This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Ukraine Possessed the Type of Missile System Which Shot Down Malaysian Airlines Flight MH-17
Ron Paul writes:
While western media outlets rush to repeat government propaganda on the [plane crash in Ukraine], there are a few things they will not report.
***
The media has reported that the plane must have been shot down by Russian forces or Russian-backed separatists, because the missile that reportedly brought down the plane was Russian made. But they will not report that the Ukrainian government also uses the exact same Russian-made weapons.
He's right ...
The American government and media are loudly proclaiming that it must have been the Russian loyalists within Ukraine who shot down the plane because they possessed the type of missile used in the attack: SA-11 missiles fired from a Buk missile system.
Of course, the Ukrainians possess them as well.
As the Council on Foreign Relations notes:
All three regional actors—Russia, pro-Russian rebels of the “Donetsk People’s Republic,” and the Ukrainian government—had access or potential access to this weapons platform.
Reuters points out:
As Russia and Ukraine trade blame over the apparent shooting down of a Malaysian airliner, they appear to agree on one thing: the type of Soviet-era missile that brought it down.
But if an SA-11 Buk missile, known as “Gadfly” in NATO, struck the aircraft and killed all 298 on board, that won’t solve the mystery of who did it: Russia, Ukraine and Russian-speaking rebels have all claimed the missile in their arsenals.
Former Associated Press and Newsweek reporter Robert Parry explains:
Ukraine, after all, was part of the Soviet Union until 1991 and has continued to use mostly Russian military equipment.
For example, here’s a Ukrainian state company BOASTING about their Buk systems and SA-11s … complete with pictures:
(Click here and here to see big, clear images.)
The Ukrainian military also admits – after denying it for 8 days – that it accidentally shot down a Russian airliner in 2001, killing all 78 passengers, using a different missile system.
But – say American talking heads – it came from “rebel-controlled territory”.
Maybe … but last time we heard that kind of claim, it turned out to be totally false.
»
- advertisements -
Well all those failing governments needing to look like leaders are very happy at this tradgedy.
Like Australlia's Prime Minister, prancing around like bull frog, making demands...trading on the multiple deaths....you can bet his government very happy at this tradgedy...like all govts around the world on the nose.....disasters are their big PR opportunities.
The area where the Malaysian passenger jet MH17 fell in Ukraine is a crash site not a crime site! Painting it as a crime site does not make it so.
Whether shot down by accident or intentionally, most of the evidence on how and why this occurred will most likely come from sources other than where the flight went down. I for one feel total disgust and seriously distressed that this tragedy has become nothing more than a propaganda gem. More on this topic in the article below.
http://brucewilds.blogspot.com/2014/07/ukraine-crash-propaganda-gem.html
a bit like when you use said crash to promote your blog?
But no one really has to try (from either side) to paint obumma as a farsical leader....because it is ever so obvious. And we elected this guy twice....go figure.
Since July of 2013 when the American government was allowed to take a more active role in creating news programs both government accountability and the role of free media has been diminished. As of July 2, 2013 a taboo came silently to an end with the implementation of a new law passed in January. For decades a so-called anti-propaganda law prevented the U.S. government's mammoth broadcasting arm from delivering programming to American audiences.
The new law unleashes thousands of hours per week of government-funded radio and TV programs for domestic U.S. consumption. This was criticized by many human rights activist as a green light for U.S. domestic propaganda efforts and in my opinion it is already being felt. More on this subject in the article below.
http://brucewilds.blogspot.com/2014/07/when-propaganda-and-surveillance....
It's 1984.
The Ministry of Truth is fully operational.
Man Putin must have gotten you trolls up extra early this morning. Proably up the same time as the FSB who are scrubbing the crash site of every bit of evidence. If the financial shits get it together to cut off your private refinancing, make sure you run to the bank on payday and hope it cashes. Now to get on Bitch Angela's case.
strange that european affairs get european comments at european hours, eh? here it's already afternoon, 1:39 PM, to be exact
We don't have to need whom shot down MH17 per say, the facts are gleaming the airliner was shepherded to the kill zone.
There really is NO good reason for this conflict. Crimea and Donestk have had their vote.The EU is basically having a hissy. Wait until Germany passes the essentially the same referendum withdrawing from the EU.
The Western Banks are understandably pissed that people are voting themselves out from under their hypertaxed , hyperregulated, dead economies , and prefer to affiliate themselves with political organizations less encumbered by bankers' financial shackles. The ability to vote and act on the vote seems to be the issue at hand
wrong. the EU is deeply divided on this, with Italy with France on one extreme, and Poland, the Baltics and the UK on the other extreme
further, what is this "Wait until Germany passes the essentially the same referendum withdrawing from the EU"?
after the next US presidential elections look to see UK consolidate itself with the US as they withdraw from EU, and Germany to cast its lot with Russia/China at the same time, as they do the same.
Germany always splits away, The UK always comes closer.
So what were those Blackwater mercanries upto in Eastern Ukraine again????
Kiev's audio recording "evidence" blaming separatists for the MH17 shootdown is a crude fake and was cooked up a day before the incident, according to audio analysis specialists.
http://en.itar-tass.com/russia/741521
Did you hear about Air Force 1 getting shot down yesterday? It was apparently all over Facefuck (since I cited the White House bombing on Twatter yesterday before this broke).
Why isn't Washington loaning some better PR advisers to Kiev? I am getting tired of slogging through the shit wake of the USS Amateur Hour, and it doesn't leave me much time to criticize the other side.
Looking over press reports of Secretary Kerry's best Susan Rice impersonation yesterday something stands out.
He apparently said (if not more than once) “And the fact is that only a few weeks ago, a convoy of 150 vehicles of artillery, armoured personnel carriers, multiple rocket launchers, tanks, crossed over from Russia into this area and these items were all turned over to the separatists.”
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jul/20/mh17-kerry-evidence-ukraini...
multiple rocket launchers are NOT missiles (ie BUK batteries)
Kerry is inherently admitting that US has lots of nice pictures of all the specified equipment (tanks, howitzers, GRAD MLRS) that was coming over the border of Russia, but he simultaneously appears to admit that he has no pictures or other evidence that the Russians have supplied the separatists with BUKs (or any other large surface to air missile systems).
Diplospeak (lies) from a Diploshit-for-brains.
Sec. Kerry was on CNN yesterday and characterized the pro-Russian soldiers at the crash site as "drunken separatists." Yes, they are separatist, but evidence is needed to back up the claim that they were drunk. What evidence does he have that they were drunk? Was a sobriety test done on them to prove they were drunk? Kerry with his supposed "expertise in international diplomacy" should know better than to accuse anyone, especially someone from another country, of being drunk without any evidence to back it up. My guess is that he characterized them as "drunken separatists" because of the age-old stereotype that Russians are all a bunch of drunks. Injecting cartoonist stereotypes into a propaganda campaign to make it stick just goes to show how desperate the man is to, once again, sell a flat-out lie to the American people!
Butcher Benjamin Netanyahu was also on CNN yesterday and stated specifically that "6 million" Israelis are under attack from rockets being fired from Gaza. Yes, he's kinda right, there are about 6 million Israelis living in Israel, but that's only true if you don't include the million and half or so Arabs also living in Israel. So why did he selectively choose to mention "6 million" Israelis? He did this so that American viewers would conjure up ghastly images of the Jewish holocaust in Nazi Germany and then apply them to what's going on in Israel today. Only a butchering war criminal with a twistedly evil mind could cook up such vile and dishonest propaganda! The irony in all this is perfectly transparent: it is not the Jews but the Palestinians being gassed in the concentration camp, and it is the Jews that are gassing the Palestinians, just as the Nazis did it to the Jews over 70 years ago.
The irony is the Palestinians for better or worse even if they are muslims are closer in bloodlines to the original 12 tribes of Israel than any of those Samaritan Khazarian Jews like Netanyahu, Rothschilds, Soros, etc.
What is even more ironic the Palestinians were given the West Bank the ancient home of the Samaritans aka Samaria. New Samaria aka Khazaria just happens to be smack dab in Ukraine. It was the Khazars (turkic descendent half pagan jews) who actually founded the city of Kiev.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samaria
Samaria (/s?.?m?r.i?.?/[1]), or the Shomron (Hebrew: ?????????, Standard Šomron Tiberian Š?m?rôn ; Arabic: ???????, as-S?mirah – also known as ???? ?????, Jib?l N?blus ) is a name for the mountainous, central region of ancient Palestine,[2] based on the borders of the biblical Northern Kingdom of Israel. The name "Samaria" derives from the ancient city Samaria, the capital of the Kingdom of Israel.[3][4][5] In modern times, the territory is generally and almost universally known as part of the West Bank.
...
Someone has a sick sense of humor if you think about it. Why would 'zionists' if they are really running the show and would allow non jews to settle a very important piece of real estate to them in the first place.
http://www.darkmoon.me/2013/top-israeli-scientist-says-ashkenazi-jews-ca...
http://www.apfn.org/thewinds/library/khazars.html
Not all jews are joos though before everyone starts the usual bs. It is always the bad apples that tend to spoil the whole bunch so they need to be weeded out.
A little interesting aside on the Khazars on the modern state of Israel. In the 11th century a displaced Khazarian jew led a jewish crusade to take back Old Samaria aka Palestine. The guy who initiated the revolt's name was Solomon ben Duji but it never took hold until about 20 years later when his son Menahem took up the cause. He changed his name to David al-Roy, and proclaimed himself the Messiah. The crusade started in Khazaria but the real fighting was in Kurdistan taking the the fortress of Amadie which today would be northeast of modern day Mosul. It didn't get much further than that since someone assasinated him, the story goes it was his father in law that poisoned him while was asleep apparently someone bribed him to do the deed. Where this ties into the modern day state of Israel is the six-pointed "shield of David" which adorns the modern Israeli flag is attributed to David al-Roy and his crusade. Supposedly there is nothing Judasitic about and it just an pagan/magical emblem since to be a Messiah you would have probably to have been a practitioner of 'magic' which he was known to have been. The Judaism just co-opted the symbolism after the fact.
Yes, it is the lying, thieving, murdering, bankster, Marxist, multiculti, feminist, globalist ones who give the other 5% a bad name.
OT: UR, last time you were hinting about legal cases were "Admiralty Law" was used. could you link me an example? I'm still quite ignorant about that, and your point looked very interesting
Not really off topic... since Grotius's De Iure Praedae Commentarius is the long version.
The short version is that when a Private Military Corporation takes a ship on the high seas, they go to an Admiralty Court and once the Admiralty Court concurs with their claim, the PMC pays a tax on the seizure and receives a sort of customary sovereign immunity for their private aggression. As if this conflict of interest wasn't bad enough, the current practice in US civil courts (with their 98/99% conviction rate) of "guilty until proven innocent" in regards to civil forfeiture is the de jure burden of proof. From a banking perspective the history is interesting since this was literal vulture finance where NY bankers speculated on Masachussettes ship building by floating joint stock companies with equity participation by captains and crews, there were even futures markets in working mens' labor where crews could sell up to 50% of their shares before departing for "work". From a government finance perspective it contradicts some conservatives'/libertarians' idealization of the "good old days" when governments were supposedly just financed by excise taxes (since a US Letter of Marque cost 5,000 or 10,000 dollars and the "excise tax" rate on the plunder was 40%). So today we could have Obama issue a letter of marque to Blackwater (financed by JPM and Exxon) to "liberate" Iraq or Ukraine, in exchange for those firms keeping 60% of Iraq's oil or Ukraine's mythical shale gas, just like the good old days against the Barbary Pirates before Jefferson sent the Marine Corps to the shores of Tripoli and kicked of the global police action long before the Monroe Doctrine of US imperialism was drafted.
Stark - The abolition of privateering and the declaration of Paris
Hugo Grotius- Commentary on the Law of Prize and Booty
http://www.fjc.gov/history/home.nsf/page/jurisdiction_admiralty.html
Wikipedia link to Prize (law)
It would be refreshing if both the USSA and USSR would brush up on some of Grotius's other works (De Jure Belli ac Pacis) and play nice but I don't see it happening
The field commanders in eastern Ukraine seem to be pretty open about their Russian ethnicity and "former" employers, unlike current US and Polish advisers. The scary thing I see is that this plane didn't get shot down until the Kiev regime started hemorrhaging literal blood on the battlefield after the eastern Ukrainians consolidated their position (through retreat) and took relatively overt delivery of the Russian armor and artillery a week or so ago.
thanks, UR. will read
in my limited legal understanding, "in the good old days" (going back to Roman and Medievalt times) a private combatant without a sovereign backing him (for example by a Letter of Marque) was "just a pirate". Ergo "you catch him, you hang him", as a breaker of both Pax and Fides
a Privateer had a sovereign backing him, and could produce a Letter of Marque authorizing him to conduct war on the enemies of his sovereign. as such a lawful combatant
what is shameful today is that some sovereigns are doing exactly that... without issuing authorization. and we seem to have forgotten how to hang up pirates
of course the whole Gitmo Idiocy only strenghtened the idea that we have no standards of war anymore, neither the ancient nor the modern
damn it, Ukraine was born out of a multilateral agreement where Russia itself was part. and yet it's not part of any military alliance
in different times, the whole situation would be ripe for a partition agreement similar to the Polish Partitions, or Korea, or VietNam. I wonder if it's not going to be the "inevitable solution"
I think it was Gerald Celente who came up with the oversimplification that currency wars lead to trade wars which lead to real wars. I also think that the use of the sterilized and acceptable term "sanctions" is rather counter-productive, given the inherent currency and trade war components which are a concurrent part of any real war plan or even formal study military tactics and history since time immemorial. Furthermore, that any US sanctions against the third largest bank in Russia is rather overt and traditional Handelskrieg. So is the "average" educated European smart enough to see through the smoke that's being blown?
If you flip through the Stark text (which was written after the fact).. it is well footnoted with specific cases in case you looking for specific precedents.
Edit: I'm not going to touch the wisdom of the Europeans' long history of drawing lines on maps... but we all know the likely alternative if you're wrong.
lol. the average European, as you know, has the same limitations of all averages: mediocrity
education? don't get me even started on that. imho the most basic education should give the educated... a grasp of the limits of knowledge, in the most Socratic sense
nevertheless: with the exception of the Baltics and Poland, who have a reasonable fear of The Bear, and the UK, which is always as odds... what remains here in Europe has a certain willingness to keep up certain standards, and to push for a reasonable peace
yes, I'd say enough of our political elites see some parts of the elephant in all that smoke. but the pressure is relentless, and MH-17 brought a nasty case of "9/11" to the BeNeLux
conflict is conflict. if we stop declaring wars in the old fashion, then we should get a better grasp that all sanctions are tools of conflict, and parts of escalation
UR, I agree. though a SAM like BUK can look like a multiple rocket launcher, or be camuflaged to look so
basically I also agree with GW in his article: all parties involved in this conflict could have fired the missile
What I hate about all the story is this: "Who did it". As if this was more relevant than the fact that there is a conflict going on, and that all conflicts, particularly if they are waged on the most barbaric level, would not produce barbaric acts of all kinds
there is a difference between civilized warfare and barbaric warfare, and a lot of gray space in-between - a notion that was very clear to every German soldier being sent either to the Western or the Eastern Front in WWII
I'm not alone in Europe in asking for more civilized behaviour from all parties. Yes, all parties
Uncle Sam, the UK, Poland and the Balts should stop asking for more indiscriminate pressure to be applied on Russia
On the other side, Putin should stop using badgeless, non-uniformed soldiers, and apply pressure on the separatists to comply to the most basic civilized warfare standards. Without him, the rebels would have been crushed long ago. He can't deny a shared responsibility, particularly after all the propaganda wars
there are soldiers, rebels, patriots... and war criminals. don't conflate the four together, and don't give the first three incentives to enter the fourth category
perhaps the guy that pushed the button thought he was attacking a legitimate target, perhaps not. I care more for a sensible follow-up to this tragedy
GW.....talking out his ass again....you have no idea what kind of missile was used so shut your stupid lie-hole.
To borrow from GW's bag of tactics (with a dose of my usual crassness):
ON FRIDAY MORNING I WROTE: 3) But that doesn't answer the rather basic question of whether the plane was shot down by air-to-air or surface-to-air missile, much less whose missile did the deed.
or the more long winded version on SATURDAY AFTERNOON
We don't know shit at this point.
About the only speculation as to verifiable facts that can reasonably be ruled out is that a Kiev military jet collided with MH17, since there would be wreckage of it in the debris field, and someone would likely have posted a picture of it by now.
The characterizations of the two "superpowers" are both filled with professionally parsed phrases (except when Joe Biden opens his drunk mic mouth and says something that would incriminate the US if taken at face value).
In terms of exposed overt lies, the only party (that I am aware of) that can be proven guilty is Kiev, since they denied they had any Buks in the area. This can be demonstrated without relying on the Russian's statements to that effect since without Kiev's Buks in the theater of operations- none could have fallen into the hands of the militia, and if the Russians had sent any across the border there would be YouTube videos and satellite imagery of the border penetration.
Unfortunately without full disclosure, including RAW INTELLIGENCE, it will be very difficult to ever ascertain FACT (as opposed to some "truth" mutually agreed upon by the CIA and FSB).
I could go on, and on, and on... but I'd still be batting 1000 against your 0.
Pfttt.
Since when did not having facts preclude anyone from forming ironclad opinions?
What kind of world would it be if we needed facts before we claimed to know everything about everything?
Wake up, man... THIS IS THE INTERNETS.
did you read GW's article? for you, an executive summary: GW is quoting Ron Paul: "...The media has reported that the plane must have been shot down by Russian forces or Russian-backed separatists, because the missile that reportedly brought down the plane was Russian made. But they will not report that the Ukrainian government also uses the exact same Russian-made weapons."
So what, was Ron Paul there?
You guys are a bunch of cowardly pussies who down arrow what you have no hope of refuting........
lol@sniveling cowards
There is so much propoganda that it needs cool heads to take a step back and look at the big picture. The legal approach of establishing "Qui Bono" (Who benefits?) might be instructive. SO who benefits:
Russia? No. It's a nightmare for Putin at a very inconvenient time. Definitely not Russia directly.
The Separatists? Not really. they don't want to turn public opinion against them. If it was them, it must have been in error. The equipment was already available in Ukraine and could have been taken from the Ukranian armed forces when the East was first overrun.
Ukraine? Yes because this turns public opinion against the Separatists and Russia and puts pressure on Europe to enhance sanctions on Russia. Also, why did the Ukrainian Security Service impound ATC communications between MH17 and Kiev ATC? It is known that MH17 diverted far to the North from its posted flight path and the path used by MH flights and other carriers in the prior weeks. This took it directly over the exclusion zone.
The US/Europe? Yes because The US is putting pressure on Europe to enhance sanctions on Russia despite the best economic interests of Europe itself. It may be just a coincidence that MH17 happened just after Germany refused to budge.
I suggest that with so much propoganda being planted in MSM, it might be sensible not to rush to judgement. These situations are always murky and False Flags are, unfortunately, not out of the question. Our fearless "Leaders" don't worry about the "Collateral damage" of a few hundred lost innocent lives.
I honestly don't see how Ukraine benefits. All indications are that they are winning their war already. They may have cooperated, but the US is the only beneficiary here. 'Our system' requires a war with Russia or China to allow for a global reset. It's the only way to save it. These fuckers will continue to kill people/blame others until they get enough cover to go hot.
I truly believe America can be a force of good again, but it's going to take a generation of reform and the death of the dollar to do so.
In this context Ukraine = US. Just another puppet regimen. WRT the rest, I hope you are right...
The point of who benefits is not relevant if it was an accident. If the seperatists were trying to shoot down a Ukrane cargo plane, its fair game and visa versa for the Ukranians.
But if it was an intentional false flag event, then yes Ukrane was the only one to gain and that would worth knowing.
It was probably a seperatist mistake. Looks like anyway if the early reports of claiming the downing are true.
I would humbly beg to differ. Who benefits is ALWAYS relevant. I do agree that a mistake by Separatists is one of the likely causes, which is why I stated so in my earlier post...
I guess you are right in the 'never let a crisis go to waste' as in which agenda is gaining ground after the fact.
It's "cui bono", not "qui bono". "Cui" is the *dative case* of "qui", and the phrase literally means "to-whom [is it] for-a-good-thing".
Both spellings are in common use in the legal community. Qui Bono is the more modern and generally accepted version, especially in the Courts. But thanks.
http://definitions.uslegal.com/q/qui-bono/
So they are, literally, talking nonsense.