the flights were on a daily basis. I saw it myself. Even during the ceasefire there were flights, although, less frequent.


PROHIBITED BOMBS


- What ammunition was on the aircraft at your airfield? Were phosphorus bombs used, incendiary devices? Ukrainian artillery used it very actively on the ground.

- I didn't see phosphorus bombs. But space-detonating bombs were used.

- Are they prohibited?

- Yes. This bomb was intended for Afghanistan. It was prohibited and was not used until lately. It was prohibited by some Convention, I do not remember, can't say. This bomb is inhumane, burns everything. Burns absolutely everything.

- They were attached and used during hostilities?

- Yes. And there were also banned cluster bombs. Aircraft cluster bomb - depending on size can hit a very ambitious target. One bomb covers a stadium. Entirely, the whole entire area - two hectares.

- Why did they use such weapons?

- They were following orders. And whose order is unclear.

- What's the point of such weapons - scare tactic?

- Maximum annihilation of manpower


CAN BE BEATEN FOR EVERY CARELESS WORD


- Why did you go to Russia, why decided to tell? Why, finally, no one learned this before? You're not the only witness!

- Everyone is intimidated by the SBU (Security Service of Ukraine. - Ed.) and the National Guard. People can be beaten for every careless word, jailed on any insignificant suspicion of sympathies towards Russia or the militia. I was initially against this "anti-terrorist operation". Did not agree with the policy of the Ukrainian state. The civil war is wrong. To kill your own people is not normal. And to take some part in it or not, but to be on the Ukrainian side and to be partially involved in this, I don't want to in the first place!

Please go to Komsomolskaya Pravda for the video recording of this conversation (in Russian) and more infographics

Hmmm...

[size=18pt]Another MH17 Cover-Up: Hiding a Key Autopsy[/size]
December 24
13:36 2014
by Eric Zuesse

If the MH17 pilot was killed by bullets, then the standard ‘explanation’ of the downing (that the plane was downed by a ground-fired missile) isn’t just false, it’s an outright hoax. So: where’s the pilot’s autopsy?

Eric Zuesse (The Pontiac Tribune) — Decisive evidence as to how the July 17th shooting-down of the MH17 Malaysian airliner occurred is being hidden by the four-nation team that’s doing the official ‘investigation’ into the plane-downing incident.

This decisive evidence is the coroner’s report on the corpse of the airliner’s pilot. If the pilot was killed by bullets, then the standard ‘explanation’ of the downing (that the plane was downed by a ground-fired missile) isn’t just false, it’s an outright hoax. So: where’s the pilot’s autopsy?

This investigation is important because stringent economic sanctions against Russia were instituted immediately after the downing; these sanctions were based upon never-substantiated charges from the Ukrainian Government, and from its sponsor the U.S. Government, alleging that the plane had been downed by rebels who were supported by Russia. (The “Buk” missile launcher charged by Ukraine as the cause was actually manned by Ukraine’s soldiers.)


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8-RyOaFwcEw

Continue reading here:

http://thesaker.is/how-mh17-was-shot-down-analysis-by-colonel-cassad/


[size=18pt]How MH17 was shot down – analysis by Colonel Cassad[/size]

2130 Views
March 05, 2015
26 Comments
Colonel Cassad has just published an interesting analysis about how MH17 was shot down (please see here for the original Russian text: http://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/2077046.html). Uncle Martin has already made a full translation and posted it on the English version of Colonel Cassad’s blog (please see here for the English translation: http://cassad-eng.livejournal.com/133434.html). Since this is very long text, I will not re-post it fully here, but I have decided to make it available for download in ODT, RTF and PDF format (please click here to download the zipped file with all three formats: http://www.mediafire.com/download/cj4vd09u7i1zr4b/How_MH17_was_shot_down.zip).

In conclusion I would like to indulge in a rather infantile exercise in self-congratulatory “autobackslapping” and point out that the hypothesis I put forth as early as August 4th is holding up to time pretty well. See for yourself:

http://vineyardsaker..com/2014/08/just-the-baseless-hypothesis-of.html (original post on the old blog)

http://thesaker.is/just-the-baseless-hypothesis-of-an-uninformed-amateur-nothing-more/comment-page-2/ (same post on the new blog)

My disagreement with Colonel Cassad is that I believe that the R-60M missile was used first to hit one engine and slow down MH17 and that the SU-25s guns were used later to finish off the airliner. Still, this difference is trivial. We both agree that missiles and canon fire were used and that no Buk-M1 was used (other than to cue the SU-25 to the correct intercept trajectory, in my hypothesis).

It is important, crucial really, that we NOT allow the AngloZionist to just gently and slowly shove the truth about MH17 into the “memory hole”. Right now, the Imperial media is mounting an truly heroic effort into not mentioning the MH17 topic as if it had never happened. Except that it did and many innocents died in this disgusting false flag attack. We cannot let Russia be alone in demanding that the full truth be revealed about this atrocity and this is why I will continue posting any well researched documents on this topic.

The Saker

[size=18pt]Dutch dismiss reports alleging MH17 downed by Buk missile[/size]
Published time: March 20, 2015 06:29
Edited time: March 20, 2015 20:52

A crane carries wreckage of the Malaysia Airlines Boeing 777 plane (flight MH17) at the site of the plane crash near the settlement of Grabovo in the Donetsk region November 16, 2014. (Reuters / Antonio Bronic)


Trends
Malaysia MH17 plane crash

Tags
Accident

The Netherlands has denied reports that the Malaysia Airlines plane was downed by a Buk missile, killing all 298 passengers and crew last July.

The Dutch Safety Board (DSB), which is investigating the cause of the crash, responded to reports released earlier by Netherlands broadcaster RTL alleging that the flight MH17 was downed by the Buk anti-aircraft missile system.

READ MORE: Lavrov condemns Reuters report on MH17 crash, calls for 'unbiased, professional' investigation

“The investigation into the cause of the accident is in full progress and focuses on many more sources than only the shrapnel,” the DSB stated.

"Additional investigation material is welcome, but it is imperative that it can be indisputably shown that there is a relationship between the material and the downed aircraft," the agency emphasized Thursday in a statement.

READ MORE: Ukraine media falsely claim Dutch prosecutors accused Russia of MH17 downing

Spokesman for the Dutch Public Prosecutor, Wim de Bruin, echoed Dutch Safety Board’s comments after being contacted by RT.

“I can tell you the same thing I told RTL yesterday – that our criminal investigation is still ongoing,” de Bruin said.

“We’re investigating many things. And it’s not a secret that we’re also investigating the possibility that MH17 was downed by a Buk missile. But it’s much too early to draw any conclusions – that’s why we have to wait,” he added.

De Bruin also said that RTL channel handed its evidence to the Security Board of the Netherlands to be examined.

RTL claimed on Thursday that a metal fragment from the crash site of the plane allegedly matches a surface-to-air Buk rocket. The piece was recovered by a Dutch journalist from the village of Grabovo several months ago, close to where the plane was brought down last year.

RTL reported it had the shrapnel tested by international forensic experts, including defense analysts IHS Jane's in London, who said it matched the explosive charge of a Buk.

Earlier this month Ukrainian media made a gaffe, misquoting Dutch investigators as having accused Russia of shooting down the Malaysian Airlines flight.

Local workers cut wreckage of the Malaysia Airlines Boeing 777 plane (flight MH17) at the site of the plane crash near the settlement of Grabovo in the Donetsk region November 16, 2014.(Reuters / Antonio Bronic)

The potpourri of reports by Ukrainian media, including those by major outlets like TV channel TSN or Segodnya daily, all claimed that the Dutch team had already come to the conclusion it was a Russian Buk surface-to-air missile that shot down the Boeing airliner.

“I can say for sure they are not correct,” Dutch Public Prosecution Service (OM) spokesman Wim de Bruin told RT. “We are not yet ready to take any conclusion,” he pointed out.

On Thursday, Russia's Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov slammed a news report about witness statements, in which people claimed they had seen a rocket fired at the time of the crash.

“Attempts at distorting facts, enforcing theories as to what could have happened continue to exist, with some based on openly dirty intentions,” Lavrov told journalists. He remarked that a Reuters report on “new evidence on the downing of the Malaysian plane over Ukraine” from last week looked like the “respected agency” had published “a so-called stovepiping.”

Lavrov pointed out that some witnesses "contradict one another, and express things amusing for any specialist. For instance, some wiggling rocket, separating rocket stages, blue clouds of smoke.” He also stressed that information was provided by alleged eyewitnesses, who somehow managed to see the crash despite being 25km (15 miles) away from it, in cloudy weather.

READ MORE: Could SU-25 fighter jet down a Boeing? Former pilots speak out on MH17 claims

Malaysia Airlines flight MH17, heading from Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur, crashed over eastern Ukraine on July 17, 2014.

Kiev, along with some Western states, rushed to put the blame on eastern Ukraine militias and Russia.

A report on the official investigation published in September 2014 said the crash was a result of structural damage caused by a large number of high-energy objects that struck the Boeing from the outside. The report did not specify what the objects were, where they came from or who was responsible.The Russian Defense Ministry meanwhile shared radar data pointing to other possibilities in the July tragedy, including an attack by a Ukrainian Sukhoi-25 fighter jet, which was said to have been tracking the passenger plane.

[size=18pt]Malaysian Pressure Forces MH17 Investigation to UN[/size]
Posted on June 27, 2015 by Eric Zuesse.
Eric Zuesse

Malaysia, frustrated by the refusal of the official international investigation-team to produce any clear evidence yet of whom to blame for the downing of the MH17 Malaysian airliner over the Ukrainian civil-war zone on 17 July 2014, has finally forced the team to request the UN to investigate. They’ve forced the original four nations on the team to accept UN adjudication of any final report. This will enable a court-proceeding to make the ultimate determination of guilt (upon which judgment penalties and compensation will be assessed), and this court-determination would inevitably allow whatever party is being blamed by the five-member official investigating team, to present its own evidence in the case, so that the court will make the ultimate determination — the official investigating team will not be performing that crucial judgmental function.

Malaysia was long prohibited from even participating in this investigational team, but on 5 November 2014, a deal was finally reached with the four nations that did comprise the team — four U.S. allies: Netherlands, Australia, Belgium, and (a suspect in possibly having downed the MH17) Ukraine itself (though it had lost none of its citizens in the disaster) — so, the next day, Malaysia’s New Straits Times headlined “Malaysia to join MH17 criminal probe team,” and reported that, “The prime minister said the country had been invited to play a bigger role in the recovery and investigation of the ill-fated aircraft, believed to have been downed by a missile over eastern Ukraine on July 17.” The Malaysian report went on then, pointedly, to note: “In July, the Dutch and Ukrainian authorities agreed that the bulk of the operations would be carried out by the Netherlands, with assistance from countries whose citizens were on board the flight. Malaysia had repeatedly asked to be part of the joint investigation team, currently comprising investigators from the Netherlands, Belgium, Australia and Ukraine.” Implicitly, that phrase “Malaysia had repeatedly asked to be part of the investigating team” said that Malaysia had consistently been refused membership until 5 November 2014. In fact, even by late November of 2014, Malaysia continued to be refused membership, and I headlined on November 30th, “Malaysia Becomes Angry About Exclusion from MH17 Investigation.” That refusal was especially outrageous because, like three of the four nations that already were on the team, Malaysia had lost (44) citizens from the downing. But in addition, Malaysia had lost the plane, from it. There was no excuse for the four pro-Western nations to exclude Malaysia, and for their limiting the investigating-team to only Ukraine (a key suspect in the downing) and three of its allies. And, between November and now, Malaysia has finally become so fed-up with the team’s continuing refusal to act, and to declare the culprit, so that the rest of the team finally consented to Malaysia’s demand to transfer the investigation over to the UN.

On 24 June 2015, Agence France Press, a mouthpiece for yet another Western nation (France), bannered, “Netherlands, Malaysia push for UN tribunal for MH17 culprits,” and Thailand’s Bangkock Post headlined this same story more honestly and directly, as “Malaysia demands UN court for MH17 shootdown,” but carried unchanged the anti-Russian-slanted AFP text. The anti-Russian-slanted AFP ‘news’ report said “It remains unclear, however, whether Russia would back the creation of the special tribunal” (something which they could also have said of the U.S., for example) and included a sub-head: “- Getting Russia on board -,” which section had only this brief and anonymously sourced reference to Russia: “The diplomat [unidentified] said the countries were mindful of the need to ‘avoid a Russian veto’ [as if a Russian veto would have been likelier than an American one, etc.].” That’s propaganda for a regime, not news-reporting for a democracy — it delivers the bias (to whip up support for war), along with its sugar-coated pro-regime facts.

The present writer has already set forth the conclusive evidence that Ukraine downed this airliner, and that the reason Ukraine did it — intentionally, not at all by mistake — was in order to enable the U.S. to blame Russia for it and thus get the EU to hike economic sanctions against Russia. Adolf Hitler’s Nazi Germany isn’t the only nation in history that has used what the intelligence trade calls “false-flag attacks” in order to blame the nations that it itself aims to attack. The U.S. has perfected that technique.

Russia was framed for the downing of MH17, which was a U.S. job carried out by the Ukrainian Air Force. (The EU knows that the U.S. has a mega-criminal government, but they go along with it, thinking that their aristocrats will get some of the loot that’s being yanked off by America’s aristocrats. They do this though 206 of the murdered passengers were EU citizens. And Netherlands, which provided the U.S. key assistance in the buildup to overthrowing Ukraine’s democracy, lost the most people in it, which just goes to show on which side Dutch aristocrats stand — it’s not the Dutch public’s side.)

Finally, Malaysia is having some success in pulling this criminal investigation away from the clearly proven criminal (Ukraine — which now is itself a U.S. client-state) and its friends.

Anyone who believes Western ‘news’ media about international affairs is simply laying his mind out to be raped by agents of the local nation’s aristocracy. Almost everything has become propaganda now. Honest journalism is squelched, if not strangled.

That’s why, if you’ll google the headline of this news-report, none of the major mainstream and ‘alternative’ ‘news’ sites will likely come up — though it has been sent to all of them.

———-

Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author, most recently, of They’re Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records, 1910-2010, and of CHRIST’S VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that Created Christianity, and of Feudalism, Fascism, Libertarianism and Economics.

[size=18pt]Dutch Journalist, MH17 Expert: 'UN Tribunal a Desperate Attempt to Hide Kiev's Responsibility'
[/size]

Proposed tribunal would be a face saving operation to burry evidence in a giant buerocratic enterprise


http://russia-insider.com/en/dutch-mh17-tribunal/ri8966


Dutch Journalist, MH17 Expert: 'UN Tribunal a Desperate Attempt to Hide Kiev's Responsibility'
Proposed tribunal would be a face saving operation to burry evidence in a giant buerocratic enterprise

Daniele Pozzati Subscribe to 792 Sat, Jul 25 | 4,579 62

The proposed UN-backed MH17 tribunal is a “desperate attempt to hide Kiev’s responsibility”, Dutch journalist and blogger Joost Niemoller argues in his post “How Chess Player Putin Wins the MH17 Game”.

Niemoller is no layman. In October 2014 he published a book on the MH17 disaster whose title De Doofpotdeal (“The Cover Up Deal”) summarizes its key argument. The inside flap explains what the author means:

“The Netherlands took charge of the investigation into the cause of the disaster, but agreed to grant a covert deal to Kiev.

It thus became a pawn in an international political chess game. Unvarnished Cold War rhetoric is making a comeback.

Putin here is the ultimate bad guy. What he says is labeled as poisonous propaganda in the West. Meanwhile, it seems, all those concerned suffer from tunnel vision.

Can we still be assured that the investigators do their work independently and objectively?”
In his piece, Niemoller laments the shortcomings of the Dutch Safety Board, the body charged with conducting the investigations on the MH17 disaster. The ever-postponed deadline – the final report might be released at the end of the year, hence one and a half year after the crash, but that too is still uncertain – he finds perplexing:

“When the co-operating countries, the JIT (Joint Investigation Team), intend to complete their probe, is not known. Then, something gets leaked to the press: ‘At the end of this year’. With which legal framework? It is not yet known. Under which conditions? No idea. How will the co-operation between the Ukrainian, the JIT and Dutch Safety Board unfold?”

“Everything is vague and secret. That is not the way it should be for such an important study.”
Niemoller contrasts this with the approach taken by Moscow:

“Russia proposed last year to conduct an international study based on research carried out by the UN - and not by means of a secret deal of countries, where one of the possible culprits, namely Ukraine, has veto power.”
Niemoller, a Dutchman, laments the dubious role of his country, especially when considering that it was the one affected most by the MH17 tragedy: 193 of the 298 victims were Dutch. And yet, Niemoller says:

“What we know for sure is that the Netherlands from day zero intensely cooperates with Kiev. What we know is that the Russians are kept out and that there is a blame game played against Putin.”
Now Niemoller focuses his attention on the role Russia is about to play. He argues that Moscow holds all the cards, and that Kiev & co apparently hold none:

“When the Russians said that if a BUK had been fired by the separatists, they would have certainly seen it on their radar, the Russians indicated that they know much more”.

“After a year, there is still no evidence of that alleged separatist Buk on the table. Kindergarten-level work from Bellingcat has been dismissed. And there was no ‘Buk-track’ through the Donbas region.”
Niemoller points out that Russia is not going to passively accept any result the Dutch Safety Board comes up with, especially if not backed with evidence. He reminds that Russia has set up its own body, ready to refute any unfounded allegations against the separatists militias the JIT might bring forward:

“The investigation Russia’s own Research Council is conducting will be a catastrophe for the Ukrainian and Dutch Safety Board”
Nor is Washington in a less awkward position:

“The Americans are silent about possible Russian involvement. Even US hawk Victoria Nuland used very cautious language about MH17 during a recent press conference in Kiev. She showed she really has nothing more to say about it.”
But it might get even more embarrassing for the US and its closest ally:

“Meanwhile, an anonymous Russian report has appeared, suggesting that the Boeing flight MH17 might have been shot with super modern Israeli missiles. There is confirmation coming from an ex-CIA agent to a Ukrainian/Israeli oligarch on the availability to Ukraine of modern Israeli weaponry”.

“The same ex-CIA agent added that the US policy, which is to blame for bringing down MH17, wants to push it away from the US, and will focus on local causes.”
According to Niemoller, “This is a very sophisticated game, but Russia can wait”.

What this proposed, UN-backed MH17 tribunal boils down to is thus quite prosaic.

“Faces should be saved. American faces especially. The Americans lost any initiative in diplomatic relations. It is the Russians who repeatedly state that they have an information advantage.”
The UN Security Council voting session on proposed tribunal to investigate last year’s Malaysia Airlines MH17 passenger plane crash in Ukraine is expected to be held next Wednesday. Russia, which has veto power, is expected to reject the initiative.

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2015/07/obama-should-release-mh-17-intel.html

[size=18pt]U.S. Intelligence Officials Demand that Obama Release MH-17 Intel[/size]

MEMORANDUM FOR: The President

FROM: Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS)

SUBJECT: Releasing an Intelligence Report on Shoot-Down of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17

It has been a year since the shoot-down of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 over Ukraine, resulting in the death of 298 passengers and crew. The initial response by the U.S. government supported the contention that the likely perpetrators were anti-government forces in southeastern Ukraine (the customary media misnomer for them is “separatists”), and that they were possibly aided directly by Moscow.

On July 29, 2014, we Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS) suggested that the United States Government report publicly what intelligence it actually had relating to the shoot-down lest the incident turn into another paroxysm of blaming Russia without cause. We are still waiting for that report.

Executive Summary

Tensions between the United States and Russia over Ukraine are fast reaching a danger point. A major contributing factor in the American public’s negative perception of Moscow is last year’s downing of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17.

A public report detailing the investigation of the incident by the Dutch Safety authorities is expected by October but the draft is reportedly already in the hands of the United States government. There is speculation that the report will dovetail with media and leaked government sources that have placed primary blame on the ethnic Russian Ukrainians in southeastern Ukraine opposed to the government put in place after the Western-engineered coup of Feb. 22, 2014, in Kiev.

As the relationship with Moscow is of critical importance, if only because Russia has the military might to destroy the U.S., careful calibration of the relationship is essential. If the United States signs on to a conclusion that implicates Russia without any solid intelligence to support that contention it will further damage an already fractious bilateral relationship, almost certainly unnecessarily. It is our opinion that a proper investigation of the downing would involve exploring every possibility to determine how the evidence holds up.

Currently, the only thing the American public and worldwide audiences know for sure is that the plane was shot down. But the shoot-down might have been accidental, carried out by any one of a number of parties. Or it might have been orchestrated by anti-government forces, with Moscow either conniving in some way in that action or not. It is also possible that the downing was deliberately carried out by the Kiev government or one of Ukraine’s powerful oligarchs to implicate the anti-Kiev forces and Russia in this mass murder. And finally, though less likely, it might even be that based on the available intelligence it is impossible to determine who did it.

In light of the high stakes involved both in terms of our extremely important relationship with Russia as well as in establishing a trustworthy narrative that does credit to the White House, the failure of the Administration to issue a coordinated intelligence assessment summarizing what evidence exists to determine who was responsible is therefore puzzling. If the United States government knows who carried out the attack on the plane it should produce the evidence. If it does not know, it should say so.

In what follows, we former intelligence professionals with a cumulative total of some 360 years in various parts of U.S. intelligence provide our perspective on the issue and request for a second time that the intelligence over the downing be made public to counter the fuzzy and flimsy evidence that has over the past year been served up – some of it based on “social media.”

The Russian Dimension

It would not be the first time for a tragic incident to be exploited for propaganda reasons with potentially grave consequences. We refer to the behavior of the Reagan administration in the immediate aftermath of the shoot-down of Korean Airlines Flight 007 over Siberia on August 30, 1983.

Hours after the tragic shoot-down on August 30, 1983, the Reagan administration used its very accomplished propaganda machine to manage a narrative emphasizing Soviet culpability for deliberately killing all 269 people aboard KAL-007 in full knowledge that it was a civilian airliner. In reality, the airliner had been shot down after it strayed hundreds of miles off course and penetrated Russia’s airspace over sensitive military facilities in Kamchatka and Sakhalin Island. The Soviet pilot tried to signal the plane to land, but the KAL pilots did not respond to the repeated warnings. Amid confusion about the plane’s identity – a U.S. spy plane had been in the vicinity hours earlier – Soviet ground control ordered the pilot to fire.

The Soviets soon realized they had made a horrendous mistake. U.S. intelligence also knew from sensitive intercepts that the tragedy had resulted from a blunder, not from a willful act of murder (much as on July 3, 1988, the USS Vincennes shot down an Iranian civilian airliner over the Persian Gulf, killing 290 people, an act which President Ronald Reagan dismissively explained as an “understandable accident”).

The story of KAL-007 should come to mind when considering the fate of MH-17. There might be legitimate reasons for opposing the increasingly authoritarian government of President Vladimir Putin, but exploiting a tragedy does not equate to constructive statecraft for dealing with an adversary.

At a minimum, the White House and State Department one year ago displayed unseemly haste in deciding to be first out of the starting gate with a narrative implicating Russia, at least indirectly – a narrative that may not be based on fact. That twelve months have passed and there has been no effort made to either correct or amplify the record is unacceptable.

Someone Is Lying

Both Russia and Ukraine deny any active role in the MH-17 shoot down. So do the anti-coup forces in southeastern Ukraine. Someone knows something and is lying to conceal a role in the incident. From the U.S. perspective what happened needs to be clarified and become a matter of public record. No other nation has the resources that the U.S. had to come up with an evidence-based answer; and intelligence collection and analysis are the tools that must be used. The information released to date does not bear close scrutiny; it does not permit an informed judgment as to who is lying about the shoot-down of Flight 17.

One year ago today, National Intelligence Director James Clapper authorized a background briefing including some sketchy talking points in a very short “Government Assessment” for selected mainstream journalists. It was just five days after the shoot-down and two days after Secretary of State Kerry pointed the finger of blame at anti-coup Ukrainians and Russia. Understandably, corroboration was being sought.

Like Kerry’s presentations on the Sunday talk shows of July 20, 2014, however, much of the “Government Assessment” was derived from postings on “social media.” The July 22, 2014 briefing addressed, inconclusively, the key issue of who fired the Buk anti-aircraft missile widely believed to have downed the airliner on July 17, 2014.

No update to that five-day-after “Government Assessment” has been provided over the past year. Are we asked to believe that one year later the intelligence community still cannot adduce evidence that goes beyond insinuation regarding the Buk missile?

The July 22, 2014 briefing also suggested that the missile might have been fired by a Ukrainian “defector.” Has there been no clarification on that point? It is, frankly, very hard for us to believe that the U.S. intelligence community has been unable to expand its understanding of these key issues over the past year.

To be sure, there has long been a tendency in Washington to “fix the intelligence around the policy,” to quote the Downing Street memo relating to the inglorious start of the Iraq War. More recently, we note the claim repeatedly made by Secretary of State John Kerry on August 30, 2013, that “we know” the regime of Bashar al-Assad was responsible for the chemical incidents near Damascus nine days before.

In that case, Kerry also cited a “Government Assessment” to support his charges. We saw the introduction of this unique genre of “assessment,” instead of the normally required “Intelligence Assessment,” as evidence that honest intelligence analysts were refusing to go along with the preferred narrative. In fact, Kerry’s accusations turned out to have been based on false and even fabricated intelligence provided by opponents of the Syrian government.

Choosing to Reveal the Truth

If the White House has concrete, probative intelligence regarding MH-17, we strongly suggest that the time is right to approve it for release before the “blame Russia” narrative becomes completely dominant. The American people are perfectly capable of judging for themselves what took place but they need to have all the information presented without bias and without any attempt to evade unpleasant conclusions. And it should be done even given the risk of compromising “sources and methods,” as the broader issue of war or peace with Russia is something that should be of paramount concern to every American.

What is needed is an Interagency Intelligence Assessment – the mechanism used in the past to present significant findings. We are hearing indirectly from some of our former colleagues that the draft Dutch report contradicts some of the real intelligence that has been collected. Resorting to another “Government (not Intelligence) Assessment” to sidestep the accountability issue is not appropriate and is itself an insult to the integrity and professionalism of the intelligence community.

Mr. President, we believe you need to seek out honest intelligence analysts now and hear them out, particularly if they are challenging or even opposing the prevailing groupthink narrative. They might well convince you to take steps to deal more forthrightly with the shoot-down of MH-17 and minimize the risk that relations with Russia might degenerate into a replay of the Cold War with the threat of escalation into thermonuclear conflict. In all candor, we suspect that at least some of your advisers fail to appreciate the enormity of that danger.

The courtesy of a reply is requested.



For the Steering Group, Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity



William Binney, former Technical Director, World Geopolitical & Military Analysis, NSA; co-founder, SIGINT Automation Research Center (ret.)

Thomas Drake, former Senior Executive, National Security Agency

Philip Giraldi, CIA, Operations Officer (ret.)

Matthew Hoh, former Capt., USMC, Iraq & Foreign Service Officer, Afghanistan (associate VIPS)

Larry Johnson, CIA & State Department (ret.)

John Kiriakou, Former CIA Counterterrorism Officer

Karen Kwiatkowski, former Lt. Col., US Air Force (ret.), at Office of Secretary of Defense watching the manufacture of lies on Iraq, 2001-2003

Edward Loomis, NSA, Cryptologic Computer Scientist (ret.)

David MacMichael, National Intelligence Council (ret.)

Ray McGovern, former US Army infantry/intelligence officer & CIA analyst (ret.)

Elizabeth Murray, Deputy National Intelligence Officer for Middle East (ret.)

Todd E. Pierce, MAJ, US Army Judge Advocate (Ret.)

Coleen Rowley, Division Counsel & Special Agent, FBI (ret.)

Peter Van Buren, US Department of State, Foreign Service Officer (ret.) (associate VIPS)

Kirk Wiebe, former Senior Analyst, SIGINT Automation Research Center, NSA

Ann Wright, Col., US Army (ret.); Foreign Service Officer (resigned)

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2015/08/the-mh17-pilots-corpse-more-on-the-cover-up.html

[size=18pt]The MH17 Pilot’s Corpse: More on the Cover-Up[/size]
Posted on August 4, 2015 by Eric Zuesse.

Even His Family Was Blocked from It. Here’s Why.

Eric Zuesse

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 anthing 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:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D_7dlG7qPio

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.

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”

“Russia says no to MH17 justice“

“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 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:


“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. …

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 had within 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.

[size=18pt]Anti-Russian Agenda Dominates MH17 Crash Investigation - US Analyst[/size]


The probe into the crash of Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17 is being conducted by "idiots," American journalist and analyst Phil Butler said in response to the latest report on the tragedy issued by the Dutch Safety Board and its misrepresentation in the mainstream Western media.

"Either the Dutch Safety Board (DSB) and the Joint Investigation Team (JIT) are incompetent fools, or sellout cover up artists," he stated in an opinion piece titled Dutch Safety Board & JIT On Pot. "The 'facts' have been continually leveraged, to 'insinuate' a final result, since day one of the crash," he added.

Butler takes issue with the report itself and the media frenzy it caused. The main area of concern boils down to the following: the investigators who are supposed to be impartial seem to be bending the facts towards a specific narrative – that Russia was involved in the tragedy which claimed 298 lives.

Butler is convinced that Russia or the self-defense forces in eastern Ukraine had nothing to do with the crash. "If either had, Obama's PR goons would have already leaked the crucial evidence by now. He needs a PR boost, just that bad," he noted.

The mainstream media has been all too eager to jump on the "blame Russia" bandwagon.

According to the latest DSB and JIT report, the investigators were probing several objects which could have originated from a BUK surface-to-air missile system. According to one theory mainly pushed by the West, the plane was downed by a missile launched from a BUK system.


Dutch and Malaysian experts visit site of Malaysia Airlines flight MH17 plane crash
© Sputnik/ Sergey Averin
West Fabricates Hype Over MH17 Crash to Suppress Truth – German Media

They also explicitly stated that "at present the conclusion cannot be drawn that there is a causal connection between the discovered parts and the crash of flight MH17."

This is not what the mainstream media heard. The report was cited in as many as "50,000 articles proclaiming a specific type of missile system downed this airliner," Butler noted. "As was the case initially, Western media is following an agenda, and agenda determined to implicate Russia in some way," he added.

Once again, at present the investigators are not sure what the abovementioned parts are. Even if they did come from a BUK they do not know how exactly the objects ended up on the plane crash site.

"The only really credible report I've seen came from the Russian Defense Ministry, when they showed military aircraft in the vicinity at the time of the downing. And there was NO credibility given this candid account. Instead, we have US presidents and UK Prime Ministers, German Chancellors and French presidents, the world's biggest news names, transforming supposition and rumor into truth," Butler asserted.

Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17 was heading to Kuala Lumpur when it crashed in Ukraine's southeastern Donetsk region on July 17, 2014. A final report on the cause of the tragedy is due in October. Its preliminary findings said the passenger jet broke up in mid-air after being hit by high-energy objects.

Moscow has repeatedly called on all parties involved in the investigation to disclose data on the MH17 tragedy.

Ukrainian government forces and independence supporters in the east of the country have repeatedly accuse each other of shooting down the Boeing 777 aircraft.



Read more: http://sputniknews.com/europe/20150817/1025826641.html#ixzz3j5l6OYF8

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2015/08/the-mh17-pilots-corpse-more-on-the-cover-up.html

[size=18pt]The MH17 Pilot’s Corpse: More on the Cover-Up[/size]
Posted on August 4, 2015 by Eric Zuesse.

Even His Family Was Blocked from It. Here’s Why.

Eric Zuesse