MH17: the Life and Death of a Psyop.

The cockpit area reconstructed to show the area targeted.
The cockpit area reconstructed to show the area targeted.

August 8th, 2014.

MH17: the Life and Death of a Psyop.

Cockpit-MH017

The loss of 298 lives when flight MH17 crashed in the Eastern Ukraine was an immense human tragedy. What followed without delay from the Western media and politicians has been an absolute farce and a complete disgrace. They have humiliated themselves and revealed themselves to be nothing more than zombie cheerleaders, drones without any pretensions of intelligent or critical thought, baying for blood, making absolutely ridiculous claims based on zero evidence and essentially engaging in a conversation of pure fantasy.

It is too early to state conclusively what caused the Malaysian Airlines Boeing 777 to crash on July 17th. The funny thing is that the entire Australian media knew the whole story on day one, which was the 18th of July here. (the incident actually happened at 1am Australian time on the 18th of July.)

On the 18th of July, the entire (and I mean entire) Australian media and most of the Western media along with Australian Prime Minister, Tony Abbott, stated with supreme confidence that MH17 had been downed by a Buk1 ( SA 11) anti-Aircraft missile and that Eastern Separatists rebels, (helpfully known simply as Pro-Russian rebels by good old Controlled Media) were the culprits.

Part 1. Lie first. Lie hard. Lie in Unison.

Tony Abbott MH17 Press Conference (July 18, 2014)

It was the Australian Prime Minister who set the tone at his afternoon Press conference on the 18th. Here are some of the key quotes. “It is highly probable that MH17 was shot down by a Pro-Russian militia controlled surface to air missile.” and “So it was shot down, over Russian backed rebel controlled territory by what appears to be a Russian backed rebel missile.” This is by the 50 second mark he has claimed twice to know what happened and who did it. This is fewer than 24 hours after the event.

Given the opening, it is rather strange that he adds at the three minute mark that. “It is absolutely essential that there be a fair, thorough and impartial international investigation.”

Later he moves onto a discussion about the contacts between the Australian Government and Russian diplomats. :”I have to tell you that, uh, that the initial response of the Russian ambassador was to blame the Ukraine for this. And I have to say that this is deeply, deeply unsatisfactory. “ Classic Western spin here, the Russians are essentially doing exactly the same thing as he is doing, stating their belief in a scenario that sits with their interests. (Except the Russians are expressing their views privately Abbott is broadcasting his views to the world.). When others behave as we do and we describe their behaviour as “deeply unsatisfactory” rank hypocrisy is revealed. The hypocrisy of Western supremacism.

“I want to say to the Australian people that as far as I am concerned when you have a situation where Russian backed rebels appear to have killed Australians using, it may well turn out to be, Russian supplied heavy weaponry. Australia takes a very dim view indeed and we want the fullest possible investigation.”

One member of the media (Denis Shanahan of the Australian)) opines that the PM is using slightly harsher language than other world leaders in relation to the culpability of Russian backed troops and asks “Do you have any particular reason for doing so?

The Prime Minister’s response is to present an entirely circular argument that has absolutely no evidence to sustain it. All he is able to offer is the insulting and ridiculous assertion that the fact the plane crashed in a rebel held area meant that only the rebels could be involved. All wrapped in the blatant lie that they “knew” that the Plane was shot down by a SAM. How did they know? What evidence did they have beyond supporting the “goodies” and opposing the “baddies”? Zilch. Absolutely nothing. Zero. Everything Abbott said on July 18th was evidence only of his mendacity, dishonesty and despicable opportunism. The journalist was told to shut up and cheer-lead like the rest of the media zombies. Only more politely.

PM Abbott “ Well this aircraft didn’t come down through accident. It was shot down. It did not crash,it was downed” he reiterates helpfully. “and it was downed in territory controlled by Russian backed rebels.”

This has been the PM’s “heroic” claim that he has used to dodge the fact that he was actually speaking nonsense , and acting as a base propagandist on behalf of his Western handlers. and the deaths of so many Australians provided him with a wonderful chance to “earn his stripes” with the big men of the Empire without risk of consequence. The Russia-Australia relationship is not important to Australia, China, on the other hand is Australia’s largest trading partner. So the Australian PM is severely constrained when it comes to promoting anti-Chinese propaganda.

The claim about the Plane crashing in “Rebel held” areas in unbelievably pitiful. Given that these systems are capable of engaging targets at a distance of up to 40 kilometres (25 miles), the Eastern rebels only control tiny pockets of land and the Ukraine military have the same weapons systems. This claim is so pathetic a seven year old child could see through it. He’s implicitly asking us to believe that anti-Aircraft systems only engage objects directly overhead! Brilliant!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buk_missile_system

PM Abbott in Parliament “Malaysian Airlines MH17 has been shot down over the Eastern Ukraine.it seems by Russian backed rebels.” “We owe it as well to the families of the dead to find out exactly what has happened and exactly who was responsible. As things stand, this looks less like an accident than a crime. I want to repeat this, as things stand, this looks less like an accident than a crime.”

This is tremendous stuff. I love the way he repeats the “Not an accident but a crime ” line twice. It’s one of the stupidest statements a human has ever uttered on the surface of this planet because shooting down a plane and killing 298n people is a crime whether or not it was an accident. The distinction is totally nonsensical.

Synchronised and unanimous adoption of he Government claims by the Australian media indicate that there is no Australian media worthy of the name. These people cannot possibly be as unintelligent as they act. They are apparently conditioned not to use their critical faculties. This is a choice they make. Ignorance is regarded as a virtue in Australia and they want to fit in.

Channel 7. 4 pm bulletin.

“Good afternoon. Now the Foreign Minister has just finished a meeting with the Russian ambassador about the extent of Russia’s involvement in this plane being shot down. Now she asked the Ambassador directly did Russia have any role in this plane being shot down?. The ambassador denied it completely. Saying Russia had no involvement whatsoever.”

Channel 10 5pm

“Good evening. From the minute we woke this morning, and from every moment since the news has only got (sic) worse. Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17 was shot down by a missile over Eastern Ukraine…We’ll also investigate who fired the shot, as International fury finds it’s focus on Russia… and somewhere amidst the wreckage lies microscopic evidence of a surface to air missile. Evidence (sic) that could prove irrefutable evidence of who exactly triggered this atrocity.”

Evidence might prove to be evidence. Thank you Channel Ten.

Channel 9. 6pm

“Good evening. It’s been a day of anger, mystery and sorrow. The shooting down of Malaysian Airlines Flight MH17.over Ukraine…but who fired the missile?”

Channel 9. During Friday Night Football “A Boeing 777 was blown out of the sky. Over Ukraine. Shot down by a Surface to Air Missile.” Later. “Investigators from around the world are now working to determine who launched the missile that took MH17 down. Tonight the blame is resting on Russian backed rebels in Eastern Ukraine. But Moscow is also under fire. Questions are also being raised about why the aircraft was flying over dangerous Ukrainian airspace.”

We don’t know who did it so we have decided to blame the Russians for the time being. Thank you.

MH17 Tragedy | ABC News NSW | Opener – (18.07.2014) – YouTube

The Australian Broadcasting Corporation changed it’s program schedule on the 18th of July 2014. Instead of each State and Territory receiving their own individual 30 minute 7PM news,a single National News was imposed across the entire nation. It was only six seconds after the hour, six seconds into their coverage that the Australian Broadcasting Corporation anchor, Scott Bevan announced with absolutely no ambiguity, that MH17 had been downed by a missile.

“Hello, I am Scott Bevan. Welcome to this special edition of ABC News on the day a missile brought down a passenger plane over Ukraine.“ He continues, “Australia, along with the rest of the world is in shock and mourning after a passenger plane carrying 298 people was shot down by a missile over the Ukraine.”

Part 2.

Kerry, the Russians and Matt Lee of AP. Everything Falls Apart.

July 20th.
vlcsnap-2014-08-06-20h04m08s67
Secretary of State Kerry Enters the Fray.

It became obvious in 2013 that the State department remains a stronghold for Neoconservatives within the US Government. Many other parts of the Executive Branch, from the President to the Defence Secretary and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of staff are no longer staffed by warmongers with any real verve for the information campaign required to start a war based on false premises.

These days, when it comes to starting the Empire’s wars, the State Department is required to do the “heavy lifting” in terms of delivering the right “big lie” at the right time. IN Libya, they succeeded, in Syria they failed.

Kerry:the Humanitarian Bonesman
Kerry:the Humanitarian Bonesman

Towards this end, US Secretary of State appeared on all of the five major US Sunday talkshows in order to make the case that the Plane was downed by the rebels. Speaking on CNN, Kerry was unequivocal.

“We have enormous input about this that points fingers,” Kerry told CNN’s State of the Union. “It is pretty clear that this was a system from Russia, transferred to separatists. We know with confidence that the Ukrainians did not have such a system anywhere near the vicinity at that point of time.” He follows with : “We know because we observed it by imagery that at the moment of the shootdown we detected a launch from that area,” he said. “Our trajectory shows that it went to the aircraft. “

Here we have a number of powerful claims. Unfortunately,  it must be concluded that  the claims made in these quotes are not supported by the known facts. Kerry stated that “the Ukrainians did not have such a system anywhere near the vicinity at that point in time.”  The problem here is that the Russian military have presented credible data, satellite photo’s that show that Ukrainian military Buk1 missile systems were stationed close to Donetsk on July 17th.

Malaysian Airlines plane crash: Russian military unveil data on MH17 incident over Ukraine (FULL)

July 21st Russian Defence Ministry Briefing.

Obviously in a situation like this, information that comes from any and all interested parties should be treated with scepticism. The Russians are involved in this situation, therefore that applies to them. One very interesting thing about the Russian military presentation was that it displays a high level of discipline when compared with what has been on offer from the propagandists of the West. The Russians do not claim that the Ukrainian missile battery destroyed the plane, nor that the military jet in the area was responsible. They merely state that these items were present in the area at the time of the incident and imply that they may have attacked the jet without actually making any direct accusations.

It was Kerry’s second assertion that really gave the game away. Kerry made a very big mistake when he stated that, “We know because we observed it by imagery that at the moment of the shootdown we detected a launch from that area,”

Pay close attention to the exact words. “We know because we observed it by imagery….we detected a launch from that area.” There can be no doubt that Kerry is stating that they have photographic evidence of the launch of the missile that hit MH17.

These comments were made on Sunday July the 20th. Nineteen days ago. There is no doubt that if these images exist, they would be valuable evidence in support of the narrative the US is trying to sell. Yet, nigh on three weeks after Kerry made these claims. We have not seen one frame. Not one photograph. Absolutely nothing. This fact alone makes it very obvious that the “imagery” Kerry described was always a work of fiction, presumably of his own invention. No other conclusion is possible. The reason we have not seen the “imagery’ is that it never existed, and the reason it never existed is that the Eastern rebels did not shoot the Plane down with a Buk1 missile system. One very telling and little remarked upon claim emerged in the Russian military briefing was that the US had a Satellite over the area of the incident at the time of the incident. The Russians can only have made this statement if they were absolutely confident that their allies did not destroy the plane with a missile. They are saying, the USA knows what happened, they have the evidence.

Marie Harf in the Briefing Room.
Marie Harf in the Briefing Room.

Matt Lee, AP journalist is impossible to miss when viewing State Department Press briefings. He’s a real obstacle to the State Department propaganda machine, and although always polite and respectful, Lee has developed a highly adversarial relationship with a series of State Department spokespeople. The role was occupied by the esteemed Victoria Nuland prior to Jen Psaki assuming the role. Of recent times this post has been filled by Deputy Spokesperson Marie Harf T he State Department briefings are supposed to be a forum for the State Department to deliver a propaganda message to a group of committed lackeys who will accept everything at face value and transmit the desired message to the world without question. Matt Lee’s frequent questions and interjections ruin the whole thing. He always asks questions. Shows a very disappointing irreverence towards authority and refuses to be cowed when the Spokesperson attempts to brow beat him into submission.

Matt Lee in the Briefing Room.
Matt Lee in the Briefing Room.

State Department Briefing, July 21st, 2014.

‘Anything other than social media?’ State Dept’s MH17 evidence secret”

Daily Press Briefing – July 21, 2014

The strange thing is that the people at the State Department must have known that Matt Lee would attend this briefing and ask his usual thoughtful and sceptical questions, yet when Marie Harf stepped into that room. She had absolutely nothing to offer beyond, “believe us because we said so.”

The contrast between the the US press and their zombiefied and mindlessly obedient Australian counterparts is stark indeed. The Transcript of this briefing indicates that there are real journalists capable of independent thought active in the US mainstream. I have used the State Department transcript,it doesn’t identify the other journalists who also ask questions at the end. (Almost all of the questions in this transcript are from Matt Lee.)

Initially the State Department spokesperson confidently built on the claims Secretary of State John Kerry made the previous day.

Marie Harf: “There is a preponderance of evidence at this point both sort of out there in the public domain and also from our information that points to the fact that there was a SA-11 launched from separatist-controlled territory. We assess, of course, that the Russian-backed separatists have this system, and one of the main reasons we have called for a full investigation is so we can get all the facts out there.

So what I encourage the Russians to do at this point is to push the separatists that are backed by their government to allow access, to allow investigators who are in Ukraine waiting to go into that area right now, and that’s what I would call on Russia to do at this point.

Matt Lee: Right. But what they’re saying is that you should – they’ve put their – what they have out on the table, or at least they say they have done that.

Marie Harf: Well, I haven’t seen any of that. Again, we’ve made an assessment based on a broad range of information. We know this was fired from Russian-controlled territory. It is our assessment, very strong assessment this was an SA-11 that we know the Russian-backed separatists have. We, again, continue to gather more information and call —

QUESTION: Okay.

Marie Harf: — on Russia to push the separatists to allow for a full investigation.

QUESTION: How is it exactly that you know that it was fired from Russian – I mean, from separatist-held territory?

Marie Harf: Well, we have a great deal of information that the Secretary laid out yesterday, and I can go back through some of it today. But we do know first that Russian-backed separatists were in possession of an SA-11 system as early as Monday, July 14th. This is from intercepts of separatist communications posted on YouTube by the Ukrainian Government.

QUESTION: Well, is there anything – okay, is there anything other – because there’s other —

Marie Harf: I can keep going if – or you want to jump in.

QUESTION: Well, is there stuff that’s other than social media that you’re talking —

Marie Harf: Yes, absolutely. There is.

QUESTION: Okay. So what is it that’s other than social media?

Marie Harf: At this point, Matt, we’ve said what our assessment is, very strong assessment publicly. If there’s more information that that’s based on that we can share, we’re happy to do so. We’ll continue looking at that. But look, this is what we know as of right now. Based on open information which is basically common sense, right – we know where it was fired from, we know who has this weapon – backed up —

QUESTION: Well, I don’t —

Marie Harf: — backed up —

QUESTION: — I mean, it’s disputed, though.

Marie Harf: — backed up by a host of information that we have gathered about who did this, where it came from, and what the weapon system was. So one of – we’re just telling you what we know now.

QUESTION: Right, right. But —

Marie Harf: One of the reasons we’ve called on Russia to push the separatists it backs into an investigation is so we can get all the facts. Instead of holding press briefings and making statements, maybe the Russian Government should call on the separatists they support to allow an actual investigation.

QUESTION: Right. But that’s what you’ve done. You’ve held press – well, Security Council meetings and going —

Marie Harf: Well, we don’t have leverage with the separatists. I would say the Russians do and they’re not using it. So let’s have them use it.

QUESTION: Well, okay. But I mean, I think we’re talking at cross-purposes here. I’m asking you —

Marie Harf: It wouldn’t be the first time.

QUESTION: (Laughter.) No, that’s true. What I’m asking – I mean, there are social – all you’re willing to present publicly that backs up your version of the story, which may well be the correct version of the story, but all you have —

Marie Harf (clearly aghast interjects sarcastically) “May well be.”

Matt Lee: (completely misses the sarcasm and soldiers on) Well, it may well be. But I don’t know because I haven’t seen your evidence that shows that the missile was launched from rebel-held territory. But you’re saying – so the only thing you’re willing to put out publicly is the social media accounts, I mean the social media stuff.

Marie Harf: That’s part of it.

QUESTION: Right. But there are social media accounts that says – that disputes that or that claims to present a different version. So are you saying —

Marie Harf: What would that version be, Matt?

QUESTION: Well, I don’t – there are many, many theories.

Marie Harf: Any —

QUESTION: But you’re saying that all of those accounts —

Marie Harf: Most of which are completely illogical, I would point out.

QUESTION: Well, but all of the accounts that do not support your version of events are wrong —

Marie Harf: No.

QUESTION: — and all of the ones that do support it are right? Is that what you’re saying?

Marie Harf: Look, we make assessments based on a variety of intelligence and a variety of information, some of which we can talk about publicly and some of which we can’t.

QUESTION: Well, is the – are you —

Marie Harf: And we also – and look, if you just take a step back, right, we need there to be an investigation so we can get all the facts, period. But on top of that, we have public information, which is, of course, the easiest for us to talk about —

QUESTION: Right.

Marie Harf: — of the separatists bragging about having the system, bragging about the attack that took place, and then walking back from it when it became known that it was a passenger jet. I would ask people who don’t believe our assessment to say, “Okay, what other possible explanation could be – could there be for that?” They defy logic, right?

QUESTION: Well, I don’t know if it defies logic or not, but —

Marie Harf: So when you start from a place of you have separatists out on – again, this is the easiest piece of information for us to talk about – online bragging about it, start there and then work from there and work from all of the evidence we have that we are confident we know where it was fired from, we’re confident we know what it was, and it points in a certain direction. Again, we would encourage Russia to support an investigation if they don’t believe the facts.

QUESTION: Right. It points in a certain direction, but I’m not sure it would stand up to an international —

Marie Harf I strongly disagree. I absolutely believe that it would.

QUESTION: — investigation. Well, are you willing, if not at this moment in time now but soon, to put forward the intel that you say backs the claims that were made on social media? And in particular, it seems to me that the Secretary was very definitive, as you were just now, at saying that you know for sure 100 percent —

Marie Harf: I didn’t say 100 percent. Nothing is 100 percent in any world, Matt. But go ahead. It is our assessment, very strong assessment.

QUESTION: Okay, very strong assessment that the rocket – that the missile was fired from the rebel-held territory.

Marie Harf: Mm-hmm.

QUESTION: And I mean, you can’t – there is no social media that I’m aware of that would lead to —

Marie Harf: Well, at the time that MH17 flight dropped out of contact, we detected a surface-to-air —

QUESTION: Yes.

Marie Harf: — missile launch from a separatist-controlled area in south-eastern Ukraine.

QUESTION: Yeah.

Marie Harf: Which we believe was an SA-11. What you want is the intelligence that underlies that?

QUESTION: Yeah. Well, I mean, they – the Russians have challenged – I’m not – I’m just saying the Russians have said —

Marie Harf: I’m just trying to clarify the question.

QUESTION: — have said we’ve shown – we’ve put out our radar images which show this Ukrainian plane near at least – well, they have. I mean —

Marie Harf: Right.

QUESTION: Why don’t you put out your –

Cornered, Marie Harf retreats behind the National Security veil in a really sad manner. It stands as a profound admission of defeat and this marks the point at which this psychological operation began to rapidly collapse. Things really go downhill from that point. Soon, some of the other journalsts begin to ask difficult and troubling questions to which the State Department have no good answer.

Marie Harf: Well, unfortunately, I don’t have original declassification authority, Matt. But —

QUESTION: Okay. Is —

Marie Harf: Wait, let me finish. But look, we have endeavoured to make public as much information as possible. Obviously, if you’re dealing with an intelligence assessment in part, we are sometimes limited in what information we can share. That’s why I think you saw the Secretary speak much more forward-leaning about why we believe this and how we believe it.

QUESTION: Right.

Marie Harf Sometimes you can’t get into all the specifics. We endeavour to put as many out as possible. We’re continuing to see if we can do more.

QUESTION: Okay.

Marie Harf: I will say that.

QUESTION: So okay —

Marie Harf: Yes, we are —

QUESTION: So there is a possibility —

Marie Harf: I can’t promise you anything, but we’re continuing to see.

QUESTION: There is —

Marie Harf: And I would also say that the Russian Government has a long history during this conflict of misinformation and propaganda that they’ve put out, so I would take anything they say about this with a very large grain of salt.

QUESTION: Well, okay. But I mean, the problem – are you committing now to at least doing – that the intel community is doing its best to declassify stuff that they can put out and at least end the conflicting claims put forward by both the U.S. —

Marie Harf: Well, I would say that the Administration in general is attempting to put out as much information as we can about what underlies our assessment. I would also say that these aren’t competing narratives from two equally credible sources here. The Russian Government has repeatedly put out misinformation and propaganda throughout this conflict in Ukraine, so I would caution you from saying that this is just two equally credible sources.

QUESTION: Well, all right.

Marie Harf: Although you’re happy to report it that way.

QUESTION: No, I just —

Marie Harf: But I would take issue with it.

QUESTION: Well, I mean, again, you might be right, but I don’t see how you can say that everything we say is right and everything the Russians say is a lie.

Marie Harf: That’s not what I said.

QUESTION: That’s exactly what you just said right now.

Marie Harf: That’s not what I said. I said I would say that we are not two credible – equally credible parties when it comes to what we say publicly about the conflict in Ukraine.

(This is the point things really break down, this is the real highlight amusement wise)

QUESTION: And your argument would be that the U.S. is more credible than the Russians are, right? Is that what you’re —

Marie Harf: I’m not even dignifying that question with a response.

(I’ve never attended “spin school” but I am certain that spinmeisters are trained never ever to make comments such as “I’m not even dignifying that with a response.” The idea is to project calm, knowledgeable authority and never ever to lose your cool even slightly. That ruins everything, creates entirely the wrong impression. I’m not seeking to beat up on Ms.Harf she is in an impossible situation due to her boss the Secretary of State’s comments on the previous day. and things go so wrong because she lacks the ability to tell outrageous lies and back them up with the right style of intimidation to seal the deal. She is too nice a person for the role,too human) )

QUESTION: Well, I mean —

QUESTION: Marie, did you see the —

QUESTION: But you’re leaving that impression, Marie.

Marie Harf: That we’re more credible? Yes. We don’t put out mass amounts of propaganda. We don’t put out misinformation about what’s happening there repeatedly over the course of this conflict, which I’ve spoken about from this podium day after day. Absolutely.

QUESTION: But can you tell us —

QUESTION: The problem with that is is that all of 2002 and the beginning of 2003 was propaganda and misleading information that was put out by the United States.

Marie Harf: Okay, Matt. I’m sure that’s a tempting historical analogy to make, but it in no way impacts at all how we are doing this assessment or what we’re doing.

QUESTION: Okay.

Marie Harf: And maybe someday you’ll finally stop using that as a straw man all the time.

QUESTION: It’s a —

FEMALE JOURNALIST: Well Marie, one of the big things is showing evidence.

(Evidence- a concept and word apparently entirely unknown to the Australian media)

Marie Harf: Yeah. I – agreed. Agreed.

QUESTION: I mean, in court or anywhere, and I think that’s what Matt’s saying, is show the evidence, independent evidence of what you got in intel. I mean, the Russians —

Marie Harf: So we —

QUESTION: — said today that they did not deliver any SA – you’ve seen it – bulk missile system. I mean, is there evidence that you have seen – not what the Ukrainians or anything online has shown, but it’s something that the U.S. has got evidence that they – that the Russians supplied this to them?

Marie Harf: This specific system.

QUESTION: Yeah.

Marie Harf: So a few points. And again, I agree that evidence is important and we are attempting to put out there as much as possible. I do think that’s why you saw the Secretary and me today going much further in why we say we believe – why we believe what we say. And I know it’s frustrating. Believe me, we try to get as much out there as possible. And for some reason, sometimes we can’t.

Look, I think it still remains to be seen, right, how the pro-Russian separatists got whatever – the SA-11, the specific one – I’m not assigning culpability there. But we know that there have been legions of young men crossing the Russian border with very sophisticated weaponry. This would not happen without at least the acquiescence or the support of the Russian Government.

These are complicated systems, right, that it takes training on. We know that the Russian Government’s been training the pro-Russian separatists. We know, period, that what’s happening in eastern Ukraine would not be happening without the support of the Russian Government. So we need a full investigation to determine exactly where the SA-11 came from, but we know that the pro-Russian separatists have many of the weapons they have, have the training they have, and have the support they have because of the Russian Government.

QUESTION: They could have stolen it from the Ukrainian —

QUESTION: Does the U.S. – does the – did the U.S. actually have – independently noticed that a Ukrainian war plane was the in the vicinity of the Malaysia —

Marie Harf: I don’t know if I can confirm those reports. I’m happy – I don’t even know if that’s true. I’m happy to check on it.

This exchange can be summarised thus: The claims that Secretary of State John Kerry made were not supported by evidence available to the State Department so when some of the journalists “crossed the Rubicon”, did their job and asked questions, it quickly became fairly clear that the evidence had never existed and would never exist. The US press were told, “believe it because we said so and we are the good guys.” When the Press failed to comply the naked emperor was exposed. It quickly became obvious that there was no evidence because there was no good reason for the US government not to release what they had. The presence of US satellites over Russia has been well known for many decades after all, the US had no plausible reason for not releasing the data they had if it was there and supported their accusations. The Russian Defence Ministry briefing specifically stated that a US space satellite was over Ukraine at the time of the incident.

Part 3. Evidence emerges.

Controlled media hounds are still working the case (MH17 breakthrough: owner of Volvo truck that transported missile fears his life | News.com.au), they are persistent. The only problem for them is that all of their efforts to frame Russia and the Separatists were predicated on the assumption that the Jet was shot down by a Buk 1 Missile system. All of their efforts are directed towards this magical goal, to track down the guilty rocket launcher. It’s been wonderful stuff, they are terribly admirable on each and every level, both as human beings and journalists.

There’s only one problem.

There are multiple pieces of evidence, including observations from an OSCE observer that was part of the first group to visit the site that the fuselage appeared to have machine gun holes in it.

This is a video made by the Canadian broadcasting Corporation (CBC) Their reporter Susan Ormitsen interviewed OSCE observer Michael Bociurkiw in Donetsk, East Ukraine.

Investigating MH17 – YouTube

Michael Bociurkiw is an individual with an interesting background. He has written a number of articles for the Huffington Post about the crisis in Ukraine that indicate that he is a “Liberal Neoconservative”. This is the beginning of his article of March 18th of this year. Entitled after Crimea, the Only Question is “What’s Next?” The mood on Maidan Square in central Kyiv remains decidedly grim after a referendum widely branded as illegal and illegitimate took place in Crimea on Sunday.” Later he adds, “Will the insatiable appetite of the hungry Russian bear be satisfied with the Crimean peninsula.” He is quite simply not a person positively disposed towards the Russian Federation. He is the last man in the world likely to “lie for Russia.” http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-bociurkiw/

Michael Bociurkiw describes himself as being “intimately familiar with that site.” and .”intimately familiar with the aircraft.”

Susan Ormitsen “What do you think we know about what happened to that aircraft today compared with the first day you came?”

“There have been two or three pieces of fuselage, that have been really pock-marked. It almost looks like machine gun fire, very very strong. machine gun fire that has left these unique marks. that we haven’t seen anywhere else.” He continues. “We’ve also been asked for example,did we see any examples of a missile, well, no we haven’t, that’s the answer. “

Gryazev-Shipunov GSh-30-2 – Wikipedia

One important thing to remember about this quote is the context, this is Michael Bociurkiw’s direct and initial response when asked what they now knew. Machine gun holes. What we are probably going to be told is that this was a crude attempt by the rebels to frame the Ukraine Air Force , they fired their guns into the plane and made the holes. But we know from the context and content of the quote that Mr. Bociurkiw does not believe that or even consider it. It is the first evidence he mentions when asked. He thinks it’s evidence.

Former Lufthansa pilot Peter Haienko was the person who noticed and highlighted the devastating photo of large calibre bullet holes travelling through both sides of the MH17 jet. He stated unequivocally that the damage pattern in the cockpit area was consistent with cannon fire from a heavy machine gun .
vlcsnap-2014-08-06-20h04m21s202
Here is a brief excerpt from Peter Haisenko’s article.

“The facts speak clear and loud and are beyond the realm of speculation: The cockpit shows traces of shelling! You can see the entry and exit holes. The edge of a portion of the holes is bent inwards. These are the smaller holes, round and clean, showing the entry points most likely that of a 30 millimeter caliber projectile.”

Sukhoi SU25.
Sukhoi SU25.

Su25 vs SU 27.

One thing that puzzled people, myself included, was the fact that the Russian Defence Ministry claimed that a Ukraine Air Force Sukhoi SU 25 was in the vicinity of the Malaysian airlines jet at the time it began to fall from the sky. When people looked at the specifications of the Su25, the claim made no sense, as the SU25 is listed as being capable of operating at a ceiling of 22,965 feet according to Wikipedia, meaning that this war plane would be incapable of travelling to an altitude to bee capable of firing it’s cannon on MH17. We all missed the fact that the Russian Defence Ministry claimed in their July 21st briefing, that “.Su-25 can gain an altitude of 10000 meters (32 808.399 feet) for a short time. “ I have no idea if this is true, but the Russians have been using these aircraft for 40 years, they developed them. More importantly, if the Russians wanted to lie, they would simply claim it was an SU27, with a much higher “official ceiling” and remove the altitude issue altogether.

I have no idea whose aircraft was responsible for the destruction of MH17, but I believe that the evidence indicates that the Boeing 777 was destroyed by fire from another aircraft. Add to that the lack of observations of a missile contrail . Add to that the multiple eyewitness accounts of Fighter aircraft in close proximity to MH17,along with Russian radar data indicating the presence of a military jet close to the flight corroborating the eyewitness claims.

We have therefore a coherent explanation of what destroyed MH17 that fits all the known facts and is not contradicted by any known facts.

The controlled media have nothing. It’s absolutely hilarious. They are apparently hoping that no-one will notice that there is not any evidence that substantiates their claim that the Flight was struck by any ground to air missile operated by anyone.

They are running around with their pre-event manufactured highly edited audio frame up and their useless photos of Ukrainian military Buk missiles driving around Ukraine, pretending they are “escaping to Russia”. The efforts at lying and brainwashing have certainly been dedicated. You almost feel sorry for them that all their pitiful efforts could not possibly have been more futile Because the entire con job hinged on the “fact” that MH17 was destroyed by a ground to air missile, and the witnesses and physical evidence and the observations of Michael Bociurkiw and German Pilot Peter Haisenko along with photographic evidence that corroborates the hypothesis that the aircraft was attacked by another aircraft. The identity of that aircraft and who operated it are not known. The Russians claim that the Aircraft was operated by the Government of the Ukraine. These claims may well be correct, but must be treated with scepticism because the Russians are a party to the East Ukraine conflict . The fact that the Russians sought to present evidence without laying blame, whereas the West did the exact opposite, means that on this matter at least, the claims of Russia deserve more credence. This is not to suggest that the Russians are an inherently more trustworthy party. That would be completely naive, but on this matter they have presented evidence whereas the West has only made wild and opportunistic claims.

I have true pity for people who are yet to understand that false flag attacks are both the traditional and contemporary way that the people who really run the world get things done.

Provocation may be a concept that people may find easier to accept. You want to start a war, but you don’t want to be seen as the aggressor. So you create a scenario that will provide you with a pretext for a war of aggression. This is really the oldest trick in the book, and until recently it had always worked brilliantly. Neoconservative Patrick Clawson actually lays out much of America’s false flag history in this short video.

Israel Lobbyist – We Need a False Flag to Start War with Iran!

The point of which is to recommend another false flag provocation in order to achieve war with Iran. He forgot to mention September 11th, of course. The most public,brutal and well documented false flag terror attack in history. The controlled media owned the public mind, owned almost all of us, and there was nowhere to go seemingly. Those days areover. The means of media production are in the hands of everyone, for better or worse.

 

 St Patrick's Cathedral in Melbourne
St Patrick’s Cathedral in Melbourne

Part 4.

We Don’t Like to Talk About That Anymore.

August the 7th was our designated national day of mourning in Australia for the victims of this tragedy. . It was tremendously sad to see all the bereaved at the Ecumenical Melbourne service. Strangely, the story did not feature prominently in the news. The coverage generally began about ten minutes into the news on all of the stations.Only one of the stations made any reference to either the culprits. Nor the weapons system involved. Only the State broadcaster ABC was still prepared to read the script. The claim was revised to the genuinely meaningless. :”It is believed that Pro-Russian rebels were responsible.” Think about that. It is believed. Think about some of the other things people believe.  There are people who believe that if they commit suicide they will be reunited with the “space brothers” on the

Inconsistent with damage from anti Aircraft missile.
Inconsistent with damage from anti Aircraft missile.

Comet Halle-bop. There are people who believe Michelle Obama is a male despite the fact that she has given birth to two children. There are people who believe any number of things, and it means absolutely nothing. Anyone can believe anything! It is only when we test these beliefs against objective reality that we can measure their veracity. It’s called testing an hypotheses, and we know that the consequences of not testing the veracity of our beliefs is that we have little or no idea whether they are grounded in, or consistent with, history and objective reality. Only their blind tribal faith in the West can sustain this belief. So they revert to that.

August 7th was also the day that the Dutch and Australian recovery teams abandoned their tenure due to the Ukraine government’s military offensive in the area. The same operation they had previously promised not to launch. Also the military operation that the Ukraine government guaranteed would be over by July 31st. Again all of their rhetoric rebounds upon them. Who is hindering and all but cancelling the investigation? Who is obstructing and destroying the investigation? It’s the Ukraine government.

Why did Yatsenuk resign?
Why did Yatsenuk resign?

August 7th was also the day that the Russian federation, imposed limited Economic sanctions on Australia, along with a host of EU nations, the USA and Norway. The sanctions will disrupt 400 million dollars of Economic activity. New buyers will have to be found. The economic consequences are unlikely to be severe, or even noticeable. However, this is the second time in the space of months that this government has put Australia economy, and especially our farming sector under threat because of reckless and inexplicable Foreign policy that seems to rake no account of the interests of the Australian people and economy. First it was the immoral support for the Israeli Apartheid state that put our farmers extremely lucrative, live export trade under threat from rightfully enraged Arab governments. Now, we have this madness of jumping the gun, speaking nonsense, being eclipsed and humiliated by reality and hurting our farmers. Who are these decisions seeking to serve? What possible ;loyalty could the Australian government have for a Kiev government with suspect legitimacy, racist thugs in it’s Ministerial ranks, and who are currently destroying Donetsk and Luhansk in every bit as evil and futile a manner as Israel destroyed Gaza.

Other than some fans in the State Department and NATO, the Kiev government really has almost nothing going for them. All Ukrainian governments since independence at the fall of the Soviet Union have been hopelessly, even legendarily corrupt. This is true whether the President is pro Western or pro Russian. This is why on several occasions in the Ukraine sitting Presidents receive only 5% of the vote in Presidential elections. This Ukraine government appears to be more of the same, only with the IMF and War as a bonus vices. All the people who look positively upon the Government of the Ukraine presumably didn’t notice, or approved of the mass murder of civilians in the city of Odessa on May 2nd this year. Forty eight civilians murdered by Right wing paramilitaries aligned with the Ukraine government and no prosecutions. No justice for those victims. And given the criminal decision of the Kiev Government to launch a major offensive in the crash area that made further investigation and retrieval impossible who are these people and why do they continue to enjoy uncritical Western support?

Selected Sources:

http://www.globalresearch.ca/evidence-is-now-conclusive-two-ukrainian-government-fighter-jets-shot-down-malaysian-airlines-mh17-it-was-not-a-buk-surface-to-air-missile/5394814

http://www.globalresearch.ca/support-mh17-truth-osce-monitors-identify-shrapnel-like-holes-indicating-shelling-no-firm-evidence-of-a-missile-attack/5394324

http://www.globalresearch.ca/german-pilot-speaks-out-shocking-analysis-of-the-shooting-down-of-malaysian-mh17/5394111

The 4th Media » A Deleted BBC Report: “A Ukrainian Fighter Jet Shot Down MH 17,” Donetsk Eyewitnesses

http://www.4thmedia.org/2014/07/deleted-bbc-report-ukrainian-fighter-jet-shot-down-mhi7-donetsk-eyewitnesses

▶ The Video Report Deleted by the BBC – ENG SUBS – YouTube [360p]

MH17 crash: Kerry lays out evidence of pro-Russia separatists’ responsibility | World news | theguardian.com

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jul/20/mh17-crash-kerry-evidence-pro-russia-separatists-responsibility

MH17: Kerry says all evidence points to pro-Russia Ukrainian separatists | World news | theguardian.com

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jul/20/mh17-kerry-evidence-ukrainian-separatists

Buk missile system – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buk_missile_system

Michael Bociurkiw | OSCE

http://www.osce.org/contacts/117909

Malaysia Airlines MH17: Michael Bociurkiw talks about being first at the crash site – World – CBC News

http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/malaysia-airlines-mh17-michael-bociurkiw-talks-about-being-first-at-the-crash-site-1.2721007

Susan Ormiston – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Susan_Ormiston

Aangirfan: CIA SAYS MH17 DOWNED BY UKRAINE GOVERNMENT; MH17 ESCORTED BY UKRANIAN FIGHTER JETS

http://aanirfan.blogspot.com.au/2014/07/aids-researchers-killed-in-ukraine-air.html

Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17: ‘Terrible tragedy’, Tony Abbott offers condolences to families for what would be ‘unspeakable crime’

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/malaysia-airlines-flight-mh17-terrible-tragedy-tony-abbott-offers-condolences-to-families-for-what-would-be-unspeakable-crime-20140718-3c4sx.html

MH17 breakthrough: owner of Volvo truck that transported missile fears his life | News.com.au

http://www.news.com.au/travel/travel-updates/mh17-breakthrough-owner-of-volvo-truck-that-transported-missile-fears-his-life/story-fnizu68q-1227014149633

Interest in MH17 Fades as Sanctions & War Edge Closer | New Eastern Outlook

http://journal-neo.org/2014/08/05/interest-in-mh17-fades-as-sanctions-war-edge-closer/

Ukraine’s Security Service Has Confiscated Air Traffic Control Recordings With Malaysian Jet | Zero Hedge

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-07-18/ukraines-security-service-has-confiscated-air-traffic-control-recordings-malaysian-j

Sukhoi Su-27 – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SU_27

Sukhoi Su-25 – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sukhoi_Su-25

28 thoughts on “MH17: the Life and Death of a Psyop.

  1. Very thorough and, I believe, accurate analysis. For what it’s worth, I, as do so many others, believe that Porky’s relatives (irrespective of nationality – and/or dual nationality) are the main perps..

    Like

    • Thanks Mark I am pleased that Hampstead Research helped to spread the message of love with your message and Bob Marley. As far as the other thing goes, clearly divisions are advantageous to the opposition. Whether it is a plot or merely the inevitable result of large egos grinding up against one another is unclear to me, it may as well be a psy-op given the results.
      I have taken your words very seriously and have made a decision not to comment upon any of these ructions in any way. I do not slag others off as a rule but have no ability to prevent others from tearing themselves and others apart unfortunately. Many thanks for your comment.

      Like

      • Thanks but I think you already submitted this comment. I saw the article, the reference to “the disaster of flight 17 from Singapore Airlines” does not inspire confidence coming in the first line. In my opinion, it seems entirely possible that there were dead bodies amongst the MH17 cargo, there were also many witness accounts of freshly running blood and people who had just died. There is footage also from the beginning of the flight that appears to be authentic,
        Instagram Video Taken By Passenger On Flight MH17 Before Departing https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mhJHfP3WOhA. I guess that could be any flight, and I cannot state definitively that MH17 was not flight 370 as i do not really know what has happened to MH370, but the theory is not logical in my opinion and the piece from VT, a great source in many cases, did not change my mind. Here’s why. The problem with MH370 is/was not the existence of the aircraft or the bodies but rather that there is no explanation for it’s complete disappearance. This is the problem. Disposing of the contents is not the issue and therefore placing MH370 in the sky, blowing it up as a false flag and blaming it on the Novorussians makes no sense as the problem of MH370 persists today. The problem is that no-one can explain what happened to it. It has disappeared. Yoichi Shimatsu, who probably did the best work of anyone on MH370 (MH370 Revisited Part 1 http://rense.com/general96/mh370rv.html) alluded to the fact that there may have been bodies on board MH17 that were part of some medical or disease experiment. The VT article refers to one witness description of one body and therefore although I admit I do not know what happened to MH370 and I may be wrong about this, I am confident that MH17 was a different flight, a genuine flight targeted by dark elements of the Ukraine government apparently at the behest of an international group with a grudge against Malaysia and the desire to see a new Cold War. These are the interests that seem to be behind these tragedies, thanks for comment.

        Like

  2. I’m glad you put this out the way/off the latest, bit like the ish itself, keep it out the way:
    ‘a decision not to comment’
    good call
    Mark

    Like

    • Thanks Mark, I was thinking that I should do something new rather than recycle that old piece. The issue is huge and must be confronted, I have assembled a huge amount of evidence since I wrote that and hope to come up with something much stronger and hopefully far shorter than this 7,000+ word (thousands in quotes) nightmare. Thanks for comment.

      Like

  3. James, FYI, the following link is to a Russian NTV news item for 6 June 2014, the leaders gathering at Normandy for the 70th anniversary of D-Day. This was some 5 weeks prior to the MH17 disaster. Note the two individuals at the right of the screen, having a fidgety chat together between about 5:00 and 5:30.

    From the moment I heard about MH17, and the immediate explosion of Russophobic hysteria in the western media, including by Abbott, I thought of that meeting, and what might have passed between them. Unprovable of course, but was Abbott in on the false flag operation from at least 6 June 2104?

    Like

    • Thanks very much Alex that is a great find and does help to explain the pure madness coming from Australia on July the 18th. It is also worth remembering (apologies for lack of source) that Abbott was seriously proposing to send in ARMED GROUPS OF AUSTRALIAN POLICE into the war zone in the days after the MH17 incident. Abbott and Harper seem to be competing for the title of the most obnoxious and wicked Western political underling. Thanks again for the comment and video source.

      Like

      • James, it’s not clear to me from your reply if you watched the NTV News piece to which I posted a link. For some reason after I posted that link what came up on your blog was the latest posted NTV news clip, not the one for 6 June 2014 at 19:00 hours which I had intended. Perhaps you got to it anyways.

        What has always disturbed me, since 18 July 2014 anyways, was the documented video of Poroshenko and Abbott, five weeks before MH17, having (what I interpret as) a fidgety one-to-one chat with each other at Normandy. With all the diplomats and visitors present to hob nob with how odd those two had such an affinity for each other. Not a smoking gun of course, but in view of what happened five weeks later is enough to at least raise questions as to what passed between them. A horrendous crime was committed for which every scrap of evidence has to be weighed, particularly as your excellent analysis indicates, the great blustering official responses seem intended to deflect from the truth.

        Just in case I’ll resend the link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vd4PCkMbL6E&index=1951&list=PLSgy-gJ-dkS-k8Rj9hqFRjIZTrnPj2Tpi titled (in Cyrillic) “Сегодня”.6 июня 2014.года. 19:00

        I live in Australia so am very aware of the official lines trotted out here. I also recall our Foreign Minister, one Julie Bishop, went off to Kiev in the immediate aftermath of MH17, while the Malaysian delegation dealt directly with DPR authorities who had nominal control of the wreck site. She has a reputation of cleaning up after diplomatic messes caused by our Tony, and I can’t help wondering if one purpose of her trip was to set up the non-disclosure agreement (whose existence was never disclosed in the corporate media).

        Like

      • Alex, I am sorry that my silly reply caused confusion regarding the video. I watched it and saw Putin speaking to Merkel whilst Poroshenko spoke with Tony Abbott, I do not know why I mentioned Harper, probably because I hate him so much and take solace from his existence that Australians are not the only ones. Many thanks to you for the clip which did come through correctly at least initially. The video is very interesting but it remains quite unclear the specific elements of the Ukrainian power structure responsible for this atrocity and their international partners.
        It was also interesting to note that Igor Kolomoisky (pardon spelling) seems to have been thrown out in the cold and has left the Ukraine entirely.
        I also live in Australia and your thoughts about the non disclosure agreement are very interesting and may be correct. One thing I would suggest is that whoever arranged it was protecting the interests of the Ukraine and failing to protect the interests of Malaysia Airlines or any of the victims. It says a lot that the Australian media have not seen fit to mention it at all. Thanks for your comment.

        Like

  4. James, no doubt you will take “Coherent’s” contribution with the grain of salt it deserves. This claim that MH17 was the missing MH370 with formaldehyde-filled Chinese corpses has been around a while, and as far as I’m concerned is just flak to smoke screen and confuse the truth. I watched the clip once and interpret the white patches around the bodies as quicklime spread for reasons of hygiene as it was full summer and the poor human debris began decomposing in the heat. “Coherent” is part of the obfuscation effort.

    More to the point is that the area around the tragedy is densely populated with numerous small agricultural and mining communities, and there were quite a few eye witnesses. It seems lots of journalists of one sort or another went there in the months following and conducted interviews with locals, which of course did not make it into the MSM. Your piece of 17 July 2015 correctly refers to one early report by the Russian service of the BBC in which witnesses reported one or more Ukrainian fighter planes in the vicinity and explosions in the sky. And of course it was quickly pulled by the BBC, presumably because it did not fit the official narrative, though it survives on YouTube.

    I have come across another clip somewhere which I draw to your attention. These links should get you there. I have watched it several times and believe it to be credible.

    http://7mei.nl/2015/05/30/lev/

    The interviewee (Lev Alexandrovich Bulatov) claims to be a former miner, retired after suffering a hear attack, and living in Petropavlivka, a town pretty much beneath the point where M17 was struck. The interviewer is from Holland, named Maxim, and interviews him in faltering, beginners Russian. I understand Russian so can vouch that Lev speaks fluently, without hesitation, and I think genuinely from the heart.

    I get the impression (though it is not stated) that Lev is an amateur plane spotter, as he lives beneath an international air corridor, and likes watching passing planes through a monocular (sort of half a binocular). On 17th July 2014 he claims he was outside watching three Ukrainian jets making attacks against rebel positions to the east, when one of the jets peeled away and revved up to a full-power climb towards an aircraft flying at normal 10 km altitude of commercial jets, though off the usual commercial corridor. He heard a double “bang-bang” followed shortly by a single “bang”. The aircraft began to break up, making a pitiable howling noise. The cockpit, one wing and (he claims) the tail detached, while the body flipped around and began falling tail first. If correct this may account for previous reports that telemetry indicated the craft “turned around”, which it did but continued on its original trajectory as it fell to earth.

    The attack jet then flew away to the north, while his attention was diverted to the other two jets which were shot down by Manpad AA missiles by the defenders. He also had to get indoors as his house was showered by small debris like knives and cups.

    The interviewer asked his opinion about the prevailing view that a BUK missile was used. His answer was “tryop”, meaning roughly “bullshit”. A BUK launch is highly visible by its noise and exhaust trail, and furthermore strikes its target by circling over it and hitting it from above. He saw no such thing, just the jet fighter. This corroborates with other eye witness accounts.

    If this is in fact what happened it says nothing about who authorised the attack, but that is another line of investigation.

    Like

    • Many thanks Alex, I am downloading the video so cannot comment on that but as far as the 370 thing goes, I did try and politely explain why I do not consider it a logical idea as the problem of the disappearance of 370 persists and was not solved by MH17. While I give that theory no real currency I also had to admit that I simply do not know what happened too MH370 but I am very confident that MH17 was a real flight targeted in a genuine false flag attack. I have no idea whether the conspiracy theories are put out there deliberately or originate organically but without evidence there is only storytelling. From your description of the video it sounds very credible and would corroborate the newly released video of last week. Horror video reveals MH17 crash aftermath https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K70igRdKVhA. What you have written about the BUK is completely correct and the lack of US satellite imagery and the lack of a visible contrail in the sky that day is in it’s way solid evidence that the flight was not destroyed by a BUK. Many thanks for your comment.

      Like

      • James, that “horror video” shows nothing new. It’s a compilation of bits and pieces televised a year before, and the “News Corp” logo in the first scene does nothing for its credibility. The following scenes of “looters” and “ransackers” are also ancient. They were televised during the initial outburst of anti-Russia hysteria, and also showed at the time, if I remember correctly, a collection of mysteriously unburnt passports of nations from which the passengers came. Some of these bits I suggest are fakes, while others seem genuine enough. The conversations indicate the speakers thought the wreckage was of fighter jets that were shot down, including references to pilots who parachuted out and survived, and were shocked to find the debris was civilian. All in all a hodge podge that says nothing new. More to the point is why this was released on the very day that victims of the tragedy were being mourned. Even some MSM presenters were bold enough to raise this question. Obviously an effort to keep the propaganda ball rolling. But if you want an indication of the guilty parties, check who screamed first and loudest.

        This diversion aside, here are links to a new documentary shown on RT-German. Perhaps you have already picked it up.

        http://russia-insider.com/en/politics/excellent-new-russian-mh17-documentary-ukraine-and-west-are-guilty-video/ri8883

        One of the participants is the actual “Maxim” from Holland from the piece I referred you to earlier. His name is Max Van Der Werff, and he shows a couple of items that fell from the shattered aircraft and landed on Lev’s house. Lev gave them to “Maxim” in thanks for his trying to bring about some justice to this unspeakable crime.

        Like

      • Thanks very much for that Alex, I must admit I downloaded “No One deserves to Die that way”and failed to watch the whole thing. I think your comments about the”new video” were very insightful, I interpreted it something like that and did not embed it in the short update piece MH17:the Investigation for that reason. Regarding “those who shouted first and loudest” in my opinion you are of course broadly correct but I assume that in the case of the Australian Prime Minister we have witnessed simply the eager to please underling attempting to seize the moment although that may be incorrect. I think Robert Parry’s description of the US intelligence on the matter of responsibility is probably pretty close to the mark,
        ” “rogue” elements of the Ukrainian government operating out of a circle of hard-liners around one of Ukraine’s oligarchs.’ This may be incorrect but it fits with my understanding and I believe that the oligarch referred to is Ihor Kolomoysky. Who has left the Ukraine and is now apparently living in the United States. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/ukraine/11502011/Fall-of-oligarch-who-bankrolled-Ukraines-war.html So he is a pretty convenient fall guy at this stage perhaps. Thanks again and I will watch the RT video you posted now.

        Like

  5. James I am not able to be as sanguine about the role of the Australian Prime Minister in this. Yes he is a political hack, an opportunist and an “eager to please underling”, but I suspect that he is more deeply implicated than we would wish to believe. He is a shallow character and easily manipulated by his imperial masters if there is perceived political reward, and for that reason I suspect he has a defined role in the larger geopolitical agenda behind this affair. I think we agree that the explosion of anti-Russia rhetoric immediately after MH17 was so choreographed and consistent that a suspicion of premeditation is unavoidable. For me that news item showing him and Poroshenko being so at ease with each other at Normandy on 6th June 2014 sprang to mind immediately on the morning of 18th July 2014 when I turned on the radio and heard the news. Ukraine was about as relevant to Australia as Paraguay at the time so how those two came to find such an affinity is unusual to say the least. Perhaps a purposeful introduction by a third party? Julie Bishop no doubt has her work cut out doing damage control.

    Regarding the old “new horror video” put out by News Corp Australia, others have now confirmed that it was old footage broadcast in part a year before, and links have been posted. Another blogger also affirmed my view that the conversations, mainly in Russian, showed that the soldiers believed they were accessing the wrecks of one or more attacking Ukrainian Sukhoi jet fighters that they were able to shoot down. They were dismayed to discover the debris was from a civilian airliner, not “looting and ransacking” like certain commentators claimed. It seems News Corp Australia inadvertently released proof that Ukrainian jet fighters were indeed active against separatist positions on that day, confirming eye witness accounts that MH17 was in fact shot down by one of them.

    The chain of command is another issue, but if one assumes a greater geopolitical agenda then it must extend far beyond Kolomoisky and Poroshenko.

    Like

    • Many thanks Alex, regarding the PM you may well be right and I genuinely hope that at some point the perpetrators of this atrocity are made to pay the price.”No One Desreves to Die That Way” was good. In my opinion it was an international plot as you describe, and the plot seems to have been directed against BOTH Malaysia and Russia for different reasons although that is not proven. Thanks for your contributions here.

      Like

  6. You’ve entirely missed the point. Both MH370 and MH17 were non existent!!! They were both lies and fabrications. No one died. So don’t worry there was no “tradgedy”. This is where blogs like this can do a lot of harm and confuse people, which is what the CIA does best

    Like

  7. and still no follow-up from Adam.

    Triple exclamation marks, on twin-777 tragic incidents, should translate into a sustained effort at making the case. One would have thought.

    I do agree, on the other hand, that the CIA specialises in smoke-and-mirrors (though, as seems to be inferred, I doubt this site is doing ‘their’ work for ‘them’).

    And is the “tradgedy” quote real? Did someone actually spell the word, that way? I’ve never seen it, before… sort of “half-Italian…”

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s