The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection$
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewRon Unz Archive
American Pravda: Who Shot Down Flight MH17 in Ukraine?
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information


Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • B
Show CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Last year I published Our American Pravda, making the case for the utter corruption and unreliability of the mainstream American media, both in the past and especially in recent years. The enormous lacunae I daily noticed in the pages of The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, and other leading media outlets were a major motivation behind my creation of The Review, whose readership has grown enormously in recent weeks.

A perfect example of this dangerous MSM “conspiracy of silence” may be found in the growing confrontation with Russia over Ukraine, greatly accelerated by the death of almost 300 passengers aboard Malaysian Airlines Flight 17, shot down last month over Eastern Ukraine. The American media and its Western counterparts have almost unanimously placed the blame on anti-government rebels backed by Russia, and darkly insinuate that Russian President Vladimir Putin has the blood of those hundreds of innocent lives on his hands. London’s once-respected Economist magazine has repeatedly run shrill covers promoting the great threat of Putin and Russia to world peace, even featuring a photo of the former under the stark title “A Web of Lies.” There is the serious likelihood of a renewed Cold War against Russia and with the neoconized Republicans in Congress proposing legislation to incorporate Ukraine as an American military ally and deploy American forces there, the actual possibility of a military clash near the Russian border.

As readers know, I have been overwhelmingly consumed with my own software work in recent months and aside from closely reading the NYT and WSJ every morning, have devoted little time or effort to following the disastrous Ukraine situation. But just carefully reading between the lines of our elite MSM outlets and glancing at a few contrary perspectives presented on alternative websites have left me highly suspicious of our media narrative, leading me to wonder where the finger of guilt actually points.

For example, according to the official American story, MH17 was downed by rebels armed with a BUK anti-aircraft missile battery. As it happens, the pro-American Ukraine government possesses a large inventory of exactly those weapons, while it is far from clear that the rebels have a single unit, let alone the expertise to operate such sophisticated devices. Furthermore, there apparently exists radar evidence demonstrating that Ukraine fighter planes were in the immediate vicinity of MH17 just before it was shot down and there are firsthand reports from investigators on the ground that portions of the crashed fuselage showed strong evidence of having been hit the sort of heavy machine-gun fire employed in air combat. I find it extremely suspicious that the American government has repeatedly refused to release the evidence supporting its own narrative, while the Russian government has released copious evidence backing the opposing perspective.

We must bear in mind that the downing of MH17 and the deaths of the hundreds of mostly European passengers came as a fortuitous stroke of fortune for the embattled Kiev government and its neoconservative American backers, given that Germany and most of the other major European governments had just balked at approving the harsh anti-Russian economic sanctions being proposed by the White House. Cui bono?

Furthermore, this terrible suspicion that 300 innocent lives may have been sacrificed in a ghastly false-flag operation by an American-supported government is somewhat buttressed by earlier events. Consider that the overthrow of the democratically-elected and neutralist Ukrainian government was sparked by the massive bloodshed that erupted between riot police and pro-American demonstrators in the Kievan capital, as many hundreds on both sides were suddenly killed or wounded by an outbreak of heavy gunfire over a couple of nights. I found it very intriguing that soon afterward an intercepted telephone call between the pro-Western foreign minister of Estonia and European High Commissioner Catherine Ashton, later confirmed to be genuine, revealed that the bullets found in the bodies of both government police and anti-government demonstrators had apparently come from the same guns. The most plausible explanation of this strange detail is that the snipers responsible were professionals brought in to cause the massive bloodshed necessary to overthrow the government, which is exactly what soon followed. Again cui bono?

Am I certain about these facts, let alone the analysis built upon them? Absolutely not! As emphasized, I’ve been entirely preoccupied with other matters over the last few months. But if such obvious suspicions are apparent to someone who occasionally glances at the news reports out of the corner of his mind’s eye, the total silence of the American media and its huge corps of full-time professional journalists constitutes a very telling indictment. Personally, I think there’s a high likelihood that forces aligned with current pro-Western regime were responsible for the massacre in Kiev’s Maidan Square and a better than fifty-fifty chance they more recently shot down MH17, but I really can’t be sure about either of these things. However, I am absolutely 100% certain that the American MSM has been revealed as a totally worthless source of information on these crucial world events, although it can be relied upon to provide every last detail of Robin Williams’ troubled life or the endless foibles of the Kardashians.

In the interests of providing our readers at least some access to alternate accounts of why we may now be heading into a new Cold War against Russia—or even a hot one— I’ve recently republished a couple of Mike Whitney’s fine Counterpunch columns on the mysteries of Flight MH17, which cautiously raised questions rather than claimed to answer them, as well as those of the redoubtable Paul Craig Roberts.

Aside from attracting considerable debate from our website’s often “excitable” commenters, whose views range from the sensible to the deranged, our Whitney columns regarding MH17 had a far more important consequence. One of our left-liberal readers was shocked to read facts totally absent from the pages of The Nation, the Huffington Post, or any of the other left-liberal sites she visits. Out of curiosity, she contacted a very prominent left-liberal American academic, someone with special expertise in exactly that area of Europe. To her considerable surprise, he largely confirmed the outlandish “conspiracy theory,” saying that the evidence increasingly indicated that the American-backed Kiev government had shot down Flight MH17, either accidentally or otherwise.

Based on his remarks, it sounded like he and his friends had devoted 100x the time and effort that I had to investigating the incident, thereby reassuring me that my casual conclusions were at least not wholly ridiculous. Yet it also appeared that neither he or any of the other American experts in his circle who apparently share his views had seen fit to publish their opinions in any of the numerous media outlets to which they have easy access, presumably for fear of being denounced and stigmatized as “conspiracy nuts.” They may regard the possibility of an American military confrontation with nuclear-armed Russia as a terrible danger, but it pales compared to the horrifying risk that the 22-year-old bookers at MSNBC chat shows might decide to put a black mark down next to their names.

The following day I lamented this cowardice of our intelligentsia to another prominent liberal academic with whom I’m friendly, and he immediately sent me the draft by a friend of his on that very topic that I am now greatly honored to publish. Most of the dead on MH17 were Dutch citizens and Karel van Wolferen ranks as one of the world’s most prominent Dutch journalists, winner of major awards and someone whose numerous books that have sold well over a million copies worldwide. His article describes the evidence regarding MH17, but more importantly focuses on the totally corrupted worlds of journalism and politics that have enabled this dangerous situation to develop.

I urge everyone to read van Wolferen’s long and thoughtful piece and ask themselves why such basic facts and simple analysis appear nowhere within the mainstream American media. Given his standing and his credibility, the New York Times should have long since featured his byline on a major opinion piece, and the absence constitutes powerful evidence. During our disastrous Iraq War the American media applied exactly the same boycott to the views of my old friend Bill Odom, the three-star general who had run the NSA for President Ronald Reagan and ranked as one of Washington’s leading experts on national security issues. Our totally incompetent ruling elites refuse to let discordant voices puncture their bubble of unreality.

For those readers who refuse to admit the possibility that our vaunted MSM might conceal such vital facts, consider the important point I made at the beginning of my 2013 article. In recent years, leading scholars have conclusively established that for a decade or two during the 1930s and 1940s, a small network of Communist spies quietly gained substantial control of our national government in Washington, DC, successfully diverting the actions of the United States to their own nefarious ends. If our mainstream media had failed to notice or report that situation at the time and then spent the next half century ridiculing anyone who suggested this possibility, why should anyone believe that the media can be trusted on the question of who actually shot down Flight MH17 in Ukraine? Our American Pravda indeed.

UPDATE: Our long, detailed article by distinguished Dutch journalist Karel van Wolferen has had enormous traffic, and is now on the verge of becoming the most heavily read piece in the history of our young webzine, while the nearly 600 Tweets it has so far received indicate distribution comparable to that of a major New York Times article. All this has happened in just the last couple of days.

Furthermore, just as I had hoped, the very lengthy comment threads of the two articles have provided a wealth of additional information, far beyond anything I had previously encountered, given my slight familiarity with this issue.

First, I learned that a group of highly-experienced former intelligence officers from the CIA, FBI, NSA, and other government agencies has issued a public statement sharply criticizing the lack of evidence substantiating the claims made by American government officials.

Also, the blogsite of Col. Patrick Lang, a very highly regarded former Defense Intelligence official, has published a lengthy and detailed analysis of the MH17 Incident, raising many of the same issues:

Furthermore, one of the commenters on our website, who purportedly has a military intelligence background, pointed us to the very detailed analysis he had published on his own blogsite regarding MH17:

And I also discovered that a prominent leftist journalist had also published a lengthy reconstruction of the shoot-down:

Although I claim no great expertise in military affairs, these analyses certainly seem to strengthen my suspicions that the Official Story almost universally accepted by the Western MSM is far from solid and may indeed be a ridiculous fabrication. I urge others to follow the links I have provided, and draw their own conclusions, perhaps different from my own. But they should ask themselves why so many highly-regarded former U.S. intelligence professionals would be raising these serious doubts and why our mainstream media has totally failed to report them.

As for me, I’ve noticed a curious fact. It appears that the people and organizations promoting the current Official Line on Ukraine have a huge overlap with the people and organizations that promoted the disastrous Iraq War, based on the notorious WMD Hoax. Meanwhile, the people providing serious skepticism about government accusations regarding MH17 are exactly the same people who raised doubts and skepticism about Iraq’s alleged WMD and the wisdom of attacking Iraq, while being just as totally ignored by the MSM then as now.

Since none of the Iraq War or WMD Hoax culprits ever received proper punishment for their crimes, they’ve mostly remained alive and free and able to promote equally disastrous foreign policy adventures in the media they continue to control. But that doesn’t mean we must be so gullible as to believe what they say.

Going forward, the crucial unknown is whether our timorous media or even its ideological fringes, will begin to seriously report these issues, or whether they’ll all get into line just as they did during the WMD Hoax.


Scott Horton has a podcast interview of Karel van Wolferen

The American Pravda Series
Hide 315 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Hepp says:

    For example, according to the official American story, MH17 was downed by rebels armed with a BUK anti-aircraft missile battery. As it happens, the pro-American Ukraine government possesses a large inventory of exactly those weapons, while it is far from clear that the rebels have a single unit, let alone the expertise to operate such sophisticated devices.

    Except for the fact that the pro-Russian rebels on social media bragged about shooting down a plane with BUK missiles. The expertise to use them could obviously have come from Russian agents.

    Furthermore, there apparently exists radar evidence demonstrating that Ukraine fighter planes were in the immediate vicinity of MH17 just before it was shot down

    Only source for this appears to be the Russian government:

    and there are firsthand reports from investigators on the ground that portions of the crashed fuselage showed strong evidence of having been hit the sort of heavy machine-gun fire employed in air combat.

    Every story I’ve read on this says that OSCE investigators believed that those holes were consistent with being hit by a BUK missile

    For example, The Washington Post:

    The images show pieces of the aircraft riddled with holes roughly the size of a child’s fist. Evidence, some experts say, of a surface-to-air missile’s distinct detonation pattern.

    “Although many of the holes may vary in size, the punctures seen in the photograph attached are relatively uniform in size, consistent with patterns exhibited by fragmentary warheads detonated at a proximity from the target,” Jane’s Military Capabilities Manager Reed Foster said in an e-mail. “This would potentially be consistent with a fragmentation type warhead employed upon a number of modern and legacy surface-to-air missile systems.”

    According to the NYT:

    The damage, including the shrapnel holes and blistered paint on a panel of the destroyed plane’s exterior, is consistent with the effects of a fragmenting warhead carried by an SA-11 missile, known in Russian as a Buk, the type of missile that American officials have said was the probable culprit in the downing of the plane.

    After some googling, I’ve found that those who argue Unz’s view will point to the comments of one OSCE official, shown here.

    He simply says it “almost looks like machine gun fire,” and basically says he doesn’t have the expertise to judge.

    • Replies: @Anon
    , @Dave
    , @VladM
    , @Anonymous
    , @Sam J.
  2. Sean c says:

    The most important question is about the air traffic control tapes. Ukraine claims that there have not been any formal request for them. What? It seems to me the pilots last communications would be very important to any investigation and not releasing them immediately only signals foul play.

  3. Hepp says:

    Also, just to be clear, I detest American foreign policy and the way we are forcing the worst aspects of our culture onto the rest of the world. I also believe that Vladimir Putin’s goals for the world, whatever the faults, are preferable to our Western leaders, whose deepest desire seems to be destroy the cultures of those they rule over. And as soon as I heard top American officials speaking up for “Pussy Riot,” it’s been hard for me to feel any kind of patriotism.

    That being said, you can be pro-Russia without having your IQ drop by 30 points. Wolferen even takes the Crimea referendum at face value. And the entire conspiracy theory about Ukraine fighter jets comes from a 50 second YouTube clip taken out of its proper context.

    I became suspicious when the pro-Russian posters here did not provide links for all this evidence they supposedly have. After a little investigation, I began to understand why.

    • Agree: Mr. Hack
  4. Kiza says:

    Nice expose. The only thing is that those Western media you mention are well discredited. New Your Times, MSNBC, NBS just joke after joke after joke. Since Ted’s CNN discovered the concept of self-financed propaganda (CIA and Pentagon supply the ‘news’, advertisers pay for production, people consume the output keenly), the Western elite has been trying to acquire this Holy Grail summarised as: The user Pays Principle, or the brainwashed masses pay for own brainwashing. Since the CNN, it has not worked so well mainly because the Internet appeared. The general concept of centralised distribution of truths and opinions is dead. But the Western power-holders are still trying the old models which do not work any more and are making every media house in the West a bigger and bigger joke. They expect media houses to distribute feral regime propaganda and the consumers and the shareholders of media companies to pay the bill. I am not aware of even one media company which is doing financially well under such arrangement. And it will get only worse for them as younger generations increasingly stay away from the press and the idiot box. One interesting exception is the British Guardian (a Fleet Street outsider), which appears to have found a niche of old-style true reporting as opposed to transcribing of government releases that all other British media houses practice. But how long will this exception last?

  5. bossel says:

    Well, well, Unz on the mysterious Ukrainian Su-25 path?

    Really, it is most probably not much more than a conspiracy theory. Su-25 aircraft are simply not capable (not realistically, anyway) to down the Boeing Airliner at 10000 m.

    The most realistic scenario is still accidental downing of the airliner by some (drunken?) separatists.

    I don’t read much of the US mainstream media (except a few articles each month from NYT & Washington Post), so I don’t really know what’s going on there, but from German, British & Dutch news sites I don’t see much of the propaganda war mentioned here.

    I can’t see the difference van Wolferen alleges between Dutch media & the likes of “Der Spiegel, the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, Die Zeit”. There are slight differences between individual media, but there is nothing like a universal blame on Putin for the downing of MH17 (although he is blamed for supporting the separatists).

    Not one of the media I usually read even alleged that the separatists actually downed a passenger aircraft on purpose. Most consider it a mistake, as I mentioned above.

    There is no “dangerous MSM “conspiracy of silence””, at least not in the European media I access. All the conspiracy theories mentioned by Unz can be found in “Der Spiegel, the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, Die Zeit” & other European sources. Of course, being conspiracy theories, they are not viewed too positively, but they are usually not simply dismissed. The available evidence for them is weighed (& usually found wanting).

    • Replies: @yrjo
  6. conatus says:

    Isn’t the issue one of jumping to conclusions and our press acting like it is already settled.
    “It is the Russians, we know it is the Russians, let’s get them.” The news acts like it is settled, they did it.

    But the bigger issue is one of honor, have we sunk so low as to betray our oaths? I thought sticking to your word was one of hall marks of the great Western civilization? Have we become such a legalistic society that promises are casually broken with the explanation of “Well you didn’t read the fine print.”
    Here is the NYTimes echoing the story of our lies about NATO expansion.

    From a 2009 NYT article, by Mary Elise Sarotte, Enlarging Nato, Expanding Confusion, discussing the ‘gentleman’s agreement’ that Gorbachev understood as meaning no NATO expansion, applying to his agreeing to German reunification.

    NYT says “Did the United States betray Russia at the dawn of the post-cold war era? The short answer is no. Nothing legally binding emerged from the negotiations over German unification. In fact, in September 1990, an embattled Mr. Gorbachev signed the accords that allowed NATO to extend itself over the former East Germany in exchange for financial assistance from Bonn to Moscow. A longer answer, however, shows that there were mixed messages and diplomatic ambiguities.

    By acknowledging that there might be some substance to Russian grievances, the Obama administration would strengthen our relations with Moscow. Given that NATO enlargement has already taken place and efforts for further expansion are stalled, little would be lost with such an acknowledgment but much could be gained.” Unquote

  7. Harold says:

    Thanks for the information on the other side of the story. So far I’ve only read what has been written here at the Unz Review. Turns out the mainstream media is not totally useless (this is not intended as a slight of the Unz Review).

  8. AG says:

    When the entire Ukraine trouble started with protesting in Kiev, the protestors were killed by `police’ who turned out to be someones else who want to create `brutality’ from govement for inciting revolution.

    With that kind of history to manipulate public opinions, there will be long way to go to find truth.

  9. Hunsdon says:

    The black boxes sure are taking a long time to be analyzed.

    The Russian government released civil air radar tracking that raised a number of questions. (Yes, but they’re Russians!)

    The Russian government released photos showing a concentration of Ukrainian BUK units near the area of the MH17 shootdown. (But they’re Russians!)

    The assertion that the flight had been diverted from the flight path used over the previous week or two, to fly over Donetsk, has not yet been debunked or explained.

    The Kiev air traffic control records have apparently vanished.

    As part of Operation Breeze 2014, US and NATO warships were in the Black Sea, including the French signals intelligence ship Dupuy de Lôme (A759), and Italian signals intelligence ship ITS Elettra (A 5340). No data has been released from these warships.

    BUK launchers are part of a system, including command and control and advanced radar vehicles in addition to the launcher itself. All assertions that the separatists have a BUK launcher seem to say “a” BUK launcher—-which vastly limits the effective range of the system.

    After reviewing all of these questions and issues, the West has collectively decided that it was drunk separatists, on the basis, apparently, of “just because.”

    • Replies: @Hepp
  10. Hepp says:

    The Russian government released civil air radar tracking that raised a number of questions. (Yes, but they’re Russians!)

    The Russian government released photos showing a concentration of Ukrainian BUK units near the area of the MH17 shootdown. (But they’re Russians!)

    I don’t automatically believe the Russian government, nor do I accept whatever western governments say at face value. That’s why I haven’t cited evidence that the Ukrainian and American governments put forward. However, evidence from the OSCE, UN, and international media all seem to corroborate the idea that it was pro-Russian rebels.

    What’s more likely:

    The Russian government is lying? or

    The governments of every western country, all western media, the UN, and the OSCE are all lying?

    By the way, I haven’t seen anyone dispute the fact that Russian rebels basically admitted it on social media.

    Also, notice how I provided links for my assertions, while you did not? I refuted Unz’s three points, then you just throw out new claims without any sources. It would take a full time researcher to keep up with all this, but I’m going to take a wild guess and say that the new claims you’re making aren’t any more credible than what you were saying before.

    • Replies: @Ron Unz
    , @yrjo
  11. Hepp says:

    The black boxes sure are taking a long time to be analyzed.

    Ok, I know I said I wasn’t going to look up any more unsubstantiated claims, but couldn’t resist this one. Just google “MH17 black boxes.”

    • Replies: @Hunsdon
    , @Joe
  12. Ron Unz says:

    I totally agree that it’s absolutely ridiculous to suspect that “The governments of every western country, all western media, the UN, and the OSCE are all lying?”

    It’s almost as ridiculous as believing that 139 eminent genetic scientists would have incorrectly denounced a book they hadn’t even bothered reading:

    • Replies: @Hepp
    , @michael
    , @Kevin O'Keeffe
  13. Here’s my independent intelligence assessment of MH 17:

    It fairly matches what is written here…

    Insofar as a ‘communist spy network’ gaining control, it would appear they lost out to a religious-fascist group over the long haul; ‘sociopaths & democracy’ (google it)

  14. Hepp says:
    @Ron Unz

    Come on Ron, that analogy is simply goofy, and you know it.

    We have evidence for HBD. Do you have any evidence for the MH17 conspiracy theory that doesn’t come from the Russian government? HBD is supported by logic, science, and common sense.

    Think about what conspiracy theorists have to believe. Ukraine would have had to intentionally be looking for a civilian plane to shoot down, since there was no other reason for fighter jets to be in the area. And for what reason? To blame it on Russians, I presume? But wouldn’t the Ukrainians have to worry that the intelligence agencies of other European governments would find out the ruse?

    Or were European governments in on it too? And they went along with this plan…why exactly? So they could put tougher sanctions on Russia, I presume. But why couldn’t they just go and do that anyway, if they were capable of that level of cooperation?

    I’m willing to believe it, if you have evidence.

  15. Dave37 says:

    Seems to me getting the true facts is made near impossible by the “counter” facts that follow. Yeah sure you can read up on all the available material and yet there is never a majority of consensus that won’t be challenged. No fan of the MSM but I suppose they are keeping it simple for us folks; otherwise conspiracy theory might have reported the shootdown as an anti-gay attack (because of the HIV scientists on board) by some homophobic government forces.

  16. Ron Unz says:

    I totally agree that my analogy is “simply goofy.” After all, everyone knows that politicians and government spokespeople are paid to lie for a living in support of what they perceive to be the national interest. Meanwhile, scientists are objective, disinterested seekers of truth.

    One of our commenters has provided a link to a very detailed analysis of the episode on his blog, that I’d strongly suggest people read and consider:

    • Replies: @Hepp
    , @col
  17. “I lamented this cowardice of our intelligentsia…”

    This certitude and disdain can be off-putting. The opposite is more effective. This sentiment is more important than people think it is.

    Any complex event can have a conspiracy narrative drafted about it that sounds convincing, complete with certainty from technical experts. It helps if Russian intelligence services are working behind the scenes.

    But the rebels took credit on social media for shooting down a plane in their airspace, and then deleted the post after they discovered it wasn’t a cargo plane.

    • Replies: @Ronald Thomas West
  18. Hepp says:
    @Ron Unz

    I totally agree that my analogy is “simply goofy.” After all, everyone knows that politicians and government spokespeople are paid to lie for a living in support of what they perceive to be the national interest.

    Ok, let’s say that the governments of Russia and the West all cancel each out, and reject anything that comes from a government.

    What’s left as a source of information?

    The media? Ok, you don’t believe them either.

    International organizations? You don’t seem to consider them credible.

    If you’re just going to pooh-pooh every possible source of information–except for the Russia government, which is apparently made up of the only honest people on earth–then I don’t see how you can really debate the issue.

    • Replies: @schmenz
    , @Dutch
  19. @Southfarthing

    Social media ‘evidence’ is fraught with danger…

    …except, perhaps, in a case where ‘truth’ is a relative thing

    • Replies: @Southfarthing
  20. @Ronald Thomas West

    Thanks for the link.

    1. Yes, Wikipedia’s current version implies that its unconfirmed whether the social media account that took credit actually belongs to the rebel leader in question.

    2. On the other hand, Wikipedia could be wrong (perhaps deliberately so), and there could be good evidence making it likely that it was a genuine account.

    This is Wikipedia’ current version:

    Multiple sources cited a post on the VKontakte social networking service that was made by an account under Girkin’s name which acknowledged shooting down an aircraft at approximately the same time that the civilian arliner Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 (MH17) was reported to have crashed in eastern Ukraine in the same area near the Russian border on July 17, 2014.[53][54][55][56] The post specifically referenced how warnings were issued for planes not to fly in their airspace and the downing of a Ukrainian military Antonov An-26 transport plane which the Ukraine Crisis Media Center suggested was a case of misidentification with the MH17.[54][56] This post was deleted later in the day and the account behind it claimed that Igor Girkin has no official account on this social service.[57][58][59][60]

    • Replies: @Ronald Thomas West
  21. @Southfarthing

    It all depends on who is staying on top of the edits at wikipedia:

    ^ A recent, small project, shows a result that is not pretty. I doubt any CIA edits would be friendly to the so-called ‘rebels’ cause but on the other hand, they have to be careful to allow at least a semblance of balance in the reporting or wikipedia gets called out on demolishing the possible facts

  22. Hunsdon says:


    I did just as you suggested, and googled “MH17 Black Boxes.” The preliminary report is due to be released, according to the first link, “in a few weeks.”

    On or about 28 July, a whole spate of stories appeared, which alleged that Flight MH17 was brought down by shrapnel that caused “massive explosive decompression,” analysis of the black box recorders has found. The source of that analysis was a Ukrainian security official named Andriy Lysenko, in Kiev.

    Query: were the black boxes analyzed in Kiev? How did Lysenko get the information? How very convenient.

    • Replies: @Ronald Thomas West
  23. @Hunsdon

    The Black Boxes were handed over to the British for analysis, so much for ‘impartial’ investigation (David Cameron has been on the Putin lynching bandwagon)

    It’s time for some zzz on this end … past midnight here (Central Europe Time)

    Good luck sorting it all out-

    • Replies: @Hunsdon
  24. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Hi Hep,
    You seem to be trying and you admit you did a “little” investigation. I was on the case within minutes and have done a lot of investigation. The Ukraine “knew” within a half an hour that it was a Buk. Too soon! The recording came out that day also only to be debunked within hours. The MSM keeps using debunked evidence long after it has been debunked. The NYT and WaPo are Neocon outlets who are not at all trust worthy.

    My arthritis keeps me from typing much more than this but if you don’t mind a lot of email, I mean a LOT, I can load you up.

    [email protected]

    To get a overview of the entire neoliberal armed robbery of the Ukraine go here for starters. Start at the start and you will know a lot about the whole situation.

  25. Fran says:

    “Everyone knows that politicians and government spokespeople are paid to lie for a living in support of what they perceive to be the national interest.”

    It’s a huge problem for credibility – one must assume that information is being manipulated or disinformation disseminated, because they have been caught doing it endlessly. Even if it turns out that something is true, it’s not because they are truthful – merely that the truth, as do lies, happened in an instance to serve their purposes.

    The very obvious lying makes it seem that their entire program is one of deception.

    The “national interest” seems to mean “economic benefits” accruing to an elite.

  26. Query: were the black boxes analyzed in Kiev? How did Lysenko get the information? How very convenient.

    He was told it by the Brits/Dutch, obviously. Anyway, the pattern of holes found on part of the nose section of the plane already confirmed that shrapnel damage must have downed the plane.

    Sorry, Mr Unz, but you should stick to writing about what you know; you’re going to end up looking very silly!

    • Replies: @Hunsdon
  27. Matra says:

    1. Yes, Wikipedia’s current version implies that its unconfirmed whether the social media account that took credit actually belongs to the rebel leader in question.

    “Strelkov’s Dispatches” (Svodki Strelkova Igora Ivanovicha) at the VKontakte social media site (itself controlled by Kremlin insiders Alisher Usmanov and Igor Sechin) was used as the main source for breaking news by the Russian media itself, usually followed by a more polished official statement later by Strelkov. Russian media, including all the major newspapers and TV channels considered the site reliable throughout June and July including the period right after the shoot down of MH17 without as far as I can tell any complaints from Strelkov’s “government”. After it became clear they had shot down a passenger airline they erased their claim of responsibility which unfortunately for them was recorded. At that point the Russian side claimed that this unofficial site, which had been accurate as far as the Russian media (and pro-Russian bloggers and tweeters) were concerned for the past six weeks, was suddenly, and very conveniently, deemed too unofficial and unreliable to take seriously!

    • Replies: @Hepp
  28. Hepp says:

    Matra, can you confirm this? Do you have screenshots of, for example, RT taking Strelkov’s VKontakte page as a reliable news source and then claiming that it was fake? If so, that would be a smoking gun.

  29. Hunsdon says:
    @Ronald Thomas West

    The question was mostly rhetorical. At the time Lysenko made his announcement—-repeated around the world—-there was no way he could have known what the black boxes would report. Yet his assertion was picked up and broadcast around the world. As I say, mighty convenient. As an editor at my high school newspaper, I would have asked, “OK, so where did he get this information?”

  30. Robard says:

    Though I haven’t seen this theory mentioned anywhere, it could be that Strelkov simply assumed yet another downing of a transport plane by his side and blindly claimed responsibility. Since the rebels don’t have planes and since they likely didn’t have an operational BUK system capable of downing airliners it would have been a most logical assumption.

  31. Ron Unz says:

    Another very detailed analysis of the MH17 evidence by a leftist journalist one week ago. Offhand it seems reasonably persuasive to me:

  32. Hepp says:

    One thing people here need to realize: Not everything is like HBD

    What do I mean by that?

    Well, when it comes to HBD issues, you can read a random blogger and have more knowledge about the world than someone with PhDs in sociology and economics. Questions of fact related to foreign policy are not like that.

    Perhaps Ukrainian and American intelligence did shoot down MH17, but if the Official Story is wrong, we’re not going to find out thanks to some random blogger. We’ll maybe find out after half a century when files get declassified and historians devoted full time to the issue reach such a conclusion.

    Unless the Official Story doesn’t pass the smell test (like HBD denialism), you should generally believe it. Rebels accidentally shooting down the plane makes a lot more sense than some conspiracy that requires a lot of coordination and has no motive (why not just put sanctions on Russia anyway?).

  33. Kiza says:

    Do some commentators really think they should be taken seriously?

    Here is Hepp in a summary: what NYT (Pravda) publishes is a fact, what Russian Government says is a lie. The NYT has been caught lying so many times that the space here is not enough (start from Iraq WMD), the Russian Government has not been caught lying. Therefore, Hepp, keep believing the US Ministry of Truth, this is really a personal choice.

    Here is Bossel: “Su-25 aircraft are simply not capable (not realistically, anyway) to down the Boeing Airliner at 10000 m. The most realistic scenario is still accidental downing of the airliner by some (drunken?) separatists.” Therefore, Bossel, it is all Russian propaganda but you are a military expert who knows better than the Russians what their plane from Soviet times is capable of. Maybe you are at that alcohol level which makes people write such drivel.

    Ron expressed a personal opinion. I have done the same on Friday morning after the event that both scenarios are possible: a US false-flag to get more EU sanctions on Russia or an out of control Russian officer in Ukraine. But, if it was not clear Whodoneit, it was totally clear who benefits it. Even a beginner criminal investigator would start from the question: Cui Bono. Here, Ron highlights that in the screaming propaganda department, the US has been the leader, whilst in the facts department Russia has been the leader. But Russian evidence is quite inconclusive. Also, as Sean points out some of the very important evidence under the control of the US stooges in Ukraine is still missing: the Air Traffic Control tapes. Further, the Russians have challenged the US to provide images from the satellites which were above Ukraine at the time. But the US response has been the usual BS: “we would have to kill you if we were to show you; just trust us”. In summary, we have a flood of unsubstantiated statements from the US and a few inconclusive facts from Russia about this horrible event.

    I am pretty sure that we will never know for sure Whodoneit. But we know that the US has already gained the full benefit – driven a big wedge by EU sanctions against Russia and the Russian counter-sanctions. This event will now mostly disappear from the media, except for occasional warm up, for example when a doctored report comes out of UK analysis of the black boxes. As people asked, why did Malaysia Airlines not deliver them straight to the CIA?

  34. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    I’m with Hepp on this one. You don’t have to be a fan of Russian baiting or U.S. foreign policy to believe the most obvious explanation. I’ve worked with both Ukrainian and the U.S. governments–neither is competent enough to orchestrate the conspiracy this would require.

    Here’s a good rundown of the social media evidence:
    Too many independent images with step-by-step analysis from too many independent sources to believe this went down any other way than the consensus story.

  35. ” I’ve worked with both Ukrainian and the U.S. governments–neither is competent enough to orchestrate the conspiracy this would require.”

    Yet competent enough to accomplish regime change with $5 billion, in which conspiracy neocon Nuland-Kagan was caught in flagrante delicto.

    It’s true that these operations are never entirely predictable in their consequences, except they are always negative in the eventual blowback.

    Maybe they thought it was Putin’s plane and the rebels would be blamed for that – and Putin considered to have received rough justice. Gessen, Kerry’s favorite, has been quite open about the official aim of regime change in Russia and the dismantling of Russia into weak western-controlled satrapies. At which point they see Snowden falling into their hand like a rotten fruit. The rhetoric is at least as heated as that against Fidel Castro, whom covert operatives were directed to assassinate, and whose government is still the target for externally sponsored regime change ops.

  36. Joe says:

    I googled it. Here’s India Times from this Monday. Looks like the analysis is taking a loong time.

    “Dutch air crash investigators said Monday they expect to release an initial report into what brought down flight MH17 over Ukraine with the loss of 298 lives “‘in a few weeks’”.

  37. Joe says:

    Unless the Official Story doesn’t pass the smell test (like HBD denialism), you should generally believe it.

    Your opinion. And I seriously doubt you actually believe that nonsense. You need to read about the Pentagon Papers and Daniel Ellsberg.

    Besides, the Ukie/US story is no more official than the Rebel/Russian story. The Russian MH-17 presentation was way more professional than anything coming out of Kiev or the White house. I’m sorry, but seeing uniformed Senior Russian Officers with a room full of monitors showing plane and satellite paths is far more convincing than a twatterpated White House wannabee blond bubblehead babbling about twitter and social media.

    On a “where’s the beef” scale, I put the Russians at 9, and the US/Ukie Gov at 1. Or perhaps a little lower, like -1 because there’s no meat at all, just hot air.

    Rebels accidentally shooting down the plane makes a lot more sense than some conspiracy that requires a lot of coordination and has no motive (why not just put sanctions on Russia anyway?).

    True. But Ukie BUK units accidentally shooting down the plane makes even more sense. It’s FACT that the Ukies have 5 BUK REGIMENTS, and everyone knows they’re not well trained. ‘’.

    On the other hand, there’s no concrete evidence whatsoever that the rebels have a BUK unit or the training to use it. Just speculation, hearsay, and twitter.

    There are several indicators that your “Official Story” is bogus. First, a real investigation would intensely scrutinize those that are known to have lots of BUKs in the area: the Ukie military. But the US/Ukie “Official Story” never goes there. That possibility is off limits, we get just the dead silence of omission. The omission speaks volumes. And omission is another word for LIE. Second, the US/Ukie Gov has not presented proper radar or satellite data to back up their allegations, or to rebut the Russians. They impounded the air-traffic controller tapes. And the Black Box analysis results are still not available. Third, the general tone of the US/Ukie rhetoric is far more nasty and unreasonable than the Russian/Rebel responses, which is a good example of the old adage “Argument weak – Shout!” Never trust somebody that has to shout in your face to make their case.

    Honestly, at this point, the US/Ukie narrative is so broken that they will probably never recover. But they don’t seem to care, they have total control of the media.

    (why not just put sanctions on Russia anyway?).

    Because it only hurts people, and it will fail in the long run.

  38. Ross says:

    Hepp is spot on in all his comments so far.

    After the Russians claimed that a Ukrainian Sukhoi SU-25 was in the vicinity- a plane which can’t get within 10000 feet of the height MH17 was traveling at- the Wikipedia article for the plane suddenly underwent a lot of editing by mysterious people seeking to claim that it could go that high.

    I’m amazed that anyone is still promoting the Ukrainian fighter theory.

    • Replies: @MarkU
  39. Hunsdon says:

    He was told it by the Brits/Dutch, obviously.

    Hunsdon said: The Dutch denied it.

    The results, given today by Ukrainian security official Andriy Lysenko, have, however, left Dutch officials stunned as they did not expect the “premature” announcement.

    Mr Lysenko told a news conference that the fragments had come from a rocket blast.

    His source however, is under scrutiny after the Dutch Safety Board (DSB) confirmed they did not give the information to Ukraine.

    DSB spokeswoman Sara Vernooij told The Independent: “I can’t make a comment on what source Mr. Lysenko has.

  40. Anonymous • Disclaimer says: • Website

    The only group that has the motive, means and opportunity to deliberately down Malaysian Airlines flight MH17 is Ukraine.

    Analysis of the wreckage and evidence to date indicates that the MH17 was shot down by combat fire from a Ukrainian fighter jet. The cockpit shows signs of 3omm bullet holes and damage to the top of the left wing which aligns up with the cockpit indicating that the plane was shot down from behind and on the same level as MH17.

    The odds are 75% that it was Ukraine forces and 25% pro Russian militants

    1. Why has Ukraine not provided copies of the Air Traffic Control data and tapes that were secured within hours of the planes demise.
    2. Why has Ukraine’s BUK missiles not been subject to a full independent forensic audit to determine is nay had been recently fired or missing? A BUK missile launch would leave trace elements on the ground and on the launcher..
    3. Why has the US not provided details from its satellite and military surveillance over the conflict zone in Ukraine ? A US Satellite was directly overhead at the time of the lane crash and there are military surveillance ships in the black sea monitoring the skies.
    4. Why was Fight MH17 redirected to fly over the conflict zone and why was it required to drop down to 10,000 meters within the operating altitude of Ukrainian fighter jets which were reported to be trailing the flight at the time.
    5. A BUK missile leaves behind a different pattern of destruction. It explodes within close distance to its target and sends out a ring of shrapnel. If this hit the plane from the forward direction then there would be shrapnel puncture marks all over the fuselage not just the cockpit.

    Normally I would think that such a suggestion would be preposterous but given Ukraine’s history and events of a provocateur sniper shooting protestors and police alike in February in Kyiv, the organized massacre of over 45 people in Odessa on May 2, the retaliatory slaughter of a Police station in Mariupol on May 8, the “legalization” of Right Sector Para military forming the “National Guard” and there attacks on civilian population in Eastern Ukraine a false flag would be within their means and agenda. It certainly has worked to data in their favor.

    The only other states that have shot down civilian Airlines in the past not as an act of terrorism is Ukraine in 2001 and the United states who shot done an Iranian Airliner flying over Iranian territory/air space.

  41. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    The propaganda from our western media extends fully into our own back yard here in the UK, with probably ‘The Guardian’ the only exception (partially).

    Having followed the arguments of the eastern and western shills on commentaries such as this from the beginnings of this crisis, I have, unfortunately, come to the view that an east/west clash is INEVITABLE, because put simply, that’s what the US wants.

    As has been the case with every single war the US has initiated since 1946, they will lose and, by the magic of the mainstream propagandists in the BBC, CNN, MSNBC, FOX, etc, etc, will turn ignominious defeat (most recently by a bunch of rag tag, AK47 wielding tribesmen in Afghanistan), into “mission accomplished” American style. Except, this time, there isn’t likely to be anyone left to make their case – if there are – I am pretty sure that the rest of us will be employing every streetlight left standing – Italian style.

    Americans are intellectually inferior to just about every nation on the planet who have a better than kindergarten system of education, so any appeal to common sense or based upon actual provable facts, will simply perish on the horns of American jingoism and rank stupidity. The neocons think they can win and they have convinced the “Whitehouse Fool” of this fallacy – God help us all.

  42. Mike Zwick [AKA "Dahinda"] says:

    With the possible exception of things like box scores, race results, and stock market tabulations, there is no such thing as Objective Journalism. The phrase itself is a pompous contradiction in terms.

    Hunter S. Thompson

  43. Kiza says:

    “(why not just put sanctions on Russia anyway?)”

    This is one of the most stupid statements/questions I have read here.
    Firstly, it is the Government (here US Gov) which decides, whilst it is businesses which lose the income, thus only a government employee would think that applying sanctions is like pressing a button (or like Nike’s Just Do It).
    Second, the USG has already applied most of its sanctions.
    Third, the bilateral trade between the EU and Russia is more than 10x the trade between US and Russia. The target of this potential false flag would have been the former – getting EU to apply sanctions on Russia which would cost EU hundreds of thousands of jobs (and similar in Russia). Which EU country government could have applied such costly sanctions in the middle of catastrophic unemployment without a “smoking gun” which came in the form of screaming propaganda from USUK?

  44. voicum says:

    MR Hepp, it seems to me,given your ‘analitical skills’ that you,eminently,can not afford to loose the ,proverbial,30 IQ points. It would put you in negative territory.

  45. MarkU says:

    If the Russians were lying it would have been just as easy and far more logical to invent the presence of an SU-27 or a Mig-29.

  46. Bill says:

    Unless the Official Story doesn’t pass the smell test (like HBD denialism), you should generally believe it.

    What gets to count as the official story? Bound Congressional/Administrative branch reports? Tweets from the guy who happens to be the US ambassador in Kiev? Which entities’ reports should we grant this belief to? Is it only the US government’s story which counts as “the official story?” If the “official story” of two different institutions are different, for example, which do I believe and why?

    By the way, what *is* the US official story? I don’t notice that there actually is one. You get these spastic accusations, sometimes via irregular channels, backed up by nothing–or by twitter– from the State Department. Then you get these contradictory leaks (to Robert Parry) by intelligence sources. Tangentially, if we had a real media, it might currently be investigating the nature of the institutional infighting between State and, well, whoever is feeding Parry. DIA? CIA?

    Ok, let’s say that the governments of Russia and the West all cancel each out, and reject anything that comes from a government.

    What’s left as a source of information?

    But they don’t cancel each other out. The US has provided accusations. Kiev has provided accusations and lies. The only piece of evidence against the Novorussians at this point is a tweet. Which could be, you know, a mistake or the result of a hack (I know, another conspiracy theory. The NSA doesn’t really exist and Stuxnet is a rumor).

    How do lawyers/courts handle this, evaluating the credibility of witnesses? One way is to inquire as to whether the witness is an habitual liar. Are the US government and its media habitual liars? As you admit, on race they are. How about on foreign policy? Did we get reasonably accurate information out of these people on Iraq? On Syria? Remember those Kuwaiti incubators? Do we get honest descriptions of what the Kiev junta is like out of Washington? There are more. The US government and its media seem like deeply and persistently dishonest institutions to me.

    The Kiev junta? They have been caught in numerous lies. BUK 312, for example. Maybe the Russian government and media are similarly dishonest, but it would be nice to get actual evidence of that, rather than these childish “you can’t believe them, they’re Ruskis!”

    How about cui bono? That’s another principle used to assess the veracity of stories people tell. the US/Kiev side benefited from the shoot-down. The US is desperate to portray the Russians as dangerous, impulsive, violent, and unpredictable. (No matter how false and full of projection this portrayal is) The shoot-down helped with that.

    How about who acts with an evidently guilty mind? The Russian side has consistently called for and cooperated with an investigation of the shoot-down. The US/Kiev side has jumped to conclusions and blocked the investigation, up to and including violating a UN cease-fire resolution. The black boxes were promptly turned over by the Novorussians. And they have fallen into a black hole, with the Dutch investigation already missing one deadline for reporting and now saying first week of September—notice, you don’t have to believe the Dutch are “in on it:” the delay was caused by Kiev. A cease fire was agreed, and a UN resolution gotten to protect the evidence at the crash site. Immediately afterwards the Kiev junta launched a major offensive (still ongoing) directly at the crash site, preventing access. The Dutch crash investigators have returned to Holland without visiting the site as a result.

    Why is the US government sharing none of their undoubtedly extensive information? Why did the Kiev junta take air traffic control information and disappear it? Why has Kiev not explained the diversion of MH17 from its normal flight path into the combat area? Why is it that the only party to release real data is Russia?

    How about deportment and demeanor? Can anyone honestly say they find John Kerry a credible witness? Jen Psaki? Obama? Why would anyone believe these people? Contrast Putin and Lavrov who have been sober, reserved, reasonable, and calm throughout.

    • Replies: @Hunsdon
  47. @Hepp

    That’s a great point. The evidence for HBD is overwhelming, but going heterodox on that issue makes people more likely to go heterodox on other issues that might not deserve it. I regularly make a conscious effort to uncorrupt my mind from the corruptions I unintentionally start to accept from reading this corner of the web.

    Looking at the commenting histories of many of the commenters in this thread, it seems likely they’re either nationalistic Russians or working out of a Russian commenting mill.

    (A message to Russians: I want Russia and the West to be allies. They’re both going to be swallowed by the rest of the world (China, the Islamic Caliphate, Africa, etc.), and their internecine rivalry has helped destroy them both (the Soviet war in Afghanistan, the Rhodesian Bush War, etc.).

    • Replies: @Hunsdon
  48. Hunsdon says:

    Privet, govorit’ Vladimir Vladimirovich. (Hello, this is Vladimir Vladimirovich.)
    Tovarisch Vladimir Vladimirovich, menya poimali. (Comrade Vladimir Vladimirovich, they have caught me.)
    Nesmotrya na to, chto ya pishu po-angliskii, uznali, kak-to, chto ya sam russki. (Despite the fact that I write in English, they have, somehow, discovered that I am Russian.)
    Vozvryazhaisya na rodinu, Khunzdon. Tvoya rabota sdelena tam. (Return to the Motherland, Hunsdon. Your work there is done.)

  49. @Hepp

    The more I think about it, the more likely it seems that it was the rebels who accidentally shot it down. This explanation is not totally watertight, there is some room for doubt, but generally this is the simplest and most plausible explanation.

  50. Kiza says:

    On Friday morning after the event, before writing here on UNZ, in my thoughts I put myself into MH17. I have flown many times on Malaysia Airlines (very polite cabin staff who are instructed to chitchat with passengers, to establish a social contact, to make you feel more than just a passenger). I could have been on MH17. I heard about the event on the morning radio show from an almost screaming anglo-catholic Australian Prime Minister, a man for who it would take a microscope to find that single working brain cell. This is the guy who about 7 hours after the event was screaming his head off how Russkie’s did it, obviously because his US masters told him so. My thought was how much disrespect this Australian regime shows to the victims, which I could have been, by instrumentilising the death of passengers for propaganda and political purposes. But I also thought: “He must have some clear evidence to be so sure!”. I was not counting on the regime-changing US ambassador to Ukraine publishing ‘evidence’ on Twitter, which is then taken by the Western media and published as fact, which is then taken by the brainwashed zombies and quoted online (here) as fact. Is this what is called “fact” now? The said PM later started calling for an investigation (obviously instructed by his minders), but his first reaction contained a shocking amount of hate. There are several mad-hatters like this Ossie PM inside leadership of anglo countries (neocons etc), which suggests a good chance for a war. I am not Russian, but I note that there is definitely too much establishment hate against the Russians in the Anglo-countries; I do not know clearly why. Yet, I still believe in the (Westminster) political system to put brakes on this mad hate. I also believe that the US is not so crazy to start a shooting war which would end civilisation and that the US plan is to economically strangulate Russia, to then impose leadership change (which is still extremely risky, but a lesser evil). Because, if a shooting war is started by the US, then it is UK, Canada, Australia and New Zealand which will be fighting it, as always. And not much of them will be left to celebrate the win.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  51. Wow. This article packs a heck of a punch. Bravo!

    I shall be sharing it on my Facebook timeline, for what little that is worth.

  52. @Hepp: you’re actually wrong about “50 second youtube segments.” RT published an almost 30 minute long Russian briefing on the subject with radar screens and everything.

    As for the social media evidence, I’m a lot more convinced by the Russian presentation than something that was allegedly posted on VKontakte. They used facts and figures, and I caught no obvious lies about the military systems in question, though they were certainly implying things I consider unlikely.

    I actually do not agree with the idea that an Su-25 may have shot down MH17, and have written an article on my blog saying so (with tremendous arguments in the comments). On the other hand, I agree with Ron here that the US media has presented nothing but the sheerest US propaganda (as bad as the Russians; maybe worse), and could care less about facts. I think it’s likely it was the separatists who made a mistake. However, it is also somewhat likely that the Ukrainian military made a mistake. They have done so in the past. If there was an Su-25 in the region, it seems the most likely scenario is the separatists were aiming at that. Military planes have ECM which could make this happen.

    As for a false flag operation, I guess anything is possible, but our government/media axis seems to need no help demonizing the Rooskie. They’ve been setting us up for war with them for the last 2 years, starting with the Sochi olympics. Please insert pomeranian grenadier quotes here, and notice that Biden’s son now works for a Ukrainian energy company. This latter fact is completely disgusting, but you would need to read wingnut and Russian websites to notice.

    Whatever actually happened: the US media has provided us with no facts. The US government says they know that the separatists did it, but the evidence they’ve thus far presented has been baloney. If they have satellite photos: they should publish them, just like they did with the overflight photos during the Cuban missile crisis back when the US government still had some shred of credibility. “Trust us” doesn’t work after Snowden.

    • Replies: @François Labelle
  53. Kiza’s take sure was enlightening. But wait Anglo-catholic is t.s. Eliot is prime minister of Australia? Oh no you mean catholic, but catholic bashing isn’t enough for one post so you have to squeeze the Anglo in there to add a little punch.

    Here’s a tip if your post is going to be as bombastic as yours is, never criticize someone else’s anger. it kind of looks like projection. If I had to guess your chin has been specked with far more spittle of rage than Tony Abbott’s.

    One more thing tony Abbott is a Rhodes scholar. In other words he’s far smarter than any man who has ruled Russia since at least Lenin. He’s also certainly smarter than you.

  54. Kiza says:

    @Sam Haysom
    It reads like I touched a bit of a raw nerve there, does it not?

    Wow, Australian PM is a Rhodes Scholar, that must be something very enlightened, maybe one step below God (who is an Englishmen, of course). I stated Abbott’s Anglo-Catholic state of mind as opposed to Anglican because in some places in the world they call such individuals the Inbetweeners. Sort of Henry VIII but with only one firing brain cell. Obviously, the Russians are not so blessed by this Englishman God of Sam’s to have such leader with the colonial Englishman’s education. So they have to stick with their own miserable education, whilst drunk, stupid, living in squalor (drunk enough to shoot planes out of the sky). This is what the oh so bright colonial Englishmen in fishnet stockings learn in their enlightened Hogwarts education under Rhodes Scholarships.

    BTW, the political system in Australia, although modelled after the British Westminster system, is much more like the US One-Party-Two-Names system. Australia desperately needs one Neil Farage of UK. The Liberal Party currently in power exhibits the total moral and mental decline characteristic of the rest of the Anglo-sphere. The other ‘party’, called the Labour Party is just the same. The current Prime Minister is a mean version of the Calif Haroun El Plassid, whilst his eternal challenger Iznogoud ( has the name Malcolm Turn-bull (not kidding you). The PM is short a few pennies in the brains department, his foreign minister Julie Bishop is a female version of him, but the most interesting member of the gang is this Grand Vizier Iznogood Turn-bull who wants to be the Calif instead of the Calif. He is not so stupid but is one of the biggest crooks this country has ever had. The new laws that this gang of morons and crooks is introducing now, by this time next year could lend me in jail for writing a comment such as this. Also, through funding cuts and sackings this gang in power has established total thought control over the national broadcaster ABC, which has now become a eunuch toeing the government line just like the British BBC, which the ABC was modelled after.

    Therefore, Australia is just 1/2 step behind the US and UK in the “development” backwards, drifting into totalitarianism. Some individuals here obviously welcome this.

  55. yrjo says:

    What to call Ukrainian citizens who resist a US-financed coup? So many choices: the Resistance, insurgents, rebels, pro-Russian rebels, separatists. So what does Hepp decide to use? “Russian rebels”!

    • Replies: @reiner Tor
  56. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Is this simply more diversion until the gathering since there is nothing else happening in the world news. Is it merely blowback against Russia for stalling the Syrian collapse? There has been substantial success in clearing a wide swath around Israel. And the gathering. I think the time has come to eliminate the Islamic private army that has been used to destroy a good chunk of the Middle East. It is a marvelous plan to create a new Caliphate and call everyone home in time for the short road to heaven. I also wonder about another, more insidious action. The development of the New World Order has always been an Eurocentered program. I wonder if the US military industrial group has finally realized that there is no room for perpetual war in the NWO and that their job is about to disappear. Could we be watching the Americans trying to replace the Europeans as the gatekeepers? It will be ugly.

  57. yrjo says:

    Bossel says an Su-25 aircraft, even if modified, could not shoot down a Boeing Airliner at 10,000 m. He really can’t believe that. He thinks the most realistic scenario is that Eastern Ukrainians, perhaps drunk, accidentally shot it down.

  58. Yea you hit a nerve like a crying baby on a plane hits a nerve. I have nothing but pity for you. So much anger and frustration so little agency.

  59. schmenz says:

    But, Hepp: is this not just an instant replay of Iraq? Only a tiny fraction of people/countries were opposed to it while all the media/corporate/political/US satraps were gung ho to get the war going. This Ukrainian business is looking very much like the same thing.

    As for evidence I would say this to the US government investigators: “Russia has released their evidence. Now it’s your turn”.

    • Replies: @reiner Tor
  60. jjc says:

    The Maidan sniper attacks offer a preview for what will become of the investigation into the downed airplane. The attacks were the central event which allowed for, and justified, the ensuing coup – as the culpability and responsibility of the sitting Yanukovych regime for the shocking violence was loudly trumpeted. However, there was very little concrete detail and a distinct lack of urgency to an actual investigation. Weeks afterward, a German documentary program went to Kiev to see what could be determined, and they found that most if not all the shooting came from a building which was entirely in the control of the extreme nationalist groups who became central to the coup itself.

    Later, in May, the official Kiev prosecutor charged with what passed as the official investigation held a press conference during which he conceded that his work also showed that most if not all the gunfire came from a building entirely under the control of the extreme nationalist groups. He then announced that the investigation was wrapping up and that the ultimate identity of the snipers would never be known and would forever be a mystery. A concurrent investigation, run by an extreme nationalist leader who was now in the new government, insisted that the snipers were a Russian Special Forces team – although how they could have gotten into the building or even afterwards escape was not addressed.

    • Replies: @Seamus Padraig
  61. @yrjo

    And what’s wrong with that? They are native Russian speakers. They also more or less want their part of the country to belong to Russia. Whatever their nominal nationality, they are clearly of Russian ethnicity. So why not call them ‘Russian rebels’?

    • Replies: @yrjo
    , @yrjo
  62. @schmenz

    Iraq was a bit different. At least here in Europe, many of the MSM were opposed to it, and reported that the whole issue was a farce.

    On the other hand, these were leftist publications. Now they hate Putin just as much as the neocons or the paleocons with cold war nostalgia. So it’s perfectly possible that all the components of the MSM (neocons – they hate Russians, nostalgic cold warriors – ditto, the European Left – ditto) are anti-Russian and hence are in on it against the Russians.

    Still, the anti-Russian consensus is much broader than it had been in the case of Iraq.

  63. Tim says:

    Try this: the Ukrainians, having lost aircraft in the area recently, deliberately redirect the airliner into the combat zone in the hope that the rebels will shoot it down and attract condemnation by the international community. The rebels take the bait. The competing propaganda machines then start flinging as much mud as possible to conceal their culpability.

    Has anyone come up with a plausible explanation for the change in course? If you redirect an airliner to the place it gets shot down, you have some explaining to do. This combined with the disappearing ATC tapes stinks to high heaven.

    • Replies: @reiner Tor
  64. @Tim

    Is there credible evidence for the change in course? Neither the Malaysians nor the Russians seem to be pressing this, it appears to have been a false rumor or deliberate misinformation thrown into the confusion in the hours after the catastrophe, and nobody seems to have followed up on it. Does anybody know how the flight radar websites work, if we can still replay data from mid-July?

  65. eah says:

    BBC: The military in Ukraine has said that separatists have shot down a government fighter jet near the rebel-held city of Luhansk in the east of the country.

    Uh-huh, “separatists” my ass. Probably bored with shooting down civilian airliners, it looks like the Ukrainians have started shooting down their own warplanes. That could get expensive.

  66. VincentT says:

    Here is part of a memo issued by a group of former U.S. intelligence professionals (VIPS). It is posted on Larry Johnson’s No Quarter USA blog. Johnson was in the CIA Directorate of Intelligence and was Deputy Director in the U.S. State Department’s Office of Counter Terrorism.

    MEMORANDUM FOR: The President

    FROM: Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS)

    SUBJECT: Intelligence on Shoot-Down of Malaysian Plane

    Executive Summary

    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)
    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.”

    Rad the rest here:

    • Replies: @reiner Tor
  67. @VincentT

    That is interesting stuff.

  68. Ron, I could have warned you that your unfortunate foray into MH17 denialism was going to draw in the tinfoil hat brigade. But they’re all using pseudonyms. You’ve put your real name to this nonsense. It sucks to be you right now!

    • Replies: @Ron Unz
    , @Hunsdon
  69. Ron Unz says:

    A leading benefit of this website is the wide variety of commenters it attracts, ranging from highly informative to the apparently demented.

    For example, regarding Flight MH17, I’ve now discovered two very long analyses, purporting to debunk the Official Story, one by a leftist journalist and the other by a commenter who claims to have an intelligence background:

    Both of these accounts are extremely detailed and seem reasonably persuasive to me, though others might surely disagree. Even more importantly, I’ve now discovered that a group of former American intelligence agents has issued a public statement sharply critical of our government’s claims on MH17:

    Given I’d devoted almost no time or effort to investigating MH17, I find all this new information very helpful, and hope that others will as well.

    Meanwhile, we also have commenter “FirkinRidiculous” now expressing enormous concern that I’ve fatally damaged my own credibility by even considering the ridiculous “tinfoil hat” conspiracy theories publicly advanced by all those former CIA, FBI, and NSA agents instead of simply assuming that the casual tweets of the nomanklatura of our American Regime are always 100% correct about everything.

    I remember a few years ago some government official whose name I forget expressed tremendous concern about the propagation of various “conspiracy theories” on the Internet, worried that they were making it difficult for the regime to control public opinion. As a remedy, he suggested the government hire people to go on websites and denounce them. The vacuous arguments of “FirkinRidiculous” are so “furkin’ ridiculous” I’d almost suspect he was one of those minimum-wage government anti-conspiracy trolls. Except that when I clicked on his name and looked at his previous comments, I immediately discovered that he’d also claimed that HIV doesn’t cause AIDS, which would surely get him immediately kicked off the government payroll:

    If I’ve been totally misled by the NYT+WSJ+MSM, and the HIV-AIDS connection really is another ridiculous “tinfoil hat” conspiracy theory, my humble apologies.

    • Replies: @reiner Tor
  70. michael says:
    @Ron Unz

    That is unfair, Ron. Hepp did not deny the notion that all the Western entities might be lying; his point was merely that it is more likely that it is a single entity, the Russian Government that is lying rather than an orchestrated, coordinated lie on the part of several Western entities. Not an unfair point, wouldn’t you agree?

    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    , @Anonymous
  71. @Ron Unz

    I remember a few years ago some government official whose name I forget expressed tremendous concern about the propagation of various “conspiracy theories” on the Internet, worried that they were making it difficult for the regime to control public opinion. As a remedy, he suggested the government hire people to go on websites and denounce them.

    I think you remember Cass Sunstein‘s proposal, which seems to be even more sinister. Apparently they wanted to infiltrate those groups to harm their credibilities. This could mean that they would promote totally insane theories instead of possible theories. I think 911 is the best example of that.

    I often fail to understand how on Earth is it possible that the most credible 911 conspiracy theory (a US government agency and/or Mossad provided some help to a bunch of Arab terrorists to get into the US without being arrested, knowing well that they were planning a huge terrorist attack, and then the Arabs hijacked four airplanes and crashed two of those planes into the WTC and one into the Pentagon, with the fourth crashing after the passengers stormed the cockpit) is not at all widespread, while crazy conspiracy theories (the cruise missile theory of the Pentagon, the controlled demolition theory of WTC, the remote controlled planes theory) are all very well known (but most people with half a brain will notice that these theories are bunk), and there are even huge websites dedicated to totally insane theories (the craziest I’ve ever read was that there were no planes at WTC, only “holograms”).

    So why is it that of the possible conspiracies, only the totally insane versions have dozens of dedicated major websites, but the only theory which even a rational person could find persuasive does not even exist? At least I’ve never bumped into websites claiming that the official story is true, except that the Arabs would not have gotten visas or would have been arrested or would not have been allowed to board those planes etc. if not for the help they received from some invisible places. Is it possible? Yes. Is it likely? I don’t know. But how on Earth are there no promoters of this theory, unlike the controlled demolition and cruise missile theories?

  72. VincentT says:

    Here’s another guy, Col. W. Patrick Lang (ret., U.S. Army Special Forces), who doesn’t buy the line of BS coming from D.C. and Brussels on the Malaysian Airlines shot down. Google his name, he’s a superstar in geopolitical/military analysis.
    Some bio: Lang is a retired senior officer of U.S. Military Intelligence and U.S. Army Special Forces (The Green Berets). He served in the Department of Defense both as a serving officer and then as a member of the Defense Senior Executive Service for many years. He was Professor at the United States Military Academy at West Point. In the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) he was the “Defense Intelligence Officer for the Middle East, South Asia and Terrorism,” and later the first Director of the Defense Humint Service.” For his service in DIA, he was awarded the “Presidential Rank of Distinguished Executive.”

    23 July 2014

    Once again the USG is fabricating casus belli

    “WASHINGTON (AP) — Senior U.S. intelligence officials said Tuesday that Russia was responsible for “creating the conditions” that led to the shooting down of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17, but they offered no evidence of direct Russian government involvement.

    The intelligence officials were cautious in their assessment, noting that while the Russians have been arming separatists in eastern Ukraine, the U.S. had no direct evidence that the missile used to shoot down the passenger jet came from Russia. “


    Iraq in 2003, Syria last year, Russia now. The US government has become a machine for manufacturing falsehoods based on half truths, whole untruths and political agenda.

    There does not seem to be any difference in the desire to do this between the two major US political parties.

    The motivation for the desire to lie the public into an hysteric war frenzy is claimed to be a search for justice, etc., blah, blah…

    In fact the motive is apparent. It is the desire of the foreign policy clique in the academy, government and media to maintain its imagined imperial supremacy in the world and any lie will do if the lie contributes to that goal. pl

    • Replies: @Hepp
  73. Hepp says:

    “WASHINGTON (AP) — Senior U.S. intelligence officials said Tuesday that Russia was responsible for “creating the conditions” that led to the shooting down of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17, but they offered no evidence of direct Russian government involvement.

    The intelligence officials were cautious in their assessment, noting that while the Russians have been arming separatists in eastern Ukraine, the U.S. had no direct evidence that the missile used to shoot down the passenger jet came from Russia. “

    Doesn’t that argue against the conspiracy? Which is it? Is the US government trying to blame Russia, or is it being honest by not going beyond what the evidence suggests? If you hate the American government and need to blame it for all problems in the world, then I guess it looks bad no matter what.

    • Replies: @Hunsdon
  74. VincentT says:

    @ Hepp

    The part you posted is from the AP article which Col. Lang used– and highlighted (bolded) key phrases– to base his criticism on. See the phrases Col. Lang bolded.

    I’ll let your comment about me hating the American government slide.

    • Replies: @Hepp
  75. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Google “Cass Sunstein conspiracy theories” for the government official you mention. His missus is Samantha Power, the US’s UN ambassador and advocate of the R2P (Responsibility to Protect) doctrine used to advance globalist objectives – in her favour, though, she once described Hillary Clinton as “a monster”.

  76. Hunsdon says:

    Hepp said: Doesn’t that argue against the conspiracy? Which is it? Is the US government trying to blame Russia, or is it being honest by not going beyond what the evidence suggests? If you hate the American government and need to blame it for all problems in the world, then I guess it looks bad no matter what.

    Hunsdon said: Hepp, elevate your game. The idea that there is a monolithic USG is as moronic as the idea that there is a monolithic Islam, or (back in the day!) monolithic communism. In any entity above the level of a sleeper cell, there are factions who differ in their goals, approaches, tactics, training and methods. Let us look at only a single element of US intelligence: the CIA. Is the NCS always uniformly in agreement with the Intelligence Service? Is the Intelligence Service always of one mind?

    You want to spam that across the entirety of the United States Government? You want to assert that State (all of State) agrees with Commerce (all of Commerce) who agree with all of Defense (all of Defense)?

    Also, yes, ad-hominem attacks. If we question the official story, that means that we hate the United States government, and not only that, we regard it as the source of all evil in the world.

    How about some Twain, homey—or was he a commie-symp as well?

    Patriotism is supporting your country all the time, and your government when it deserves it.

    Once more—if my government releases evidence that supports their case (from the French or Italian sigint ships that were in the Black Sea at the time, or even air traffic control tapes from Kiev), I’ll be more than happy to evaluate them and reconsider my position.

    Didn’t Ronald Reagan get the laughs with the line, “I’m from the government, and I’m here to help you. Trust me.”

    • Replies: @Hepp
  77. Hunsdon says:

    FirkinRidiculous said: Ron, I could have warned you that your unfortunate foray into MH17 denialism was going to draw in the tinfoil hat brigade. But they’re all using pseudonyms. You’ve put your real name to this nonsense. It sucks to be you right now!

    Hunsdon translated: Ron, nice little website you’ve got there. Be a shame if anything happened to it . . . . .

  78. Hepp says:

    The part you posted is from the AP article which Col. Lang used– and highlighted (bolded) key phrases– to base his criticism on. See the phrases Col. Lang bolded.

    Yes, I’m aware. But then Col. Lang says the US is trying to create a casus belli, which is inconsistent with the measured tone he highlights. If they went through the trouble to kill 300 people, couldn’t they also manufacture some solid evidence to point to?

  79. Mark says:

    Who Shot Down Flight MH17 in Ukraine?
    Can anybody tell me one good motive why the Russians or separatists shot down MH17.
    There was no strategic, military sense doing it , and they should expect future propaganda against them by doing it .
    Why they would do that above their territory , that is absurd.
    Why Ukraine fighter planes were in the immediate vicinity of MH17 just before it was shot down Why did the Kiev take air traffic control information and disappear it? Why has Kiev not explained the diversion of MH17 from its normal flight path into the combat area?
    I think shooting of MH17 was smoke screen for fighting in Gaza, that was diversion from real problem.
    Why ICAO is not investigating black boxes , but United Kingdom ?
    Regarding news in western media , you kidding yourself. What western country can oppose USA propaganda?

  80. Hepp says:

    Hunsdon said: Hepp, elevate your game. The idea that there is a monolithic USG is as moronic as the idea that there is a monolithic Islam, or (back in the day!) monolithic communism.

    Right, which is why most conspiracies, which require a great deal of coordination and secrecy, are so absurd.

  81. yrjo says:
    @reiner Tor

    Why not call them ‘Russian rebels’?
    Because they are Ukrainian.
    And since they are rebelling against the rebels who deposed the elected president of Ukraine, perhaps Orthodox is a better word.
    Orthodox Ukrainians against the US-backed putsch.

  82. col says:
    @Ron Unz

    This is a get out card we did not give them this. But they did!

    I owe something to readers, first this what went down on flight MH17.
    June 02 – 06 Nato Electronic Aviation radar exercisers, where they practice jamming radio signals , spoofing and countermeasures against planes and missiles in Hungary Europe.
    See NATO schedule.
    Next see Telegraph UK and Daly Mail articles about loss of radar ie spoofing (A and C transpondersgo offline ) and planes from Civilian commercial aircraft radar. Note flimsy NATO denial.
    When Malaysian airlines MH 370 disappeared experts said maybe it shadowed anther Aircraft and went to Asia. The point is a aeroplane can hide behind anther or provide a shield.
    For several months the Ukraine Gov has been bombing select towns in Eastern Ukraine as well as moving troops with Large transport aircraft. Several fighter planes have been downed. All this is factual and nothing out of the ordinary. Fighter planes have properly used commercial aircraft as shield/or the airspace above 5 to 10km. Who wouldn’t id if your a fighter pilot. This was properly close by MH 17 and spoofing it;s electronic signal, with poorly trained missile operators it’s a accident wanting to happen. Oh, the level people in power will go. MH 17 was chosen
    For several week before the destruction of MH 17 rebels/freedom fighters/ pro Russian (these people were born in the Ukraine ,lived in the Ukraine and ARE Ukraine obtained Buk missiles. With reports they overtook a Ukraine arms depot.. As noted a crew is needed to launch said missiles.
    Q. Why when Separationists acquired Buk missiles and used them,
    airspace even over 10km was restricted/forbidden?
    A. So semi trained Separatist might think they are shooting down of Ukraine military aircraft.
    Ukraine Goverment’s despicable behaviour organised this accident to occur. MH 17 was chosen.

  83. @michael

    Michael (and Hepp), your point is a good point, but I would argue it’s not watertight. Some circles within the US government were lying about Iraq WMD, and the whole US government (even elements uncomfortable with it, like Colin Powell) went along with it. Not only that, 99% of the US media also. And even maybe 30-40% (possibly 50%) of the European media as well, and also many European governments, especially Eastern European governments, and also many governments around the world who wanted to get favors from the US. Even the governments that didn’t go along with it didn’t expose the lies, they just weaselly proposed “diplomatic solutions” to the nonexistent problem of Iraqi WMDs.

    The 60-70% (maybe just 50%) of the European media that didn’t go along with the WMD lies were mostly leftists. They are capable of going along more or less orchestrated lies and fake outrages, as the case of Ferguson amply demonstrates. The other 30-40% were strongly pro-US, so we shouldn’t be surprised that they are going along, and the same could be said of the US media and of the governments that also endorse US policies.

    So what needs to be explained is why leftist media outlets went along with it. The explanation is simple, anti-Russianism has a strong leftist (gay rights etc.) angle against the Evil White Conservative Putin.

    So while you do have a point, I wouldn’t overstate it.

    My personal take is that although it was the rebels, there’s more to the story than what we know. Either the Ukrainian Air Force was deliberately flying together with civilian airliners (a tactic about which reportedly the Russian rebels were complaining before – that of course could be later manufactured false rumor, just as the many social media “evidence” presented against the Russians), or some other tactics. I strongly suspect the Ukrainians weren’t 100% innocent in this, even if we leave out the negligence angle (not closing the airspace while conducting air operations against the rebels, who were known to be in possession of anti-aircraft missiles). And it’s strange why nobody’s asking questions about the lack of non-social media evidence. I would say basically 99% of the Western media doesn’t ask so basic questions. That is suspicious to me.

  84. Ken Smith says:

    There is a saying: “The first information to get out is often the truth”. This is because there is no time at this point to cook up a fake story.

    Strelkov made a tweet saying he shot down a Ukranian jet. Then the truth about the identity of the plane came out, and… he pulled it. In terms of the physical act we know who shot the plane down and we can ignore rambling analyses of who-shot-the-plane-down.

    NOW… that DOESN’T mean the Ukranian government had no responsibility. Perhaps it knew about the BUKs the rebels had but didn’t want the overflight money to disappear, so it didn’t restrict all air levels arund Donetsk and Hrabove/Grabovo. Maybe a leak or two can clarify this? THIS is what the Russkies should be looking for!

    • Replies: @Robard
  85. mulp says:

    When did desiring greater trade ties with Western Europe mean “pro-American”???

    When has anything European been “pro-American”?

  86. Robard says:
    @Ken Smith

    As I pointed out earlier, Strelkov could simply have made the claim based on blind assumption since (a) the rebels had been regularly shooting down military transporters and (b) the rebels don’t have any aircraft, therefore any downed aircraft would ipso facto be a Ukrainian one. His motive for making an unverified claim would simply have been to preserve the illusion of tight and co-ordinated action, especially if he himself had been taken by surprise at the news.

  87. 55,000 young American men dead because of the government lied about Gulf of Tonkin incident. 5,500 young American men and women dead because the government lied about WMD in Iraq.

  88. George V, wanting a war with Germany but with no reason to start it, told his foreign secretary Edward Grey: “You have got to find a reason, Grey.” In other words, a lie. And millions upon millions dead.

    “Over there, over there,
    Send the word, send the word over there
    That the Yanks are coming, the Yanks are coming …”

  89. I’m sure Ron will tell Hunsdon when the black helicopters start circling. This joker is beyond parody!

    • Replies: @Hunsdon
  90. JJC says:

    To clarify – Streikov did not have a Twitter account and the information attributed to him regarding a downed aircraft appeared via a third party who had been posting messages from the rebels. The origin of the message regarding the downed plane may have been from the rebels, but it also may not have been and therefore the removal of the message may appear sinister or else it may have been removed because it was fake. As evidence, it is at best sketchy – yet to some it remains a clincher.

    Russia today, at the UN Security Council, asked for results and a discussion over the official investigation into MH-17. Four weeks ago the Security Council drafted a very strongly-worded resolution demanding that all cooperation be given to this investigation. The Ukraine government has violated this resolution in that it has refused to halt its military operations, and investigators were only allowed limited access before they gave up and returned home.

  91. America’s nuclear weapons industry is huge and very profitable. Just a couple years ago, there was strong support to slash our weapon’s stockpile down to 1000 warheads, even Obama and Hagel, suggested this. Now with a new Cold War, there are demands to spend a trillion dollars to rebuild our entire arsenal.

  92. @ Hepp, #10

    Hepp said: “What’s more likely: The Russian government is lying? -or- The governments of every western country, all western media, the UN, and the OSCE are all lying?”

    That is a false dichotomy, Hepp. The proper question is: the Russian government is lying, or the U.S. government is lying? It’s not like other western governments, western media, the UN, and the OSCE have independent opinions or sources of truth; they all more or less just parrot the story served by the U.S. government, out of subservience, fear, opportunism, etc. It would be beyond naïve to believe that any of those entities you listed, all of which are dependent on the goodwill of U.S. government to various degrees, would dare to contradict the “official” story on a matter that doesn’t directly involve them.

    So we are down to only two independent actors: the U.S. government and the Russian government. Both of those can and would lie, of course. The question then becomes: cui bono? Others on this tread have demonstrated amply that the Russians have nothing to gain by downing MH17, but that the U.S. gov’t and their clients in Kiev have plenty to gain, i.e. turning the world opinion against Russia.

    • Replies: @Hepp
  93. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Well I am given to understand that the attack on MH17 was from behind the cockpit and from the rear. Both sides from below.The shell entry peeled back the cockpit cabin in opposite directions on each side.
    A sam missile explodes up and over in front of the target projecting the shrapnel from the front to the rear. No one witnessed a white exhaust trail from a sam .
    According to inspectors no projectile was found to have done this.
    There will be a Commission into the tragedy .
    But it will go the way of the 9\11 Commission.

  94. Kiza says:

    Here is something that the rumour mill brought. I repeat this is from a rumour mill, a friend of a friend of a friend and so on knows someone from the Russian establishment. Here is what the rumour brought:
    1) the East-Ukrainian rebels do have at least one BUK which they acquired when they overran some Ukrainian military facility in Eastern Ukraine
    2) they have used BUK to shoot down at least one Su25 and definitely one big transport plane flying above 15000 feet
    3) MH17 shootdown came as a surprise to the Russian military
    4) they believe (but not sure) that MH17 has been shot down by a Ukrainian interceptor (Su-27 or MiG29) which was shadowing the MH17 flight (flying in its larger radar shadow) by shooting a cannon at the cockpit (this would be a different plane than the Su25 mentioned in the Russian media briefing).

    My personal addition to this is that the identification of Su25 model appears to have been based on the intelligence about planes that Ukrainian military had operational, because a radar cannot tell Su25 from Su27 (except based on secondary info such as the speed and altitude reached). Just before MH17, the West-Ukrainian military did make a few interceptors operational, one MiG29 was just shot down by the rebels a few days ago.

    I do not expect this rumour will convince many, if anyone, but this is consistent with several facts:
    1) this is why the West-Ukrainians were attacking the crash site before the investigators could visit
    2) this is why the ATC recordings have disappeared
    3) the delay in analysing the black boxes
    4) the West-Ukrainians never admitted that the rebels had acquired their BUKs because then they would have to explain why they did not close the international airline corridor above the war zone, it was a much more convenient story that BUK came from Russia.

    Obviously, it is still possible that rebels did shoot down MH17 by mistake with their BUK. But, no matter which side you root for, it is blatantly obvious that MH17 should have never been flying over a military zone.

    • Replies: @Anon
  95. mennie says:

    The “leftist journalist” that you refer to writes under the pseudonym Eric Zuesse, calls himself an investigative historian, but is actually retired quality program manager Larry Cardo.
    You can see more of his articles here:
    It’s all one big rant against Obama.
    The man is only interested in discrediting the US government.

  96. Hunsdon says:

    1. The black helicopters are actually dark green. They appear black from a distance.
    2. Ron Unz does more commentary than breaking news.
    3. I’m no joker, although I do like to listen to the Steve Miller Band.
    4. We used to have a saying, If the law was on your side, pound on the law. If the facts were on your side, pound on the facts. If neither is on your side, pound on the table. Pound away! I am a clown! I am a buffoon! I am beyond parody!

    To reiterate: The Russian government has produced evidence questioning the official narrative regarding MH17. The United States government has made a series of unsupported assertions. NATO warships, including signals intelligence collection ships, were operating in the Black Sea when MH17 was shot down. Presumably data from these ships could illuminate the situation. (Was it a mistake to use the word illuminate? Illuminati! Bilderbergers! Rosicrucians!)

  97. Hepp says:
    @Mark Eugenikos

    That is a false dichotomy, Hepp. The proper question is: the Russian government is lying, or the U.S. government is lying? It’s not like other western governments, western media, the UN, and the OSCE have independent opinions or sources of truth; they all more or less just parrot the story served by the U.S. government, out of subservience, fear, opportunism, etc.

    I don’t agree. Many Western governments and international organization opposed the Iraq war, for example, despite the fact that the American government wanted it. Same with the US position on Israel. One can come up with other examples.

    • Replies: @reiner Tor
  98. @Hepp

    The Kosovo War was supported by both the left and the right, similarly to this Russian thingy. The reasons are the same.

    The European left (including leftist or left-liberal media and publications) is normally anti-American (except in the UK and a few other places, most notably the former communist countries, where the left is reflexively Atlanticist), but is pro-American when the Democrats are in power, e.g. Clinton or Obama. The European “right” (again, including its media) is normally Atlanticist (with some notable exceptions, see below), so they reflexively side with the Americans no matter what.

    The Iraq war was a special case, when the French right (which, contrary to most other right-of-centre political forces in Europe, is anti-American) was against a Bush administration in search of French gloire, but also the German left-of-centre government (under Schröder, who later turned out to probably have been bribed by Putin) emboldened by the stance of France, also set free its uneasiness about American cowboy politics.

    Now, however, we have an Atlanticist Germany and a leftist, not militantly anti-American France (where since Sarkozy the right has turned thoroughly Atlanticist), with an Atlanticist UK prime minister. So there is no major power to speak up against the Americans, and no major publications in major countries to speak up against it. The French are not very pro-American, but it would take militant anti-Americans to openly confront the Americans as liars.

    Some media outlets in Germany are speaking against the anti-Russian sentiment, but obviously they can only ask questions (e.g. why the rush to conclusions even before the investigation has started?), and have very little influence. But it also seems that Merkel doesn’t really want the sanctions and only goes along under heavy American pressure. Again, she doesn’t want to confront America, and calling the Americans liars would definitely be very confrontative, something for which nobody can find the courage. The situation would be much different if the whole European leftist media was anti-American, but as already explained, they are pro-Obama (and also pro-gay, which also means anti-Russian), so it is much more difficult for any politician to speak out against the Americans – Chirac at least had a temporary alliance with leftist publications on this issue.

    I should also add that much of the opposition by European governments to Iraq came in a weaselly way, proposing “further diplomatic solutions” to the nonexistent problem of Iraqi WMDs. There was very little public debunking of American lies by major politicians. Now, however, we still have many countries opposed to American policy, but since there is no major half-respectable Western media outlet (like The Guardian and others in the case of Iraq) speaking out the truth, the politicians are even more weaselly. Like the Hungarian and Slovakian prime ministers are grumbling against the sanctions hurting their economies, or France still wanting to sell the warships (or at least the first one of them) to Russia, etc.

    So I don’t quite see how Iraq disproves that there can be uniform media propaganda, when Iraq didn’t have one of the major prerequisites for such unity, namely a leftist American president, and the absence of an anti-American right-of-centre government in any of the major European powers. (The only example of the latter was France. Among small European countries, we have something similar in Hungary, although interestingly Orbán was an Atlanticist in his previous term in power 1998-2002.)

    • Replies: @HA
  99. @ reiner Tor, #110: I agree completely, that’s a great and nuanced analysis.

    @ Hepp, #108: I was specifically referring to the downing of MH17, since that is the subject of this article, not to everything under the Sun where the U.S. gov’t and other western gov’ts and organizations may differ. But since reiner Tor replied to your comments better than I would have, I have nothing to add.

  100. Marx says:

    Lost me at the end when you assert the commies took over the us govt.. delusional much?

  101. @HA

    Depends on your definition of “major power”. Italian GDP is maybe 20% smaller than French or even British GDP, and maybe 40% smaller than German GDP. Italy has no nuclear weapons, nor a permanent seat in the UN Security Council. Italy is also not very vocal in its opposition, unlike Chirac, who geared up anti-American rhetoric before the war. (His kindness was reciprocated.) I’m sure Italy has no clout to openly call the US a liar – something which not even Chirac ever did. Chirac talked about how Iraq’s nonexistent WMDs posed no “immediate” threat instead of telling the truth that probably Iraq didn’t have any such weapons. Again, any opposition to the Iraq war (even strongly worded opposition) was weaselly in that it never accused the US government of lying. Even though most world leaders must have known that Iraq possessed no WMDs.

    So what we have in the case of Italy is similar (albeit much less vocal) as the opposition to the Iraq war in France and Germany: grumbling against actions endorsed by the Americans, but not calling the US a liar.

    Anyway, since Hepp’s argument was that unlike Iraq, there is unity on Russia now, and my comment set out with the goal of explaining that difference, I think that your point about Italian opposition to sanctions only weakens Hepp’s argument, and strengthens the point of my comment, which was, to repeat, that there is still some weasel opposition to action against Russia, just not in a major power (France, UK, Germany), and not in the press (which is not true about some countries either, e.g. there is some reluctance in Hungarian conservative publications to go along with the American story, and also some parts of the German press also seem to entertain some doubts). The more examples like Italy you can find, the weaker Hepp’s argument will look.

    And just for the record, let me repeat that I personally still believe that it was the rebels who downed the plane, but I didn’t think Hepp’s argument was as watertight as he thought. With every week passing without an official report on the investigation, my doubts will grow, and I now seriously entertain the possibility that there’s something they are hiding – like Ukrainian warplanes flying close to MH17, using MH17 as a kind of “human shield”.

    • Replies: @HA
  102. HA says:
    @reiner Tor

    I have no problem with any of that, though I think investigations about plane crashes tend to be more lengthy than you apparently expect, even when a crash happens in a part of the world not being fought over, which is not the case here. Also, I would note that the sounding of the drums against Russia has so far risen to the level faint whisper in comparison with what we heard for Iraq. I have no problem with that, either, but that should be kept in mind when drawing analogies with that situation. Steve Sailer is fairly sensitive to pro-war sentiments, and so far he has featured a) the wife of the Polish foreign minister b) an NYT reporter who made his reputation reporting on Sarajevo and c) various low-level reporting connected with WWG, as he puts it, by the likes of Gessen. Even in comparison with the bomb-Syria faction, which thankfully went nowhere, that isn’t much of a war party, and the downing of the airliner hasn’t changed that.

    • Replies: @reiner Tor
  103. @HA

    I agree that a final conclusion cannot be released, but some preliminary findings, for example the pilots’ conversation to the tower, could be released basically immediately. We have the transcript for MH370 now, and people were complaining about the lack of information even with MH370. Obviously one doesn’t need to dot all the i’s and cross all t’s to release some preliminary results. It’s also not a complicated investigation like TWA800. After all, there’s not a great deal we don’t know here: it was shot down, end of story. The only things needed to be determined is what was used to shoot it down, who fired it, and what were the exact circumstances – was there really a Ukrainian warplane in the vicinity. (I wouldn’t rule out that there was one in the vicinity. I don’t think Ukrainians downed MH17, but I might think the Buk might have aimed at the Ukrainian plane – if indeed there was a Ukrainian plane, which is not impossible.)

    • Replies: @HA
  104. HA says:
    @reiner Tor

    “I agree that a final conclusion cannot be released, but some preliminary findings… could be released basically immediately.”

    I am not aware of a protocol on preliminary findings, but based on researchers that I do know, some take a dim view on such practices, and prefer to wait until they can release a full report that is as accurate as complete as it needs to be. The conspiracy theorists are, of course, dying to get confirmation of one fact or another, but I don’t believe that the governments of Malaysia or Holland are waiting with bated breath to see if, perhaps, the passengers were all killed in the airport before the flight, or something of that nature. Since they strongly suspect (however unjustifiably, in the opinion of some of the commenters here) they already know what caused this, they are less likely to apply pressure for getting partial confirmation as early as possible, and would rather be safe than sorry.

    Besides, the conspiracy theorists will likely trash the official report anyway.

    • Replies: @reiner Tor
  105. @HA

    That was not how MH370 was treated. The conversation of the pilot with the tower was released within a couple of weeks, and Malaysian Airlines was even accused of withholding information by – among others – the Western press. They also released results regarding the pilot, the investigation into his computer etc. Even though of course the investigation is still not over there as well.

    I don’t believe that the governments of Malaysia or Holland are waiting with bated breath to see if, perhaps, the passengers were all killed in the airport before the flight, or something of that nature

    I don’t quite understand why you are beating this straw man, I explicitly stated that the most likely scenario is that it was simply shot down (mistakenly believed to be a military plane), end of story. But there is also the possibility that there were Ukrainian warplanes around it. This would be an interesting aspect.

    From the public information there is no way the Dutch (or any other) government could know these circumstances. So the question arises, why are they not interested?

    • Replies: @HA
  106. HA says:
    @reiner Tor

    I explicitly stated that the most likely scenario is that it was simply shot down (mistakenly believed to be a military plane), end of story.

    I agree, and I suspect that is what most of the governments believe the report will say (and that goes even for most of those that don’t believe that’s what happened.) That being the case, the only people likely to want early reports are those who believe that something anomalous happened, to use a relatively innocuous phrase, and also that the forces sophisticated enough to engineer that anomaly were unable to cover their tracks and unable to persuade the investigators to doctor the report. That seems a small and uninfluential subset of the audience, and I suspect even a significant fraction of those will also find more questions than answers in any official report.

    Also, with regard to protocols on preliminary reports (in particular, on nondisclosure), see this comment, for what it’s worth. Not sure if it’s correct, but it seems plausible.

  107. Anon • Disclaimer says:

    Wow. The article talks about lies in MSM, and then we see a comment confronting this article with the same garbage from the same MSM. They should be proud!

  108. Anon • Disclaimer says:

    1. The insurgent didn’t use the BUK to shot the military airplanes, they obtained it only prior the Boeing story. The rumors about capturing it was just a couple days before.
    2. This was funny. While the Ukrainian President was insisting that the rebels had captured the BUK and used it to shot the Boeing, the Ukrainian Defense Minister was denying that this BUK was functional (there was even an official document on the Defense Ministry web site, I’m only afraid not many people here read in Ukrainian).
    3. This BUK never showed up to be used for anything else afterwards. Strange, isn’t it? Like it was brought in just for the Boeing.

    I read blogs from independent journalists and civilians in the area (i.e. East Ukraine), it’s quite close to the events, isn’t it? Interviews with the insurgents, government soldiers, photos, witnesses first hand, civilians suffering and such (for the record I do read in Russian and Ukrainian languages). I wouldn’t trust anything else. You don’t report about East Ukraine from Kiev, Moscow or Washington! Ukrainian media + Western allies are one big propaganda machine. Like, the same news appear practically simultaneously, drawing from the same shady social media appearances and fakes. I myself can make an account called “Igor Strelkov” (or “Barak Obama”) and put their anything I want. But just to be clear, Igor Strelkov notably doesn’t have social media accounts to use them as a “proof”. Etc.

  109. Anon • Disclaimer says:

    From my experience commenting and reading comments on MSM sites… Any reader’s comment that’s not the “party line” is removed, while being sensible, and backed up with links and facts. When I commented on CNN that the routes over the war zone should’ve been closed down long time, they removed it. When I put a comment somewhere else, that the Russian intel data had been ignored, I got blocked! Your comments don’t even need to be any “pro-Russia” (I don’t even know what it means) to be removed, but just different from the echo chamber. Isn’t it quite telling about the state of the media?

  110. Kiza says:

    We can agree that the whole purpose of Western media is propaganda. This is because everything in the West must be utilized. I keep asking people: “Is there a free lunch? If, no then why do you expect that someone will give you news for free, all without trying to sell you something? Who pays for the news? If it is not a wonder juicer then it is an idea of belief they try to sell you.” This is totally general, and does not apply only to MH17 “news”.

    Regarding MH17, let me summarise my belief based on what is known so far and a bit of my speculation added. This was a false flag organized by the US neocons and executed together with Ukrainians. They had Plan A and Plan B. Plan A was to draw the rebel anti-aircraft missiles onto a civilian airliner which was deliberately routed by the Ukrainian ATC over the relatively small rebel-held area. MH17 was shadowed by a Ukrainian interceptor from the point of entry into Ukraine, probably piloted by a US pilot (there is a training base, I think in Nevada, over which the US pilots used to practice dog fights with US planes against the Soviet planes). The interceptor has a missile sensing radar and it would have broken off the civilian plane if one were launched. When this Plan A did not work, then Plan B was put into effect: shoot down the airliner by the interceptor whilst still over the rebel territory. The Ukrainian interceptor (Su27 or MiG29) used the 30mm cannon (strong evidence) shooting at the cockpit to kill the pilots and disable vital electronics. It is likely to have also used an air-to-air missile, which would be almost indistinguishable from a surface-to-air missile in its effect.

    It was good to read a commentator here write: “rebels shot it down, end of story”. What I describe is only my most likely scenario, definitely not the end of story. But I do not think we will ever be sure either way. Only the end-of-story monkeys will be sure because they were sure the first time they heard about it on the “news”.

  111. yrjo says:
    @reiner Tor

    You sound like one of those people who think New York City is full of Mexicans, Africans and Israelis. I bet you even say that Barak Obama is black.

    Oh yes, back to topic. “Rebels” is a propaganda word, so it’s better to pick another one. And, as you nearly said, they are Ukrainian. Fancy a cold bear?

    • Replies: @reiner Tor
  112. @yrjo

    Maybe because I’m Central European. I once talked to a Canadian (Anglo) secretary, and I told her Hungarians lived in Serbia, having Serbian passports (and not having Hungarian ones) etc. She asked me how could they be Hungarian citizens if they don’t have Hungarian passports. I told them they weren’t. In the end, it became clear that she understood “Hungarian” to mean “Hungarian citizen”, and that she would have used the expression “ethnic Hungarian” to describe those Hungarians in Serbia. (No wonder, the definition of Canadian, her nationality, could be best given as “citizen of Canada”.)

    So to me those people who don’t want to belong to Ukraine, speak Russian, ask Putin for help against the Ukrainians, possibly think that their greatest national poet was Pushkin (and not Shevchenko), etc. – they simply cannot very much be Ukrainians. And they also very much walk, quack and look like Russians. I don’t quite understand why they couldn’t be accurately described as Russians and not Ukrainians. Yes, most of them are Ukrainian citizens.

    • Replies: @Hunsdon
  113. Hunsdon says:
    @reiner Tor

    reiner Tor: For Americans (and apparently Canadians) this is a difficult concept to grasp. The nationality/citizenship distinction is foreign to US understanding.

    • Replies: @reiner Tor
  114. @Hunsdon

    This is essentially a terminology problem. In English the standard meaning of “nationality” is “citizenship”. A German national is a citizen of Germany. An ethnic German is a citizen of another country, but is nevertheless ethnically German. And the there is the category of people of German ethnicity, which includes both ethnic Germans and the large majority (but not all) of German nationals. At least that’s how I understand the English terms. The meaning of German depends on context: could mean ethnic German, German national, or a person of German ethnicity, but the default meaning is German national. Still, the way I understand, “German” could mean all of these.

  115. TomB says:

    All this talk about the intricacies of this plane’s shootdown not only misses Unz’s big point, but indeed substantially bolsters it which is the incredible herd-like behavior of the main-stream media in the U.S. at least.

    As if this is something that doesn’t resonate like a ring of a deep bell otherwise.

    The question of course is why and Unz and I have gone around once before concerning same with me asserting that I think it’s largely a sort of fear on the part of our journalists to go crossing lines set by a largely Left/liberal elite about what can be investigated and said and written and televised, and what cannot without facing, at the very least, professional sneering. (Not to mention the dynamiting of one’s career possibilities with the elite big media corporations, the disqualification for professional prizes and awards and recognitions, and etc., etc.)

    Mr. Unz disagrees with me, seeing no particular partisan slant to the phenomenon, but I stand by my contention.

    In the first place I’d note that if it were not a partisan matter then you’d tend to see this Soviet-like cabining of reporting concerning all kinds of issues, and that’s not too much of what is seen I don’t think. Instead it indeed mostly does concern matters of partisan interest, and as to the rest of where it does appear seems to be on those issues in which our elites generally have decided what constitutes intelligent opinion and what does not.

    So in my view it is elitist, but also heavily partisan elitist, although I will admit that to my eye too, as it is to Unz’s, in the case of this plane shoot-down much of the orthodoxy of blaming it on the pro-Russian/Russian forces is indeed coming from the same precincts that brought us all the reporting on Saddam’s weapons of mass destruction and etc., which is to say the neo-con precincts. And, obviously, it will be noted that the neo-cons are especially well-ensconsed in the Republican Party and find their greatest mouthpieces there.

    My contention concerning this is that this is simply because the neo-conservatives are not really conservatives at all, and but represent a mere segment of the Left/liberal elites who have determined that, for a time at least, the Republican Party is where their most fervent ideas (in general those concerning Israel’s best interests) can be forwarded. And where contrary ideas coming from the Democratic ranks can be most vigorously pounded. (Not to mention providing a perch from which to pound down any rise in those contrary ideas in the Republican Party itself.)

    And, notably in this regard I think, is what I think is the clearly better sort of coverage these folks ideas get in the major elite media than other (and what I regard as “true” conservative) ideas, and indeed the better sort of coverage that elite media grants to them when it covers them personally than how it covers other (again “true”) conservatives.

    Thus for instance just consider how the absolute Everest of Left/liberal journalism the New York Times covered the neo-con’s WMD fantasies in the lead-up to the invasion of Iraq. Or the extreme credulousness with which it reported on every one of the neo-cons serial ideas of how to rescue their great adventures in Iraq and Afghanistan such as the “surges,” and then the utter failure to note the fact that by their own terms of long-range success they failed, and we got booted out of both countries essentially. (Not to mention any follow-up to Tom Friedman’s remarkable admission that were it not for 25 specific neo-cons there would have been no Iraq war with all that has meant to us, which is at the very least an amazing suggestion one would think would deserve some extended investigation.)

    Or consider what clearly can seem the instructions the herd is receiving vis a via more topical and clearly partisan-infested stories, with the major media insistently running the same picture of the young, innocent and charming face of Trayvon Martin over and over and ignoring the youth’s own, later “selfie” showing him flashing gang signs. All of which is now seems to be substantially repeated (if to a little lesser degree, perhaps out of a bit of Martin humiliation) by the constant running of the anodyne and again even charming pictures of young Michael Brown, and the studied ignoring of him flashing his own gang signs, not to mention the oh-so-heartbreaking news pushed on us about his music dreams having been killed, without mentioning the violence-glorifying nature of same.

    My perspective at any rate, and not to say I don’t respect any varying viewpoints concerning same…

  116. Welcome to World War Twitter. One of the perverted things is that every time one side inflicts casualties, they immediately claim it was done by the other side. The Russians / Pro-Russian separatists blamed the Ukrainians for sniping protesters in Maidan Square. If a Pro-Russian village is blasted by artillery with civilian casualties, the Ukrainians blame it on the Rebels. In one incident a group of Ukrainian soldiers were ambushed. When a Ukrainian helicopter flew overhead shooting back at the long gone rebels, they claimed that they were shot by the helicopter. The propaganda gets worse because it is always claimed to be on purpose as a way of pissing off the population to motivate the army. Like the joke about the N*%%#$ that stole so many chains, he could not swim with them.

  117. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    “Vladimir Putin’s goals for the world, whatever the faults, are preferable to our Western leaders”

    Two quick questions on that one:

    1. What exactly are Putin’s goals for the world?
    2. Why are they preferable to those of western leaders?

    Best regards,


  118. Hunsdon says:

    Gee, this atrocity sure fell down the memory hole in a hurry, didn’t it?

    • Replies: @reiner Tor
  119. @Hunsdon

    I still think it was the rebels accidentally shooting down the plane, and I think in the absence of intense pressure from the media the investigation normally doesn’t disclose any information until the case is closed, but I’m also a bit curious as to why there’s been no pressure from the media regarding such an important event. MH370 investigators were forced to reveal details (e.g. about data found on the pilot’s computer), even though MH370 was, however terrible a tragedy, just an airplane catastrophe, with very little geopolitical consequences. MH17, on the other hand, is way way more important. So why is the press not interested in the little details? I know that details like the last conversation with the tower are just trivia, but the tabloid press normally thrives on trivia. Why not in this case?

    • Replies: @Hunsdon
    , @Matra
  120. Is Ron Unz aware that the ‘contact’ email provided at this site, which is [email protected], consistently bounces back as being undeliverable, and that he has therefore not been seeing many thousands of emails that are sent to that email address, which is the only email address that this site provides to contact the site? I request him to contact me via email so that this problem can be rectified. I wish to become a columnist at this site, as I am at many others. I have repeatedly tried to reach him for that purpose.

  121. one thing that surprises me is that no one mentions the NATIONAL RECONNAISSANCE OFFICE.

    this is the entity that manages us/nato satellites. i can assure you that the NRO was monitoring the ukraine. and that the resolution of their satelites is less than a centimeter.

    the NRO has pix of mh370 and mh17. and everything happening on the ground.

    in real time. at a high resolution.

    if you had subscribed to aviation week & space technology you could have seen such pix of the russian invasion of afghanistan.

    those pix are probative. how is it that no one demands those? in fact, it occurs to me that everyone in the nato/usa is running away from that evidence.

    do they need a war that desperately?

  122. Dave says:

    LOL. Nice try, but even the Slate link you included states:

    Social media being what it is—fickle and easily manipulatable—this is certainly not definitive proof of who is responsible for shooting down Malaysian Airlines Flight 17 over Ukraine on Thursday

    Oh, but I guess we can be assured that the CIA and Ukrainian government will get around to hearing about Twitter some day and discover the false-flag implications of it. (ROTFLMAO!!!!)

  123. Hunsdon says:
    @reiner Tor

    reiner Tor: I freely admit that I am more or less a partisan for the LNR/DNR, and I’d prefer not to think that they shot the plane down. But if they did, they did. I want to see the evidence. The USG can hand wave about “sources and methods” all they want, but in 2014, that’s not cutting it any more. It seems that each time there’s bad news for the rebels/separatists/terrorists, it turns out to be unsourced/made-up/a provocation. The government in Kiev does not have exactly the best track record in terms of providing concrete, verifiable information to support its claims.

    Once more, show me the evidence. If it was Vladimir Putin his own bad self operating a battery of Buk launchers . . . let’s see the photos. As an above commenter mentioned, there’s the NRO, there were all those NATO SIGINT ships in the Black Sea: show us the evidence. Change our minds. Prove it to us.

    Because contra a certain former SecDef, sometimes absence of evidence really is evidence of absence.

  124. i think it is important to understand that though the kgb no longer exists, russia continues to monitor its enemies[usa, nato, the eec].

    and i think we should be able to agree that russia has its intell assets in the countries that russia sees as a continuation of the “great game ” alliances.

    so, russia was more than aware of the conspiracy that the usa and nato hatched to provoke a confrontation[coup] in the ukraine when yanukovich spurned eu overtures that would have allowed the imf to further rape the ukraine economically. this is a history that is all too conveniently overlooked by the defenders of nato[eu].

    russia understood the motives behind the coup. and the fsb furnished him detailed intell analyses of the machinations of the “great gamesters”.

    and i would say that putin has played his hand very adroitly. he knows that all the nato countries, the ukraine junta, have no hand beyond a “bluffing” one.

    which is ok for the sheep that read the nato controlled press. the sheep that still haven’t recognized the fact that their fascist governments lie to them all the time[i.e., you tell me when any nato state has ever told the truth].

    putin understands the “great game”.

    the foundation of that game is the usd[and collaterally the euro].

    so, putin, and his new allies, have decided to establish a new world unshackled from the usd, the euro.

    he understands that “sanctions” are tantamount to “acts of war”. “acts of war” that the nato fellatrice press refuses to identify as “acts of war”.

    so, putin and his fellow insurgents to the idea of dollar, ecu imperaialism, have taken up the arms that are available to them. hydrocarbons, agriculture, precious metal[palladium, gold] mining.

    and russia has not been slacking in its understanding of the nato conspiracy to continue pursuing the “great game”. when russia and china announced this new pipeline, i wondered how russia was going to acquire the prime movers and compressors to move the methane. after all, that market is controlled by the nato countries. and sanctions would have arrested russia’s acquisition of those turbine compressors.

    you might want to recognize that russia/china thought about this pipeline a long time ago. perhaps even before western intell caught on.

    russia has prepared to build its own turbine compressors/gensets. which it will be selling into the dollar dissatisfied world[see turkey’s recent acquisition of these turbines].

    it is an economic war between nato and russia. and russia has prepared better than the nato organization.

    i think that no nato country has noticed this turbine project of russia. i think that they continued to think that they held the russians by the yinyang because russia would need nato turbines to drive any methane transmission. no nato country will be selling turbines to gazprom or any chinese entity ever again.

  125. Dutch says:

    Maybe YOU should ask yourself why you need your reality dictated to you by anyone? Or why every argument you present rests on you projecting this same sheepishness on everyone else.

    I don’t believe any government, organization or media. And in a million years you can’t tell me why I would need to. We are happy that you find comfort and security hiding behind the groupthink of others, but its not the way that all of us choose. And the fact that you can’t grasp that is not reason enough for all of us to have to suffer your inane banter. Check yourself before you go slinging mud at those who endeavor to think. You’ll look like less of a sheep if nothing else.

  126. Matra says:
    @reiner Tor

    I’m also a bit curious as to why there’s been no pressure from the media regarding such an important event

    There are lots of other stories that they prefer – Islamic head-choppers, celebrity nude shots, and a few weeks ago it was all Israel all the time. It was the same with AF447 which disappeared completely from English language media within days.

    MH370 investigators were forced to reveal details (e.g. about data found on the pilot’s computer), even though MH370 was, however terrible a tragedy, just an airplane catastrophe, with very little geopolitical consequences.

    MH370 has been the most sensationally covered airline accident/incident in history. It’s disappearance is unprecedented for a passenger airline so there is nothing surprising about it.

    MH17, on the other hand, is way way more important. So why is the press not interested in the little details?

    You have far greater faith in the intelligence and sense of responsibility of Western media than I do. They lack curiosity about the details of most world events. There is nothing new about this. In the US a story about white flags mysteriously appearing on a NY bridge were a bigger story than MH17 within days of the plane being shot down and I suspect most Americans found it far more interesting than MH17. The Dutch and aviation media are still following the story.

    Last week Sergei Lavrov (quoting from said “that those who had initially made “accusations verging on hysteria against Russia and the rebels” had now fallen silent and “seemed to have swallowed their tongues.” It’s obvious that the Russians are still trying to spread misinformation that will appeal to low information Westerners and Russians alike. The MH17 investigation is going on in the appropriate and usual manner in accordance with Annex 13 of the International Convention on Civil Aviation. Russian claims to the contrary is just them engaging in cynical propaganda.

    • Replies: @VladM
  127. Blondie-2 says:


    Shurely nobody nows what happened with the two nearly identical B777 of Malaysian Airlines.

    There is no evidence that both accidents are coupled , and no that there aren’t. Both have the same indicators, a sudden crash without any known communication from the pilots to ground.

    Reasons are a lot, maybe coincidence, maybe a terrorist attac, maybe a misguides BUK locked to the weather radar, maybe the nose “pockmarks” are from a fighter plane, maybe machine gun fire after crash, maybe maybe maybe.

    Nobody knows except that there are interests and info wars from all parties.

    Most of all I fear mass stupidity and bureaucratic idiocratie. And i live in Germany, Hamburg, east part of it. Walking hours through the neighbourhoods, nearly no buildings constructed before 1946. Over here you can see the scarfs of WWII, remember how your grandparents acted, know what they told.

  128. VladM says:

    Obviously the matter is still in question and I do not like to throw in my opinion but my doubts about the version dominating in the West, let me do this as I do my papers:

    1) Methodology: equipment and its operators – radar stations “Kupol” on Ukr side – range about 200 km (~ 160 miles), none on the rebel side, unlimited on Russian side. Very amateur operators on Ukr side (check how they shot down Russian passenger jet in 2001), very professional on Russian side. None to rebels – they didn’t have a “Kupol” radar system.

    2) What happened and who disclosed what: Russians immediately put their radar data on the table, none by the West which of course has a lot of data – this region is watching very closely. Why?

    3) No comments from U government why the U fighter jet approached in blind (in clouds) to shooting distance to MH 17. No release if there was an exchange between Kiev tower and the military that the plane was sent on a different route – in Russian media the dominating hypotheses is the plane was mistaken for Russian spy plane.

    4) Why non disclosure agreement is put in place for all info on MH 17 tragedy?

    Simple questions but no simple answers.


  129. VladM says:

    “cynical propaganda”? Amazing – on Sept 11 preliminary results will be published – you want a bet? It will say “it is not clear who shot the plane”. – Read Ukr Army did it, if there was a chance to blame it on rebels it would be done so. But there is no chance – the rebels didn’t have an operational Buk.

  130. @jjc

    I know the report you’re talking about. I’ve seen it. I live in Germany, and a couple people put up the link on Facebook; it had gone viral. If there’s anyone here who still thinks the Maidan-sniper story is pure hokum, you should read this translation of the transcript for yourself:

    And when you’re done, take a look at the original report:

    Even if you don’t know German, some of the visuals need no explanation.

  131. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    except for a few details I’ve run across from multiple sources: first, the shrapnel from the BUK is a mass of small steel spheres, each about 10mm diameter. There are no holes of this size on the panels, from the photos I’ve seen. The cannon on the MIGs in use by the Ukrainian military are 30mm cannon. They have a type of projectile that comprises multiple longish shards, which shatter upon impact. Some of the entrance holes seem very close to 30mm diameter, the exit holes are far larger, consistent with the break-apart rounds typically used in these cannon.

    From the report I read, the radar tracking info that indicates two MIG 25’s very near that plane just prior to its crashing came from non-russian sources…. neighbouring countries, air traffic control records, etc.
    Then there is the report, from multipel sources, that have the airliner making an unplanned course change to bring it over the area of conflict for just long enough to have it far enough off course…… as if it were being deliberately set up for the shootdown.
    Now, the final QUESTION no one has satisfactorily answred: WHERE is the recording from the two black boxes alledgedly discovered and removed from the crash scene, and WHY have we not heard those recordings? Russia has been hollering and demanding those recordings be released. Those in control of them are, for reasons as yet unexplained suitably, refusing.

    Last bit: I’ve also read a rather sophisticated analysis of the recording alledging to be the “rebels” bragging over their shootdown….. which analysis raises serious questions as to the authenticity of that recording. It seems it is very likely a manufactured piece of artwork deliberately intended to deceive……. which fits well with all the other points I raise above. IF this was a false flag operation, of COURSE a few bits of fabricated “evidence” will surface…….. same game as the dirty coppers who leave a throwdown gun in the hands of the guy they just shot to make it appear the guy drew down on them, so as to “jusstify” their killing him. The fingerprints left on those guns are almost never chemically analised to determine that the person was dead when the prints were made onto the throwdown gun. Convenient…… and deceitful.

    When we see that the SAME TYPE of projectile from some of the exact same guns were retreived from the corpses of individuals on opposing sides of the supposed melee in Kiev, the coup begins to stink of a set up, false flag, charade, black ops affair. If they could/would do that, what possible “proof positive” could suggest the downed airliner was not also a plot to promote a not-so-well-hidden political agenda?

    • Replies: @VladM
  132. VladM says:

    I read tons of articles about the shooting MH17, 99% is pure BS speculations but few give some insights to think about: as politically un involved the most connected to facts I saw is analysis of Russian Engineers Association. They warn plainly that the analysis and its results are very tentative however: in their version the MH17 was hit by fighter jet which initially was on head to head course coming from under neath at angle about 25-30 degrees left hitting by gun (20 mm) the pilot cabin, causing de hermertization killing almost instantly the pilots, the plane continue to go on autopilot, the jet turned around and fired air to air sort range missile which hit one of the engines on MH17 right side. After that the MH 17 went into spiral fall which eventually resulted in breaking of airframe at altitude about 5 km.
    What really upsets me that almost 300 people are dead and their death became a chip in a political games.

  133. So the transcript is out, and as was most likely from the outset, not much is known yet. They didn’t even specify the size of the high-energy objects, so not even the machine gun theory is to be ruled out with absolute certainty. (Not very likely, but I don’t think it was ever likely, if you ask me.)

  134. as politically un involved the most connected to facts I saw is analysis of Russian Engineers Association.

    Yeah, they sound really independent. Save it for the birds!

  135. Link to English translation of the Russian Engineers Union analysis at

    ^ You can open and save a pdf file copy on MH17 report

  136. Anonymous • Disclaimer says: • Website

    The United Nations Security Council has unanimously adopted a resolution on the downing of MH17 in eastern Ukraine, condemning “in the strongest terms” the actions that led to the crash and calling for “a full, thorough, and independent international investigation into the incident”
    Why doesn’t Ukraine or our USA Back this Resolution? Why were the ATC Tower Audio Tapes confiscated by “Ukrainian Security Services”, and not made public? Why were the USA/CIA Satellite Images Withheld?

    Sorry Folks, this was a False Flagg Attack, to Murder 298 Persons to Blame Russia, Impose Sanctions, and to “Draw Russia Into The War.”

    Proof MH-17 Diverted By Ukrainian ATC over “War Zone!”

    Proof “Separatist Audio, We Shot it Down” Relesed by Ukraine is a Fraud!

    Proof that “US Intelligence Analysts Conclude,” “Ukraine Shot Down MH-17”

    “German Experts Point Finger at Ukrainian Air Force for MH-17 Murders”

    “Malaysian Press Charges Ukraine Shot Down MH-17”

    “Former US intelligence personnel challenge Obama to present evidence of Russian complicity in MH17 crash” “Current Intelligence Personnel Up in Arms about Lies!”

    Spanish Air Controller @ Kiev Borispol Airport: Ukraine Military Shot Down Boeing MH#17 “Read The Tower Conversations Minute by Minute”

  137. While it claims to have 157 comments, currently i can only see some 23 here. What happened to the rest of the comments?

    Update: just got restored after i sent my comment.

  138. @Hepp

    “israel” has good reason to want to damage both Malaysia and Russia. And they don’t care about Holland.

  139. @Ron, I too had serious doubts from the start about this. Hopefully the American Public are experienced enough (I won’t say smart enough) to not be steamrolled into another NeoCon foray.

    But there is something much scarier to contemplate. It appears now that our government, or at least people who our government are very comfortable with, are willing to sacrifice large numbers of innocent lives to further their agenda. I have never been and still am not a 9/11 “truther”. But it light of this, it is really so far fetched that our government would either cause it, or allow it to happen?

    • Replies: @Ronald Thomas West
  140. @Robert What

    Robert, welcome to the serious doubters. Without going into the more far-fetched seeming ideas, what is undeniable is, when 2,200 professionally trained architects and engineers sign on to stating (in no uncertain terms) the government explanation for the collapse of WTC Building 7 is a “physical impossibility” .. there is a very serious problem:

    ^ These are not crazy people

  141. ktwop says: • Website

    What does the deployed oxygen mask on MH17 signify?
    But the bottom line is that if there was time for the oxygen masks to deploy then it is more likely that a Ukrainian jet was responsible rather than a BUK missile.

  142. Great article, now if you will only turn your attention to 9/11, the biggest lie of them all!

  143. Update from this end, on a Der Speigel report the BND (German CIA) has assigned responsibility to the ‘rebel’ captured Buk:


  144. soren says:

    The scenario as told by German intelligence is that it was a Ukrainian buk captured by rebels shot from rebel territory… but that some of the pictures put out by the Ukrainian government had been “manipulated”.

    In this scenario, the rebels are to blame as is the Ukrainian government for not directing flights elsewhere because they had known that a buk had been captured. This German report doesn’t detail if the buk(s) were captured in operational condition or if they needed outside help.

    I wonder what German intelligence makes of the weird recordings put out by the Ukranian government purportedly of rebels talking about shooting down MH17. It’s been so long since I listened to them, but they seemed fake to me at the time because of the order they were released and how the first one came out so fast.

  145. My take on the BND (German CIA) information reported by Der Spiegel is…

    …it was deliberately fabricated disinformation for public consumption

  146. Germany backs down on BND (German CIA) claims ‘separatists’ shot down MH 17 (with a diplomatic note)


  147. Matra says:

    Russian media continue to embarrass themselves:

    Web users debunk Russian MH17 claims

    What amazes me is just how bad the Russians are at propaganda. I’ve lost count of how many times they’ve been caught lying about this yet they never seem to learn. Russian state media now have a Baghdad Bob reputation in aviation circles. My advice for the Kremlin: Get someone who can tell one plane from another, maybe someone who works in aviation, for your future spinning efforts and then take it from there.

  148. @Matra

    I agree, I would have expected way more professionalism from the KGB or its successors.

    • Replies: @Cato
  149. Contraviews says: • Website

    Someone may already have commented on it, but it’s impossible to read all the comments.
    One of the most salient points I find, is the fact that no vapour trail had been observed or photographed from the ground. A vapour condensation trail remains visible for quite some time and is visible for I would think at least 15 minutes.
    Surely in this day and age when virtually everyone carries a cell phone capable of making pictures, such evidence should be available. But apparently there is not.
    As a test it would be interesting if Russia would in front of the international press test fire a BUK missile.
    I would very much appreciate comments on this particular aspect of the catastrophe. Thank you in anticipation.

  150. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Hi Ron,
    I came across your website via a few links from Mark Steyn. With regard to this airliner being shot down, I come to it from knowing an aircraft enthusiast whose hobby it is to find out everything about aviation etc. There are enthusiasts like him across the world. Within hours of the tragedy, this geek “community” was examining aircraft movements around the area, and also photos of the fuselage and so on. There is a website which shows the movements of all commercial planes around the world in real time. The theory then was that the aircraft had been shot down by another aircraft judging by the type of holes in parts of the fuselage etc. Also suggested was that there was another large aircraft flying in Russian airspace with red markings similar to the one shot down. The suggestion was that Putin might have been in that one, and the Ukrainian air force shot down the Malaysian one in mistake for the one in Russia. All this is speculation but I am putting this idea here to you so that you may follow up on it if you wish. Nobody listens to the geeks but they often have an eye for detail that us norms do not and they have their own little world that others do not penetrate very easily. Kind regards, cdm

  151. Malaysia has been cut out of the investigation, why? For refusing to prejudge the outcome?


  152. @Matra

    Relating to:

    “Russian media continue to embarrass themselves”

    That particular image had been floating the around the internet for months before Channel One took the bait, likely exactly the purpose the photo had been created for. No different to western media had been suckered into images of Russian military supposedly operating in Ukraine with photos of exercises exterior to Ukraine’s borders.

    @reiner Tor

    I rather expect a better chance the photo referenced in the BBC story had been created in Langley, Virginia, rather than by FSB. If we are speaking to issues of intelligence agency competence, I recommend:

    ^ The CIA excels at world class stupidities

  153. AlMiller says:

    Its not like the Russians have done a very convincing case of denying responsibility. Its Occam’s Razor for me.

  154. Uh huh, yeah… and what about 9/11?

    • Replies: @AlMiller
  155. Cato says:
    @reiner Tor

    Mostly to keep this thread open, I have to say that I agree. OK, Cossack militias might be impulsive and poorly trained, but to pin this on the Russian state, well… it’s just too poorly executed.

  156. @AlMiller


    The parallels are pretty clear. In the case of both 9/11 and this Malaysian airliner, the western mainstream media had their story ready to go as soon as it happened. And then when all the evidence starts accumulating that this story is untrue, cannot possibly be true, they simply ignore all of it. In fact anybody who brings it up is immediately tarred as a “conspiracy theorist”.

    That’s what about it. (Shrug)

    • Replies: @alMiller
  157. alMiller says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    We are now entering the Twilight Zone.

  158. @alMiller

    No twilight zone. Maybe you just think it’s a twilight zone because of the blinkers you have on.

    In terms of the physical evidence, you can just go to and look around with an open mind. It’s quite clear that the official story on 9/11 cannot possibly be true. That much is really quite rigorously demonstrable in terms of hard physical science.

  159. eah says:

    It does not appear that Putin has been all that helpful in the investigation. Which is surprising if you consider 1) many seem to claim Russia had nothing to do with it, and 2) given the horribleness of it, he could have done his — and Russia’s — international standing a lot of good by driving the investigation.

  160. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    That’s what I believed and still believ ,more so when I cast Bush and Romney.
    This was and is my view. It is possible that Saddam and not US,UK,Italy, Israel were lying over the debates ( or threat from the west and meek begging for an argument from Saddam) that he had hands in anthrax,Niger Uranium ,Yellow Cake ,and 911 . How can the countries with different time zones,languages,religion,and geographical separation could concoct the same lies ? They can’t.

  161. anon • Disclaimer says:

    The Ukraine military shot down another airliner some years before when a missile aimed at a training drone missed and locked on to the airliner.

    I think the Kiev side had been directing airliners across the war zone along the path of planned bombing runs to allow Ukraine military jets to fly the same course *below* the airliner and use the airliner’s much bigger radar signature (huge compared to a military jet) as protection i.e. if a missile was fired and missed it might lock on to the airliner instead.

    I don’t think the US side wants to admit their allies were using airliners as human shields and the Russians don’t want to admit their surface to air missiles ignore civilian IFF (as they must in a war zone) hence why both side’s stories feel unconvincing.

    Apart from the politics it’s important because if missiles treat civilian IFF as foe then it means airliners need to be kept a very long way from any mid-tech war zone.

    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    , @JR
  162. @anon

    Objective comment and I find all of your points likely to be true. Of course none of us have any proof.

  163. anon • Disclaimer says:

    @reiner Tor

    True but separate from the politics of it if missiles ignore civilian IFF then that would be useful info to get into the public domain as any airline who decided to keep flying over a midtech war zone to save fuel would soon lose their customers.

  164. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    The Russians, Chechens or Americans «fighting» in «Ukraine» are cryptoJews. Ukrainians and other peoples are also cryptoJews. Any name of any nationality is just terminology. All terminology is Jewish.
    The war in Ukraine is not real. It’s a play – circus show like any other war.

  165. “Russia’s campaign in Ukraine today is a prominent example of hybrid warfare. In the previous decade, however, during the 2008 Russia-Georgia conflict in the breakaway regions of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, both sides used combinations of regular forces, irregular forces, and criminal elements. Prior to the war, Russian military forces operating in Georgia as “peacekeepers” sustained a flourishing smuggling network in partnership with various Abkhaz, Ossetian, and Georgian criminal groups. Alongside Russian forces, this smuggling network moved into Georgia, while cooperating with separatist militias used by Russian forces to ethnically cleanse Georgians from the two breakaway regions. Similarly, Georgian military forces cooperated with guerillas operating in the area. Both sides thereby blurred the distinction between regular government forces, criminal elements, and militias.”
    Counter-Unconventional Warfare
    White Paper
    26 September 2014
    It is the corruption more than the sanctions that are killing the economy. The impotent media couldn’t figure it out no matter how much they tried. I put myself on the do not fly list. The cities are dying and we’re seeing money pumped into failed airports. Get prepared for the heavy bombing because it’s coming.

  166. Thread way too long to read, so apologies if this update is redundant.

    According to FortRuss Blog a Ukrainian fighter pilot called Vladislav Voloshnin has been named by a defector from the UAF as the attacker. It was apparently the ‘wrong’ plane. The detail was quite convincing to me, but read it yourself folks.

  167. Sam J. says:

    “…Except for the fact that the pro-Russian rebels on social media bragged about shooting down a plane with BUK missile…”

    Well that settles it. Before I read this I was sure it was brought down by men with box cutters.

  168. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    In my opinion this is too much conspiracy thinking – kinda of like those who think 911 attacks were committed by CIA or Jews or Aliens etc. The Ukraine would have no need to shoot AA missiles since so called Rebels had no air force at the time – and I believe still don’t posses any aircraft. Conversely, rebels have a host of AA weapons and Ukraine was using its aircraft at the time.

  169. @Anonymous

    The truth could be a bit more complicated. For example Ukrainian military planes always traveling close to civilian airliners so that it would be more difficult to shoot them down, in essence using the airliners as human shields. I’m not aware of the Ukrainian military using these tactics, but certainly it’s a possibility, and in my opinion more likely than most conspiracy theories around here.

  170. MarkU says:

    Re: “The Ukraine would have no need to shoot AA missiles since so called Rebels had no air force at the time ”

    The Kiev regime had no need to put anti-aircraft batteries in the area at all, but they did!

    Please everybody, get real.

    Its been months since the shooting down of MH 17 and despite all the accusations made by the US government and the Kiev regime at the time, not one single piece of credible evidence has been produced. Obviously the information is being suppressed, and even more obviously it is not being withheld to protect the rebels or the Russians.

  171. Alternative theory.

    MH17 was downed near Soledar and Artimovsk.

    Under Artimovsk there is a gigantic weapons cache. Is it possible that the plane was downed so that Western investigators could look into an inventory of that site and assess what the Separatists removed from said weapons dump? Chemical, Nuclear, Biological weapons stocks?

    The HQ for the crash site investigation was set up in Soledar which is a very close to the Salt Mine cave entrance.

    The passengers were just collateral damage in the contest over weapons stocks.

  172. @Anonymous

    What if there’s something missing from the Armsdump/Salt Mine directly under the crash site?

    Missing Nukes, Chemical Weapons, bio weapons? Artimovsk is like Racooncity.

    • Replies: @reiner Tor
  173. @Captain John Charity Spring MA

    I hardly doubt there were nukes stored in an arms dump in the Ukraine. Chemical and biological weapons degrade with time, they can still be poisonous, but you can’t just dump them in a salt mine and expect them to work 20 years later. (Ukraine never had money to sustain these programs, even if there were some such programs on Ukrainian soil, so at best they have some 25-year-old degraded stockpiles of these weapons, which cannot still be usable.)

    I also think this is a complicated theory, frankly I don’t expect the Ukrainian government to be as diabolically clever as this theory implies.

  174. iffen says:

    The best explanation is that the Russians supplied the weapons but did a poor job of training the operators.

    • Replies: @inertial
  175. @Ron Unz

    Hey Mr. Unz,

    I just wanted to let you know that the feature on this website, the one that allows you to click on a commenter’s name (thus bringing up all the comments they have previously made), apparently does not work for people who have an apostrophe in their name/handle.

    • Replies: @Ron Unz
  176. inertial says:

    The best explanation is that the Russians supplied the weapons but did a poor job of training the operators.

    Aren’t there supposed to be uncounted hordes of Russian troops fighting in Ukraine? Why would Russia supply such a weapon and not provide a trained crew for it?

    • Replies: @iffen
  177. iffen says:

    I don’t know how many Russian troops are in the Ukraine, if any. I would assume that there are not very many or it would be over by now.

  178. Maybe MH17 was shot down by the USS Vincennes…

    …or by an SU-15 out of Sakhalin…

    …or, perhaps it was hijacked and blown up by some Saudi guys with box cutters.

    It’s hard to keep all of these things straight.

    Can’t we all just leave airliners alone? I’d like to get to my destination, and I don’t have a dog in this hunt.

  179. @François Labelle

    Thanks, in my opinion that was the most convincing evidence to date.

  180. Bellingthecat has been thoroughly discredited. He belongs to group of social media ‘truthers’ and has absolutely no technical, much less ballistic skills or training. The British Guardian who don’t either, used hrs stuff and have since had to retract the material conclusions.

    Military experts from MIT – not yet under CIA control
    – have dismissed his ‘analysis’ completely. He was also the guy who brought us those non-existent chemical weapons attack in Syria.

    Most recognise him as a GHQ stooge.

    I believe even the Guardian doesn’t use his stuff anymore – and it’s never been known for rigour.

    • Replies: @reiner Tor
  181. And here is an assessment of the non-surface-to-air-BUK (or ‘red herring’) theory, going with the pics and reports of two fighter jets -Ukrainian – seen on each side of MH-17 :

    Ray B. March 07, 2015
    Here is my analysis, from an ex-Boeing aero engineer standpoint:
    The Boeing 777 was initially at 33,000 feet. The aircraft, therefore, was above the Su-25’s ceiling, as listed at wikipedia. (Service ceiling: 7,000 m (22,965 ft) clean,
    5,000 m (16,000 ft) with max weapons) I am aware of the Comments both that this is an artificial, CIA-changed figure and that Su-25 pilots have reached at least 30,000 feet with supplemental oxygen. For the purpose here, it does not matter. I am presuming the Su-25 was carrying only two R-60 air-to-air missiles, which are low drag. So, the service ceiling in this case would have been around 21-22,000 feet. (The upgrades to the Su-25 did not include engine or aerodynamic changes, so are unlikely to have increased the ceiling.) The 777 was well within reach of the R-60s, though (66,000 ft, Mach 2.7). As a non-maneuvering, transport aircraft, it would have been laughably easy to hit. I would have salvoed both missiles, both for increased hit-chance and to avoid coming back with only one missile (very noticeable, as opposed to just empty pylons). The above would tie-in with ret. Col Zhilin’s testimony. Most reports indicate the accompanying-fighter was closing from the rear, which is the most advantageous for infrared guidance. With infrared guidance, the missile would home-in directly on the hottest area – the engine exhaust. The warhead would probably detonate in the
    exhaust cone or adjacent to it. In the Boeing 777, the engine is slung well out in front of the wing. The expanding-rod warhead would rip up the engine but probably not
    take out the wing or flight control cabling. The ‘hit’ (or hits) might indeed be survivable. Today’s jet engines are built with FAA-mandated ‘containment shields’. They
    are meant to contain high-velocity fan/compressor/turbine blades if something causes them to shear off. They are basically armored ‘cans’ surrounding the rotating
    parts. A missile detonating inside this ‘can’ might have the expanding-rods contained, rather than punching through the nacelle and into the fuselage. If detonating on the far side of the ‘can’ from the fuselage, much the same result… Also, Zhilin says, “…the Boeing turned 180 degrees to the left.” This would be the direct result of losing thrust on the left engine. The pilots were probably more concerned with staying in the air (under control) than their heading…
    commercial/startup/pdf/777_perf.pdf “Engine-out altitude capability (MTOW, ISA + 10°C) Basic: 16,200 ft Maximum Weight: 15,600 ft” After the 777’s engine was hit and disabled by the R-60, the 777 would have descended to around 15-16,000 feet. That is the standard one-engine-out ‘cruise’ altitude as above. It may have been lower with the damage. If I were the pilot, I would have been on a circling descent through and below that altitude, looking for a nearby airport or good field. Since the R-60 has
    such a small warhead, the pilots may not even have known they were hit by a missile and assumed a simple engine-out problem.
    That could account for the lack of initial reporting.
    This descent would have put the 777 well within the Su-25’s (wikipedia) altitude capability. So, it would have been possible at that point to conduct a ‘strafing’ run with the 30mm cannon. With the 777 turning, that may have presented the opportunity for whatever angle shot the fighter pilot wanted. As various Commenters have
    noted, there seems to have been a concentration on the cockpit and avionics bay. (Grrr.)
    Unfortunately, with the ‘secrecy agrement’ in place, I see no way that any important evidence will be revealed, barring a Snowden-like mass-release by someone
    with a Conscience…

    Am off to Asia Times with this too.

  182. @Sure Thing

    Could you provide links to prove your assertions?

    I haven’t read much from this Bellingcat site, but the analysis with the pictures tracking the movement of the Buk seem to be highly plausible. It also doesn’t need ballistic skills or training to track the movement of vehicles on pictures.

  183. iffen says:

    Disregard the earlier comment.

    Maybe Putin realized that he is dealing with idiots on the American side. This could have been a signal to the idiots that they were underestimating the opposition. He could see the situation leading to the killing of many Russians. This could have been an attempt to prevent further escalation by the US by demonstrating his will and resolve.

  184. Russia states they have a Ukrainian witness backing the SU 25 combat jet shoot-down of MH 17


    • Replies: @Ronald Thomas West
  185. @Ronald Thomas West

    Der Spiegel interviews expert who debunks Bellingcat’s (Elliot Higgins) claims of Russian manipulation of digital images:


    • Replies: @Ronald Thomas West
  186. @Kiza

    I don’t disagree as much as you might expect about Abbott. He seems to demonstrate that intellectual brilliance is not necessary for a Rhodes Scholarship even in a populous state. However, far from his having his strings pulled by the US as you posit, the biggest influence on him was probably Peta Credlin his very controlling Chief of Staff and his motive would be popular domestic politics – which he achieved. Not as good as a Bali bombing, properly exploited; but pretty useful.

  187. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:


    You got taken for a ride on this one. A more recent video out ( shows the first reactions. Ignoring the commentary, it’s pretty obvious the insurgents arrived on the scene triumphant, thinking they downed a Ukrainian SU-25, only to realize it was a passenger jet. Since there was no SU-25 shot down that day, we can rule out the possibility that a SU-25 shot down MH-17, then was downed itself. The idea that a Ukrainian BUK was fired simultaneously and downed MH-17, fooling the insurgents into thinking they shot it down is such an implausible scenario that it beggars belief. This gels with the quickly posted and deleted social media posts bragging about shooting down a SU-25.

    There’s been a lot of FUD on both sides of this conflict, but on this issue, the mainstream media got it right.

  188. 14 January 2016 update: Russia sends a letter to the Dutch on the use of speculation in their MH 17 crash report as well as ignoring/excluding evidence provided by the Russian side

  189. 24 February 2016 update: Dutch MH 17 investigation keeps falling apart:

    Returns to air to air shoot-down –

  190. Covering new disinformation, Off Guardian points to the regressive nature of the MH 17 investigation:


  191. skeptic says:

    “In recent years, leading scholars have conclusively established that for a decade or two during the 1930s and 1940s, a small network of Communist spies quietly gained substantial control of our national government in Washington, DC, successfully diverting the actions of the United States to their own nefarious ends”

    Certainly Alger Hiss, Harry Dexter White, and a few others were aiding the Soviet Union, but they scarcely controlled the government.

    Could we have some sources?

  192. Contraviews says: • Website

    The JIT in its 29/9 report showed a picture of a smoke trail. If that had been the smoke trail of the BUK that alledgedly shot down MH 17 than that picture would without a shadow of doubt been splashed over al the western media within hours. Hundreds may by thousands would have seen it and scores of pictures and videos would have been taken. The very fact that JIT now comes up with a smoke trail (which could have been taken any where) proves that it is a fake. If that is a fake all the other pictures are most likely fakes. Mr Eliot Higgins should have done better.

  193. Despite the Dutch whitewash (report) which could only be called the ‘likely’ & ‘probably’ ‘we love to point any finger at Putin report’, material at odds with the western line continues to come out:


  194. The Dutch investigators “can’t decipher” the radar data provided by the Russians. As well, Dutch police have confiscated from journalists raw footage of new witness interviews that will no doubt be shared with Ukraine as a party to the investigation, endangering those persons who provided the information on condition of confidentiality:


  195. JR says:

    The lengths Dutch Prime Minister publicly went (serving quote ‘geopolitical interests’) to get the EU-Ukraine association agreement ratified the clear rejection by advisory referendum notwithstanding, ought to make any well informed reader suspicious of how far Rutte went out of public sight to serve those same ‘geopolitical interests’ by manipulating both the investigation and public opinion in relation to MH17.

    Rutte recently demonstrated his fealty to those ‘geopolitical interests’ again. When asked if new evidence was presented in the Skripal case to justify the Netherlands support for the UK, Rutte answered that ‘such evidence wasn’t necessary because May had stated that it was highly likely that Russia was responsible’.

    The Dutch Government got a UN mandate to perform the investigation and as such that part of the investigation had to be transparent.

    Clearly to serve those ‘geopolitical interests’ the Dutch separated the technical investigation from the legal liability investigation. The technical investigation was performed under the UN mandate and the second legal liability investigation was organized separate from any UN mandate.

    The Dutch, Australian, Belgium government colluded with the Ukrainians to organize a ‘Joint Investigation Team’ which under the cover of performing a legal investigation refuses any transparency and at regular intervals hints that indictments are close but not there yet.

    Also the Dutch Transport Safety Board technical investigation has concluded that the UkSATSE should have closed the Air Control area above Eastern Ukraine, but the Dutch government has thus far never taken any action to hold the Ukrainians responsible for that failure even when 3 days before MNH17 a AN-24 was downed from 6500m and UkSATSE (joint civil-military ATC) continued to control some 100 civil air liners a day over that area. The Dutch simply accepted that the Ukraine lost all relevant radar data.

  196. JR says:

    4th June 2014
    UkSATSE ensures safety in Ukrainian sky under any conditions
    Ukrainian State Air Traffic Services Enterprise (UkSATSE) informs that the enterprise keeps on providing the whole range of air navigation services. It ensures flight safety in the airspace of Ukraine, airdromes of Ukraine and in the international airspace over the high seas at the relevant level. Moreover, UkSATSE ensures trouble-free operation of branches of Joint Civil-Military System of Air Traffic Management of Ukraine irrespective of foreign interference in work of air traffic services bodies in Crimea and at the East of Ukraine.

  197. JR says:

    Actually this “Who shot down MH17?” is the wrong question.

    The question is “Who is liable?”.

    Shooting down aircraft above a war zone is SOP. If a civilian air liner is guided and controlled over such war area where 3 days earlier an AN-24 has been downed from 6500m one really ought to question the competence and liability of the ATC involved. That ATC authority UkSATSE as a joint civil-military ATC was fully informed about the situation and still continued to guide some 100 civil air liners ad day for three days over that war zone.

    Shooting down a civil air liner over a war zone is tragic but not necessarily always a crime. There was no motive for the East Ukrainians, but as shown by the relentless exploitation by the Kiev puppet regime this Kiev regime most definitely had a motive.

    Any liability investigation with the Ukrainian secret service as an investigator like in the Dutch/Australian/Ukraine Joint investigation Team simply can’t be trusted to even look for the truth. The JIT was set up with the intention of evading the transparency requirements associated with the UN mandated investigation.

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
  198. CanSpeccy says: • Website

    Actually this “Who shot down MH17?” is the wrong question.

    The question is “Who is liable?”.

    In which connection, as may already have been noted:

    Malaysia Airlines filed a flight plan requesting 35,000 feet through airspace but was told [by Ukrainian air traffic control] to fly at 33,000

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  199. Thinking people smelled a rat in the case of MH17 straight off. No sensible person can fail to smell it now. Just a few considerations:
    1. Donbass freedom fighters (and, by extension, Russia) were blamed by the US, its vassals, and its client states like Ukraine even before the debris cooled down. Only the perpetrators could have known designated “guilty party” without any investigation.
    2. Satellite pictures promised by Kerry four years ago never materialized. The only logical conclusion is that the perpetrators were not those accused by the US, and the pictures would have revealed real perpetrators, which the US did not want to happen.
    3. Malaysia, the owner of that airplane, was not allowed to participate in the investigation. Apparently, someone was afraid that it might not play ball. This can only happen when the “investigators” meant to hide the truth, not to reveal it.
    4. The UK, Australia, the Netherlands, and one of the suspects, Ukraine, signed a non-disclosure agreement. It makes no sense unless one or more of the signatories is guilty.
    5. The “investigation” is going on for four years, longer than any investigation in the history of civil aviation. The experience shows that a lot less time is needed to uncover the truth. Thus, the length of this “investigation” shows that the real purpose is cover-up.
    6. Ukraine never provided the records of pilots’ communications with air traffic controllers, or any other air traffic control records. Thus, it must have had something to hide.
    One can continue in this vein, but what’s the point? Suffice it to say that all international airlines drew their conclusions: they fly over Russia, but avoid Ukrainian airspace, like they avoid Iranian and North Korean airspace. Sapienti sat.

    • Replies: @JR
  200. In my blog ‘contraviews’ post 148 you will find a recording of the conversation (mentioned in this article) between the Estonian Foreign Affairs Minister Urmas Paet and EU Foreign Policy chief Catherine Ashton. Go to the year 2014 in the margin and scroll down to post 148. One may find more interesting articles on MH17.

  201. JR says:

    See my comment nr 230: There is not one investigation. The Dutch manipulated this into two separate investigations. There was a technical UN mandated transparent Dutch Safety Board investigation. The Dutch organized a second criminal investigation together with Australia, Belgium and the Ukraine and instigated A Joint Investigation Team (JIT).
    The manipulation and exploitation of the MH17 incident by the Dutch seems to rival that of Skripal incident by the UK.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
  202. @JR

    Yes. I can understand the Dutch government: they serve the US overlords first and foremost. They don’t give a hoot about the lives of ordinary Dutch people. What I do not understand is the behavior of the people who lost loved ones in MH17 crash. Don’t they want to know who killed them? Don’t they object to being grist for the mill of amoral and cynical politicians?

    • Replies: @Rurik
    , @Wizard of Oz
  203. Rurik says:

    Don’t they want to know who killed them?

    no, not if you pay them enough money

    (just like with 9/11)

    the wreckage of MH17 was obviously riddled with machine gun fire

    only Ukraine could have done that

    the way the zio-west immediately blamed Putin proved it was all a lie

    it was the zio-west that foisted the political strife in Ukraine

    it was the zio-west that allowed the Ukraine to have veto power over the “investigation” into the shooting down of MH17

    the whole thing is a devil’s farce

    just like all the other atrocities and war crimes committed in this century by the zio-fiend

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
  204. @Rurik

    You are even more cynical than I am. I have no doubt that the politicians, Dutch, US, Australian, Ukrainian, and all others, are totally amoral and unscrupulous. Naturally, they are all venal. As the US saying goes, “honest politician is the one who, once bought, stays bought”.
    But I thought that a person who lost someone in that crash would like to know the truth, rather than “official” US BS. It would be sad to think that none of almost 300 people on board had anyone who cared about them more than about money. If I were related to any of the victims, I’d feel vindictive. I’d want to kill whoever is responsible, not whoever the liars found it expedient to blame. And I’d make damn sure I know who planned this provocation and who executed it in cold blood.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
    , @Rurik
    , @Wizard of Oz
  205. peterAUS says:

    If I were related to any of the victims, I’d feel vindictive. I’d want to kill whoever is responsible, not whoever the liars found it expedient to blame.
    And I’d make damn sure I know who planned this provocation and who executed it in cold blood.

    Good to see that before going onto suicide murder rampage you are willing to do some forethought and preparation.
    So… exactly would you “make damn sure I know”?
    You must be well connected.

    If I were to do the same I wouldn’t know how to do it.
    I mean, save hacking into some highly classified data banks of major world powers I really wouldn’t have an idea how to proceed. And I just can’t hack there…..just thinking how much hard work would even trying to develop a proper “zero day exploit” require….just no way.

    Second best would be kidnapping and questioning a person who knows all that. Unfortunately that’s somebody rather high up, with decent protection. I don’t think I could pull that of even in my best days. It’s simply out of question now.

    So…how would you do it?

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
  206. @peterAUS

    Well, it isn’t easy, but I think it is doable, at least if you are willing to invest some effort and intelligence into it. First, as far as the execution of this crime goes, there are three bona fide suspects: Ukrainian government, Russian government, and Donbass freedom fighters. I’d analyze the timing of events and statements: when the plane was shot, when the actual info from the crash site appeared, when the statements were made. Any accusations that preceded evidence could have originated only from the perpetrators or those who directed the criminals. Second, there is an old Latin question that is as appropriate today as it was two thousand years ago: cui prodest? That applies to perpetrators and those who directed them. Third, who had the means to commit the crime? Shooting down an airplane at 33 000 feet requires technical means and skill. For example, I wouldn’t be able to do it without special training. Fourth, who conducted the investigation? Does it seem honest? If not, who resorted to shenanigans? Who was in the best position to produce red herrings? If the investigation appears to be a cover-up, who participated in it and who facilitated it? Who was excluded from it? If the investigation was a ruse, those excluded from it clearly aren’t guilty. And so forth. That would take time, but, as we all know, vengeance is a dish best served cold.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
  207. peterAUS says:

    Well….you believe that none of people who had a loved one among those dead has been “willing to invest some effort and intelligence into it.”
    It’s a lot of people……and I don’t buy it.
    Feels a bit…condescending.

    My point is that a serious investigation can’t be done without access to highly classified data.
    No amount of work with public available data is good enough to produce a proper result.
    Or at least a result which would prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, who was the perpetrator. I mean….the person/persons coming to that conclusion will, literally, spend their life/lives on that. Not something to be taken lightly.

    I, personally, believe the plane was shot down by the guys in Donbass, by mistake. Happens in such wars. Don’t blame them. Just an error in judgement.
    Maybe the blame should be placed on “civilian” part of that tragedy, from company management, through air controllers to the plane pilot/copilot. Still, just several levels of negligence.

    The circus after the shooting is another matter. From media to top politicians. All sides.
    Of course that the top players know exactly what happened. They just don’t want, for different reasons, to present that evidence to the public.
    That is interesting.
    Or simply proving the fact, again, that when real interests of the big guys are concerned, public outrcy means nothing.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
  208. @peterAUS

    Interesting hypothesis, but there are several publicly known facts that contradict it:
    1. Donbass freedom fighters were blamed by the US, its vassals, and its client states like Ukraine even before the debris cooled down. Only the perpetrators could have known designated “guilty party” without any investigation.
    2. Satellite pictures promised by Kerry four years ago never materialized. If they could prove that Donbass freedom fighters were the perpetrators, these pictures would have been publicized by the US more than any Hollywood movie. My conclusion is that the perpetrators were not those accused by the US, and the pictures would have revealed real perpetrators, which the US did not want to happen.
    3. Malaysia, the owner of that airplane, was not allowed to participate in the investigation. Apparently, someone was afraid that it might not play ball. This can only happen when the “investigators” meant to hide the truth, not to reveal it.
    4. The UK, Australia, the Netherlands, and one of the suspects, Ukraine, signed a non-disclosure agreement. It makes no sense unless one or more of the signatories is guilty. Donbass freedom fighters are not a party to that agreement.
    5. The “investigation” is going on for four years, longer than any investigation in the history of civil aviation. The experience shows that a lot less time is needed to uncover the truth. Thus, the length of this “investigation” shows that the real purpose is cover-up.
    6. Ukraine never provided the records of pilots’ communications with air traffic controllers, or any other air traffic control records. Thus, it must have had something to hide.
    7. Malaysian Airlines filed a flight plan at 35 000 feet. Ukrainian air traffic controllers told the plane to reduce altitude to 33 000 feet over Donbass. This was never explained.
    8. The “investigators” keep pushing the theory that MH17 was shot down by a Buk missile. Many facts contradict this theory. One, the “investigators” produced just a few allegedly Buk fragments, whereas it is well known that Buk missile generates thousands of these fragments, many hundreds of which would be lodged in the plane debris and passenger bodies. Two, Buk missile leaves a smoke trail visible for many miles around, which remains there for more than an hour. Nobody in this densely populated area captured that on video, or even saw that. Three, many witnesses saw the second airplane in the vicinity. Actually, this info first appeared on BBC news. BBC then deleted this footage from its site, which strongly suggests that whoever controls BBC is complicit in the crime. This certainly excludes Donbass freedom fighters. Four, there are round holes in the pilots’ cabin, which are totally inconsistent with Buk missile elements, but remarkably consistent with the damage from 30 mm gun, a standard equipment of Soviet Su fighter jets that both Ukrainian and Russian air force has, and that Donbass freedom fighters most certainly don’t have.
    Overall, my hypothesis is that somebody smarter than those pathetic puppets in Kiev planned this crime specifically to blame Donbass freedom fighters and, by extension, Russia, for it. The crime was executed by the Ukrainian army, well known for its ineptitude and general ham-handedness. The operation was botched, so that an extensive cover-up became necessary. Hence unprecedented four year “investigation” with direct participation of one of the most obvious suspects.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
  209. peterAUS says:

    Well, actually I believe that those points do not contradict my theory.
    1. Donbass freedom fighters were blamed by the US, its vassals, and its client states like Ukraine even before the debris cooled down. Only the perpetrators could have known designated “guilty party” without any investigation
    1. Donbass freedom fighters were blamed by the US, its vassals, and its client states like Ukraine even before the debris cooled down. They saw, on their monitors, what happened.
    2. Satellite pictures promised by Kerry four years ago never materialized. If they could prove that Donbass freedom fighters were the perpetrators, these pictures would have been publicized by the US more than any Hollywood movie. My conclusion is that the perpetrators were not those accused by the US, and the pictures would have revealed real perpetrators, which the US did not want to happen.
    2. Satellite pictures promised by Kerry four years ago never materialized. They could’ve pointed to actual surveillance capabilities of the US, either way.
    3. Malaysia, the owner of that airplane, was not allowed to participate in the investigation. Apparently, someone was afraid that it might not play ball. This can only happen when the “investigators” meant to hide the truth, not to reveal it
    3. Malaysia, the owner of that airplane, was not allowed to participate in the investigation. The investigation was supposed to be as impartial as possible. Interested parties were kept out as much as possible.

    No need to keep see-sawing this. Being done plenty of times before and it is being done, as we speak, all over Internet.

    You believe what you will; I do the same.

    Moving on.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
  210. @peterAUS

    Laughable arguments.
    1. If anyone on the US/Ukraine side saw on their screens anything that could place the blame on Donbass freedom fighters and/or Russia, they would have presented their evidence straight away. The US and its vassals (e.g., UK) go into lengthy hysterics even when they have no evidence whatsoever (US elections in 2016, Skripal affair, etc).
    2. The US was so eager to hide its surveillance capabilities that Kerry blabbered about it from the get go. Then presented zilch. Very believable.
    3. If Malaysia was excluded to make the investigation impartial, than Ukraine, Netherlands, Australia, and UK should have been excluded, as well. The investigation should have been conducted by a party who has no stake in the matter. Instead, it is conducted by one of the prime suspects and countries who lost citizens in that crash. For four years! With non-disclosure agreement, to boot. Inspires lots of confidence.
    I am sure your responses to the rest would be just as “convincing”.

    • Replies: @yurivku
  211. peterAUS says:

    Laughable arguments.

    I am sure your responses to the rest would be just as “convincing”

    What took you so long?

    Is that you, personally, or it’s “Eastern” thing? You appear to be from Taiwan. Is that your cultural thing? You know…start a discussion and as soon as the other guy disagrees it’s “laughable” and condescending.
    Or it’s age thing? Like, you mid twenties?
    Badly hidden reverse racism, even?
    C’mon…tell me. At least something to get from this…”discussion”.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
  212. @peterAUS

    Sorry to disappoint, I am not from Taiwan and not in my mid-twenties. I am a scientist, a biochemist. I take into account evidence and dismiss empty talk. Arguments like “we have evidence but we won’t show it to you” do not cut ice with me. If you put something like this in a paper, you’d be booted out of any scientific journal. For a good reason.

  213. Ronnie says:

    It is a simple relationship – the Jewish controlled MSM support the US Deep State position on everything and in return the US government supports Israel, no matter how illegal or inappropriate the Israeli behavior has become. And the citizens of the USA suffer greatly because of this.

  214. Rurik says:

    And I’d make damn sure I know who planned this provocation and who executed it in cold blood.

    that’s how some of the widows of 9/11 felt, and when Dubya told us all we don’t need any stinking investigation, since the government had told us all who did it (Osama and his 19 henchmen), they just wouldn’t’ buy it.

    and a sham ‘investigation’ was commenced, much of the motivation for which came from these heroic women.

    but then when they went to the other families of the victims, and promised them billions of shekels to leave it alone, and move on, a critical mass of them were willing to get paid off for the murder of their loved ones.

    Probably told something like ‘your loved one is dead, and demanding to know who did it, is going to anger a lot of powerful people. Do you really want to do that? when you can have so many millions of shekels instead?

    so they bribe and bully at the same time

    I recently watched a documentary on drug kingpin Escobar, and his mantra for anyone who got in his way, was that they had a choice; ‘Lead or silver, take your pick’. IOW a bullet to the gut, or a bag of cash. It worked well.

  215. There are three possibilities:
    1 rebels shot, our thought they shot, at an Ukrainian bomber, and hit a passenger plane
    2 a Ukrainian bomber used the passenger plane as shield, in the expectation that the rebels would not fire
    3 a western plane deliberately shot down the plane, possibly a stealth plane.
    That the plane was ordered to fly lower by Kiev air control might support the last two possibilities.

    In any case, neither the rebels, nor the Russians had any interest in shooting down the plane.
    The western interest at the time was clear, the Netherlands objected most to sanctions, our export to Russia.
    The 300 deaths changed that literally overnight.

    What never has been explained was the telephone call from prime minister Rutte to vice prime minister Asscher, at the time on holiday on vacation in the south of France.
    Rutte phoned Asscher on his mobile, but asked him to call back on a land line ‘so that the Russians could not listen in’.
    What at the afternoon of the crash was so secret that the Russians were not allowed to hear, I have just the suspicion that Rutte told Asscher that the Russian had to be blamed.

    The Dutch investigation, with suspect Ukraine, drags on until now.
    Here my suspicion is that that is the objective, continuing with vague accusations against Russia, but never something concrete.
    Two unnamed experts just investigated Russian radar tapes, and came to a different conclusion than Russia.
    The asserted BUK is, they say, not to be seen, alas, this means very little, a BUK goes so fast that ordinary radar does not pick it up, the antenna rotates too slowly, people who might know, say.
    Radar of course also does not pick up a stealth plane.

    Those who followed the murder of Bin Laden in Abottabad know that the USA used a helicopter there invisible for Pakistani military radar.
    This became known beecause the helicopter crashed, and Pakistan allowed Chinese technicians to examine it.
    I suspect this helicopter had active stealth, that is, it neutralises radar pulses that are received.

    But monuments and remembrances all over the place.

    BTW, theory 2 seems to be in a top secret Australian report on the disaster.

    • Replies: @Rurik
  216. yurivku says:

    Sorry, but do you really can’t see who you are arguing with? This is payable or sincere, but certainly a player of anti-Russia team, whatever the truth is he’ll stick to that line.
    He did not give a chance to doubt it.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
  217. Rurik says:
    @jilles dykstra

    There are three possibilities:
    1 rebels shot, our thought they shot, at an Ukrainian bomber, and hit a passenger plane
    2 a Ukrainian bomber used the passenger plane as shield, in the expectation that the rebels would not fire
    3 a western plane deliberately shot down the plane, possibly a stealth plane.

    no, there is only one possibility, and that is that a Ukrainian jet shot down MH17, because no other scenario can account for the OBVIOUS bullet holes to the cockpit of the plane.

    The western interest at the time was clear, the Netherlands objected most to sanctions, our export to Russia.
    The 300 deaths changed that literally overnight.

    good point,

    only it’s worth pointing out that these zio-interests – to destroy Iraq and Libya and now Syria

    are all evils that in no way benefit the actual people or institutions of the West, hardly.

    Rather it’s a catastrophe for the people of the West, that these evils are being perpetrated in their name, by the zio-scum who hold our governments hostage.

    So let’s just remember, when you say ‘the west’, what you’re referring to is the zio-west, which is the enemy of the actual West.

    It doesn’t serve the West to be at odds with Russia. Just the opposite. It’s doesn’t serve the people of the West to be at war with Muslim nations. Just the opposite.

    So the same forces in the world that have destroyed Iraq and Libya and Afghanistan and Donbas and tried to destroy Syria utterly before Putin heroically came to its aid, are the same forces trying to destroy the West as well, with mass-immigration and everything else ((they)) can think of to sow hatred and strife. ((Their)) calling cards.

    Rutte told Asscher that the Russian had to be blamed.

    no doubt

    The asserted BUK is, they say, not to be seen,

    a BUK missle leaves a distinctive trail that would have been visible for a long time on that clear day.

    no such trail was witnessed or photographed. There was no BUK. MH17 was shot down with air to air 30 caliber machine gun fire from a Sukhoi Su-25, flown by the Ukrainian air force. They may have also used air to air anti-aircraft missiles. But there’s no doubt about the machine gun bullet holes, which are obvious.

    Those who followed the murder of Bin Laden in Abottabad know that the USA used a helicopter there invisible for Pakistani military radar.

    the account of the killing (and secret burial with zero proof) of Osama is patently absurd.

    How in God’s name anyone would believe the zio-western press and government liars who lie to us every time they talk, about something like the killing of Osama, with not even a photo, other than the fake ones they got caught putting out, is beyond me.

    Do you also believe that Putin killed that spy in England recently?

    Do you believe that Assad used chemical weapons against his own people?

    Do you believe that Saddam’s soldiers were tossing babies out of incubators?

    do you believe that Saddam had WMD?

    Do you believe that Osama did 9/11?

    do you believe that ‘they hate us for our freedom’?

    • Replies: @jilles dykstra
  218. @yurivku

    Whoever that personage is, a lot of honest people read these comments. So, even if arguing with that person makes as much sense as having a heart-to-heart conversation with a lamppost, it still makes sense to present arguments for the sake of other readers.

    • Replies: @Ron Unz
  219. Ron Unz says:

    Whoever that personage is, a lot of honest people read these comments.

    That’s certainly correct. I’d estimate that 95% of readers do not themselves write comments, so to the extent that someone is trying to “persuade” people rather than just spouting off, that’s the audience you should be targeting.

    To the extent that some commenters are just “trolls” making weak, “trollish” arguments, you can consider them as ideal punching-bags, allowing you to convincingly present your own opinion against a feeble sparring partner, and thereby make it much more likely you’ll persuade the much larger number of other casual readers.

  220. peterAUS says:
    @Ron Unz


    In meantime, for the minority here (mature and/or reading a bit of history, say, 5 %):
    US Navy Cruiser, Aegis type, during peace, made a mistake.
    In this case a hastily organized crew in a middle of heavy conventional war apparently could not.

    That’s for the shooting.
    Now, the “fallout” from the shooting is another matter altogether and something definitely highly politicized against Russia.

    The only which interests me here is the inability of interested public to get the truth. Even in this era of instant communication and access to all sorts of data and computing power, when it really matters, public is helpless.

    Addressing that could, maybe, be somewhat productive here.

    And those who spout they know how about this: would you sign a death sentence against the crew that did it? You sign it with full confidence and they’ll get executed 2 hours later. If you can that’s another interesting thing around here.

  221. @peterAUS

    If you are such a fan of Wiki, here is the Wiki page about the first civilian aircraft shot down by Ukraine, back in 2001, when Ukrainian oligarchs controlled the presidency, but before an oligarch actually became President:
    In that case Ukrainian authorities also denied their crime for years.
    As the joke goes, Ukraine is the only country on Earth that shot down two civilian aircraft and not a single military one.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
  222. peterAUS says:

    Scientific mind for sure at works here. You know, reading carefully, checking/rechecking facts etc.

    In that first link
    there is
    7.1 2001 Siberia Airlines Flight 1812

    That’s fine.
    I recognize a guy on a mission.

    Good luck.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
  223. @peterAUS

    Sorry to disappoint again, but my mission is my day job. It is very interesting and satisfying. Very successful both scientifically and career-vise. But my job makes me very intolerant: I can’t stand BS from colleagues, grad students, and propaganda alike.
    As to Ukraine, I was born and grew up there, and I speak better Ukrainian than most self-proclaimed “patriots”. I deeply resent that Nazis turned what could have been a decent country into a shithole.

    • Replies: @yurivku
  224. @Ron Unz

    This website has some of the best comments on the Internet. I learn more from the comments than from the articles.

  225. @Rurik

    ” Do you believe that Saddam’s soldiers were tossing babies out of incubators? ”

    This propaganda tale has been debunked.
    About the bullet holes in MH17, a bit more complicated.
    A BUK does not have to hit, in the vicinity of the target it shoots a lot of projectiles, shrapnel, resembling bullets, on the target.
    The interesting point here is that the BUK did what a fighter pilot would have done, kill the crew, in order to prevent that a mayday with specifics could be sent.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  226. @peterAUS

    ” In this case a hastily organized crew in a middle of heavy conventional war apparently could not.”

    There was no war whatsoever.
    The USA crew deluded themselves into thinking there was one, by just looking at their screens.
    They were so nervous that just at the 23rd or so effort they could feed the correct code into the missile for firing.
    Why the USA ship was inside Iran’s territorial waters has never been explained.
    The occasional firing with machine guns at tankers from Iranian rubber boats did no harm whatsoever, just a nuisance.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
  227. yurivku says:

    This probably again not for peter, but for everybody including me.

    I deeply resent that Nazis turned what could have been a decent country into a shithole.

    Dont’t agree with “could have been a decent country ” Ukrain never been and never will be a decent one. Just because it’s made artificially from a piece of shit by Austrian and Germand hands.
    But peter is a Croat AFAIK which also made by Germans from shitty serbs, so Uki’s Nazis are relaives to him.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
  228. @yurivku

    Thanks, I did not know that. Now it all makes perfect sense. Croatian Ustaša were devout allies of Hitler in WWII, just like Western Ukrainian nationalists. Ustaše militia is well known for its atrocities that made even German Nazis blush ( Again, exactly like Ukrainian OUN and its armed wing Ukrainian Insurgent Army. No wonder this personage supports the descendants and admirers of those “Ukrainians” who committed Volhynia massacre and weren’t even smart enough to hide their crimes, so that today Internet is full of pictures of Polish women and children brutally murdered by those monsters. Even Wiki has a well-illustrated page about Volhynia massacre (
    Ustaše are exactly like Bandera followers, the worst scum on the face of the Earth.

    • Agree: yurivku
    • Replies: @jilles dykstra
  229. @AnonFromTN

    In order to see how it began read
    Voline ( Vsevolod Mikhailovitsch Eichenbaum), ‘The unknown revolution (Kronstadt 1921 Ukraine 1918-21)’, New York 1955
    Bolsjewist jews driving the Ukrainians from their farms.
    For an eye witness account of these people trying to sell a few left possessions at railway stations, in order to postpone death by hunger
    Morgan Philips Price (edited Tania Rose), ‘Dispatches from the Weimar Republic, Versailles and German Fascism’, London 1999
    Price travelled by train through the Ukraine.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
  230. peterAUS says:
    @jilles dykstra


    ” In this case a hastily organized crew in a middle of heavy conventional war apparently could not.”

    was related to the people who shot down THIS plane (Ukraine).

    So, my point was/is:
    A properly trained crew, in a peacetime, on US Aegis type cruiser, made a mistake.
    Again, a hastily organized crew of a separatist movement, in a middle of heavy conventional war, made a mistake.

    That’s for actual shooting down.

    The circus from then on, including prevalent attitude here, is another matter.

  231. @jilles dykstra

    Well, if we are to dive into history, here are a few tidbits.
    Anti-Jewish pogroms were a long-standing tradition in much of what now is Ukraine.
    The first widespread case that came into stories and even literature (Shevchenko’s poem) was Haidamacks rebellion in 1648 (Google it, you can find a lot of info). Another well-known case was mass murder of Jews by Petlura’s regime in 1918-21. It was so atrocious, that when a Jew Shalom-Shmuel Schwarzbard murdered Petlura in Paris, the French court acquitted him in 1927, even though he confessed to the murder, citing as his reason that Petlura goons murdered his whole family and countless other Jews.
    All this was well before Bolsheviks took over Ukraine (what was Ukraine back then; they added a lot to it, including Donbass, some Southern parts, and Western Ukraine, which was among their crimes, in my view).
    BTW, In Volhynia during German occupation Ukrainian nationalists murdered Poles and mixed Polish-Ukrainian families, including women and children of all ages. Murdered brutally. You can see the pictures of the heinous crimes of Bandera followers all over the Internet. Here are a few examples (weak-hearted should not watch this)

    • Replies: @jilles dykstra
  232. @Hepp

    I think the question of what is best for the world is best left to the 8 million that live in it; humanity should decide on its government every ten years.
    The nation state system fosters uncontrolled capitalism. The nation state system is a middle man between the global wealth of a very few and the slave poverty of the mass of 8 billion.. The problem with capitalism is that it is such a powerful system of economics nothing can block its path.
    Uncontrolled, capitalism is like the game of monopoly: in that game, payment is due to the capitalist owner at most landing spots on the playing board; unless the party landing on such spot already owns the spot landed on with each turn at play. In the end, the game of monopoly wipes out everyone; it transfers everyone’s wealth to but one player, the winner. Everyone else is a broke worthless loser.
    Without internationally enforced rules that prevent powerful, large mega monopolies corporations (the public is unable to vote to change the corporate nature or to restructure by voting those Board of Directors who mange the mega-corporation) to reach the size of nation states and to amass the much more capital to burn than most nation states, nothing is going to change. Bottom up insistence that nations write laws to control the mega-capitalist powered, monopoly secured corporations go unheeded because no politicians or group of politicians is strong enough to write laws that the nations can enforce, hence mega corporations are virtually operating in a completely lawless environment { meaning mega corporations can do whatever they want }. There is no nation powerful enough to reel in many very large corporations; those certain few corporations own and enjoy the security from competition that monopolies guarantee in most of the extremely profitable markets in the world.
    No one, including Russia and China can expect to survive trying to compete against the masses of capital, the earning capacities and the wealth building power of monopolies. Monopolies rule the nation state law makers , not the other way around. If I were you, I would add to your list of possible MH-17 bashers several global corporations; the one’s I have in mind, cannot be completely identified to a single nation in the world because they are so large they own the lawmakers, most of the assets and all of the earning power in many of the nations.
    One the 9/11 clouds is the possible corporate involvement.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
    , @jilles dykstra
  233. peterAUS says:

    An interesting point.

    Now, there is another.
    Starting from:

    ….payment is due to the capitalist owner …

    what happens if the payment is not paid?
    We know what happens. The state enforces the law which demands the payment.
    Key word “enforces”.

    So, you are, maybe, correct, up to a point, but missing that “enforcement” element. For me, the key element.

    There is a mechnism to enforce that payment.
    Let’s follow it.
    International laws, international courts, then economic pressures…all nine yards.

    And when all that fails what happens: Regime change. The…”power projection mechanism” of West steps in. Cutting to the chase, US military.

    At the moment the enforcer of global capitalism is US military, when you think about it.
    Yes, I know it’s oversimplification but it is the core of all this.

    So, those multinationals do need an enforcer.

    True, ideally they’ll want some multiracial/multicultural force, as any preferable workforce today.
    The problem is…motivating people to kill, let alone die for something, demands a bit more than a paycheck and medical.
    And, at the moment, only the “blood and soil” provides that type of motivation.

    Even the modern empire’s military is based on US flag and US patriotism. That’s sort of (tragicomic) funny because the biggest losers in the current game are the troopers in that military, but let’s stick to the topic here.
    Second best, Russian, Russian flag and patriotism.
    Third, China…….

    So…things are a bit more complicated there than simply “corporations rule the world”.
    Just a little bit more.

  234. Anoynmous says:

    I thought we established a few years back that the plane was taken down by Howard Stern:

  235. @smellyoilandgas

    ” The nation state system fosters uncontrolled capitalism. ”

    What do you think the present strikes in France are for ?
    To prevent that uncontrolled capitalism is introduced in France.
    The French strikers know quite well that just the nation state can protect them.
    They fear privatization, and they’re right.

  236. @AnonFromTN

    ” Anti-Jewish pogroms were a long-standing tradition in much of what now is Ukraine. ”

    Never heard of pro jewish pogroms.
    But the problem with you, and people like you, that they like complaining, but apparently never asked themselves why.
    Yet, Solsjenytsyn explains the why excellently in his book on jews in Russia since 1800.
    Jewry just had to blame themselves, harsh trading practices.

    I have the book, trying to find out if there exists a translation of his second book, jews in the USSR since 1917, to my surprise the cheapest book on sale, the first book, is some $ 70.
    This $ 70 is the german translation.
    Prices like this often indicate that books are bought up, to prevent that they are read.
    Cannot remember what I paid long ago, but I hardly ever pay more than € 20 for a book.

    Please do read
    ‘From prejudice to destruction’, Jacob Katz, 1980, Cambridge MA
    This jewish Israeli historian explains German antisemitism.
    He’s the exception, all the others just ‘explain’ antisemitism by antisemitism.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    , @englishmike
  237. @jilles dykstra

    I am not complaining, as antisemitism does not affect me in any way. I am just against any kind of nationalism, as my experience shows that judging people by their national or racial origin is simply stupid. Usually people who have no personal achievements to be proud of (simply put, losers) take pride in their nationality, religion, race, and similar things they acquired without personal effort.

    • Replies: @jilles dykstra
    , @CanSpeccy
  238. @AnonFromTN

    No idea what nationality you have, but if any nation is proud of itself, it is the USA.
    But nationalism has nothing to do with judging, or being proud.
    I’m a Dutch nationalist, I valued the country that existed, that my forefathers created.
    It no longer exists.
    Yet, half the year w’re in France, and respect the French.
    They’re different, but so what ?
    I respect them too for resisting the attempts to destroy the French culture.
    In any country I visited I respected the people and the culture, it is theirs, not mine.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
  239. CanSpeccy says: • Website

    I am just against any kind of nationalism

    Ah, so you won’t mind if your neighborhood is settled by an influx of mosque-building, polygamous Muslims opposed to girls’ education, or Africans practitioners of Voudoo, or Sikhs for a Sikh homeland. All good people no doubt, but more concerned with taking advantage of high American wages, cheap housing, reliable electrical supplies, etc. than in assimilating to American culture.

    You are, in other words, for open borders, even if that means American wages and the American standard of living converging with those of the Third World while America’s social cohesion disintegrates, as tens and even hundreds of millions flood in across the borders in order to take advantage of America’s prosperity created through the sweat and toil of the native born or their ancestors.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
  240. @CanSpeccy

    I think you are purposely conflating things that are not the same. Tried and true arguing technique: claim that your opponent said something nonsensical, then show how nonsensical it is.
    I am against open borders, I strongly believe that each country should keep its borders closed and should not fall for the ruse of “refugees”. I also believe that many EU countries are committing suicide by admitting lots of people with incompatible cultures. Besides, genuine refugees are usually women, children, and elderly (say, like Donbass refugees going to Russia). When the “refugees” are mostly able-bodied young males of draft age, they are not refugees, they are an invasion army. You can thank your EU bureaucracy for the surrender of Europe, which I used to like as a great vacation destination and will miss.
    My point is that people of all colors, religions (or lack thereof), and national origins can be smart or dumb, hard-working or lazy, law abiding or prone to breaking the law, etc. There is no correlation between any of these things with their color, nationality, or religion. What’s more, smart people change their ways to fit the prevailing culture of their country of residence. BTW, the US population (with the exception of Native Americans who survived genocide) is composed of a variety of immigrants. It used to be the strength of the country, before elites took over and imposed “political correctness”.

  241. @jilles dykstra

    Americans are a nationality in a political, but not in an ethnic sense. I always appreciated cultural variety of Europe. I liked the difference between France, Italy, Spain, Germany, Austria, Czech republic, Switzerland, UK, Hungary, Croatia, Slovenia, etc. It used to be that in Europe you drive a couple of hours and enter a different country with distinct language, culture, architecture, cuisine, etc (whereas in the US you drive six hours on a highway and see exactly the same red barn). So, I agree with you 100%. In fact, I am sad that because of EU bureaucracy Europe is committing suicide.

    • Replies: @jilles dykstra
  242. @AnonFromTN

    Eric Zemmour, ‘Le Suicide Francais’, 2014 Paris

  243. @AnonFromTN

    Not quite, I long ago drove from Seattle to Minneapolis, blue highways.
    What kind of people the farmers were was, I did not ask them, obvious to me.
    French farmers, like one sees French farms in France, Dutch or German, the same.
    Orange City, the Netherlands of the fifties, as Jonathan Raban describes in his book on how he went down the Missisippi, teaching evolution in Orange City, out of a job.
    The USA does have cultural differences, such as Chinatown in San Francisco.
    But I agree, in general, a hamburger culture.
    I must add that I never visited the NE, what interested me in the USA was the scenery, and USA history, history that most in the USA deny that it existed before white man entered.
    Yet USA history goes back at least 30.000 years.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
  244. expat47 says:

    Why on earth would Russia gain anything from shooting down the plane? Western sanctions assault on the Russian Federation had been ongoing for some time before this incident. The US is willing to kill its own people, ala 9/11. The deep state is malicious and dangerous and it is the alt internet that makes our use of same to glean information that we would never to see in the MSM. The US has been trying to provoke Russia into a war and Putin hasn’t taken the bait. The senseless idiots in the west don’t seem to realise that Russian nuclear weaponry is supperia to our own and life on earth would surely end; except for the wealthy elites who run our country who would be safe in our D.U.M.B’s

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  245. Gary says:

    How about Flight 370? Far more interesting and

  246. @jilles dykstra

    US NE looks funny to Europeans: a building constructed 100 years ago is considered old, whereas in countries that actually have history anything built in the last 300 years is considered new. One of the best thing about Americans is their sense of humor. In AZ you can buy a sign saying “On this spot 100 years ago nothing happened”. It describes most of the US.
    The nature is great in the West. I lived 6 years in AZ, we traveled every other weekend, always saw something new, and did not even exhaust all possibilities. The East is boring by comparison: from Atlantic to Chicago everything is the same, except near the coast the concentration of people is many times greater. Small towns in most of the Eastern US are best described “anywhere USA”. Appalachians in the East are considered mountains, whereas they are hills at best. But there is a lot more science in the East, whereas in the West only California has something to be proud of in this regard. Seattle in the only place in the WA state that has decent research.
    Modern US crossed out its pre-Columbian history, but you can tell where there is history by comparing art. In the East someone like Warhol is considered an artist, which shows well how barren the field actually is. In the West there is true art that clearly grew out of Indian traditions. Art is a good illustration of the old British joke: “there is nothing easier than creating a perfect English lawn – just sow the grass and mow it for 300 years”. Yet most of Europe accepted the US as its overlord. Looks like cultures also have their old age dementia.

    • Replies: @jilles dykstra
  247. @AnonFromTN

    Anything white over fifty years old got a historical marker, when I visited the USA for the first time in 1978, the tourist trip, LA, SF, las Vegas.
    If anything astonished me it was Las Vegas.
    On the one hand why people want to go there, on the other the organisation, 24/7 ‘entertainment’ going on.
    SF looks European, LA is a disaster.
    Miami, when one speaks english one is discriminated, my wife speaks spanish reasonably, when she switched to that language she was welcome.
    Not far from Hyatville, a later trip, Seattle to Minneapolis, 30.000 years continued habitation was unearthed.
    When I visited the place there was hardly anything to see, a girl I asked said ‘yeah, the petroglyphs’.
    I saw them, and got some information in the visitor centre, a hut of maybe three by four metres.
    Yet there were Indian civilisations galore
    Walnut Creek is such a place.
    USA madness, Hearst Castle, and the Spanish monastery in Miami.
    Paul Kane, ‘Wanderings of an artist among the Indians of America’, 1859, 1996, New York
    Ronald Wright, ‘Stolen Continents, Conquest and Resistance in the Americas’, 1992, London
    But indeed the USA scenery is unbelievable when one comes from a country more and more resembling LA.
    But I think the Badlands impressed me most, huge areas with nothing.
    I was lucky in by accident entering at the back door, from the east.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
  248. @jilles dykstra

    Only downtown SF looks European (even Chinatown), if you go further afield or come to Oakland, it’s “anywhere USA” or worse.
    Personally, I like Las Vegas. It’s mindless entertainment that was not done on the cheap. If you know math and don’t gamble, it is also a bargain. I was there last time a few years ago and noticed that it is becoming more upscale. The fountain with classical music and light show in front of Bellagio, as well as their restaurant on the edge of that fountain, or the restaurant in Cosmopolitan with a view of that fountain, are pretty impressive (not cheap, though).
    I never was in Badlands, unfortunately. There are many stunning places in the West, including national parks, such as Bryce Canyon, Zion, Sequoia (worth visiting twice, in summer and in winter – it looks very different), Grand Canyon (you want to come from the South), Saguaro, Redwood, Yosemite, Arches, Canyonlands, Mesa Verde, etc. South Dakota is also worth seeing; in fact, Mount Rushmore is the least interesting thing there, but the vistas are very impressive and surprisingly beautiful. If you have time and inclination, you can drive from Phoenix to Las Vegas via Hoover Dam – the drive is as long as from Madrid to Warsaw, but the views are stunning. The absence of people and towns improves them. Just make sure you have full tank of gas North of I-10 and a gallon of water per person. Or you can drive from Phoenix to Grand Canyon via Petrified Forest and Painted Desert: everything North of Flagstaff looks like the Moon or Mars.
    In the East, I think only Mammoth Cave is worth visiting (both sides, so you want two tours that you need to book ahead to squeeze them into one day). You can also stay overnight in the motel inside the park and see deer coming close to your balcony in the evening.
    As to locals, you cannot expect high school dropouts you encounter at gas stations, fast food eateries, and near-highway motels to know history (or anything else, for that matter). They usually do the only thing they know how: serve you in those undemanding capacities.
    If you like Indian culture, you might enjoy reading Hillerman – all his stories are in AZ and NM, and although the stories themselves are rather simplistic, he conveys the spirit of the Indian country, Navaho and Pueblo Indians, pretty well. Gives you a different perspective on white culture.

    • Replies: @jilles dykstra
  249. @AnonFromTN

    Quite pleased too see that more than 80% of the places you name I visited.
    You do not mention Walnut Creek, or Meteor Crater.
    From Meteor Crater I took an dirt road, still quite well remember the rocks I managed to drive over without uninsured damage with the RV, great admiration for automatic gearboxes with fluid coupling.
    I made the tourist round SF LA Las Vegas twice, but along different roads.
    Indian culture, quite a number of books, but of the SW
    Edward H. Spicer, ‘Cycles of Conquest, The Impact of Spain, Mexico, and the United States of the Southwest’, 1533 – 1960′, Tucson, 1962, 1970
    Las Vegas, the best meal I ever had.
    Not cheap.
    Grand Canyon, on foot until Plateau Point, when I was again in our RV my idea was that I’d ruined my knees forever.
    Death Valley, going down there on a dirt road with an automatic gearbox and drum brakes, no great fun, engine braking just at 30MPH.
    Near Mammoth Lakes so much snow that we had to buy chains.
    Indian literature:
    ⦁ Paul Kane, ‘Wanderings of an artist among the Indians of America’, 1859, 1996, New York
    ⦁ Walker D. Wyman, ‘Nothing but prairie and Sky, Life on the Dakota Range in the Early Days’, 1954, University of Oklahoma
    ⦁ Margaret Irvin Carrington, ‘Absaraka, Home of the Crows, Experience of an officers wife on the Plains’, 1868, 1983 University of Nebraska
    ⦁ William Bartram, ed. Mark Van Doren, `Travels of William Bartram, Trough North & South Carolina, Georgia, East & West Florida, Cherokee, Muscogulges, Chataws’, 1791, 1955, New York
    ⦁ Hugh L. Willoughby, ‘Across the Everglades, A Canoe Journey of Exploration’, 1898, 1992, Port Salerno, Florida
    ⦁ Marjory Stoneman Douglas, ‘The Everglades: River of Grass’, 1947, 1995, Marietta, GA
    ⦁ J.W.Powell, ‘The exploration of the Colorado river and its canyons’, 1895, 1961, New York
    ⦁ Francis Parkman, ‘The Oregon trail’, New York, 2002, Boston, 1883, 1847
    Stan Hoig, “The Sand Creek Massacre’, Oklahoma, 1961, 1982

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
  250. @jilles dykstra

    Thanks! I never read most of these books. Will be in illuminating reading.
    Meteor crater is an interesting place, but it’s a bit of a side trip if you go from Phoenix to the Grand Canyon. We went there on a separate trip, via I-10. Never been to Walnut Creek. Too late now: I moved to TN.
    I was to Everglades with my daughter. My most vivid memory is the profusion of mosquitoes. Anti-mosquito spray works for all of 5 min, and then they are back. On the way back I bought a very appropriate bumper sticker, with red cross, mosquito, and words “I gave blood at Everglades”. I have better memories of the Biscayne reef in Florida (also a national park), although Hawaiian coral reefs and those on St. John island in the US Virgin Islands are much more impressive. I liked St. John best because we were there during the hurricane season in September, so there were very few people. In essence, you had every bay to yourself. The temperature of the water allows you to stay in indefinitely.
    What I like about Tony Hillerman (in addition to the fact that he is entertaining) is that his perspective is not quite white. I think white man’s perspective on Indians distorts things. They have a different view of life, not clouded by the pursuit of money, which leads our elites to the destruction of the world right now. If Trump keeps current suicidal course in Syria, all these great places and most humans can be destroyed in the death throws of the Empire. Looks like boundless greed is the most destructive and dehumanizing force on Earth.

  251. As good ods fashion principles in investigating any crime.
    Enough said as more mendacious accusations from pax-amaericana and all their vassals come storming through these events that have occured since Yugoslavia to this very day.

  252. @AnonFromTN

    The Donbass refugees going to Russia were mostly young men. In Saratov, 2000 out of 3500, for example.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
  253. @Philip Owen

    Did anybody tell you that lying requires more brains than telling the truth? You are unqualified. I know who was there from people who actually saw that exodus: the refugees were ~80% women, children, and older people. Your supervisor won’t pay you for something as clumsy as this.

    • Replies: @Philip Owen
    , @Philip Owen
  254. Anonymous[140] • Disclaimer says:

    Good post. I wonder how many people who claim to “know” exactly what happened in instances such as the Syrian gas attacks and the airliner downing over Ukraine, where there are conflicting stories and propaganda from two or more players creating elaborate tales for the faithful to “debunk”, would bet their life against a Magic Truth Machine. So if the Truth Machine validates a theory as correct they win a nice prize, but if the theory is wrong they pay with their life.

    My guess is not many would do so. Most people pick a side like they pick a sports team that appeals to them and stay with that side regardless of what the evidence reveals or does not reveal. It’s just a game of tribal bullshitting and posturing on the internet.

    With no risk to life or limb and nothing important at stake it’s easy to confidently construct “truths” based on cherry picked “facts” that line up with ones geopolitical sympathies.

    With some skin in the game I confidently predict that would change 🙂

    • Replies: @peterAUS
  255. peterAUS says:

    Most people pick a side like they pick a sports team that appeals to them and stay with that side regardless of what the evidence reveals or does not reveal. It’s just a game of tribal bullshitting and posturing on the internet.

    With no risk to life or limb and nothing important at stake it’s easy to confidently construct “truths” based on cherry picked “facts” that line up with ones geopolitical sympathies.

    With some skin in the game I confidently predict that would change.

    Of course.

    Whenever I start taking all this “Internet conversations” serious I re-read a quote I picked from a post of some lady on some other forum:

    One thing I’ve learned through my many, many years of having my blog and trying to figure out what’s happening for myself- That only a very few are interested in truth as can be discerned to the best of one’s ability- The rest just want, like high school, to follow the ‘in crowd’ and belong.

    I’d just add a couple of psychopaths, several sociopaths and, also, handful of “paid guys”.

    Apart from “paid guys” and a few persons who are trying to figure out things, the rest simply cater for their psychological, mostly emotional, needs.
    Almost all of that is, simply, an “online therapy”.

    Nothing wrong there, IMHO.
    That’s simply how we are hard wired.
    Just take a look at social media. That’s us.
    This place is “populated” by “us”.

    What is good, though, is that free speech is, still, allowed here and every now and then there is a very good comment.
    Such comments are worth skipping/skimming/wading through the rest.
    And, I really commend the owner for that “ignore” button. Helps a lot.

  256. Anonymous [AKA "a__german"] says:

    Boring theme. A few days after the shoot-down the reason was clear, crystal clear. A rocket, because pictures can talk if you can read them. Just some knowledge of physics needed. Nobody here?

    Most likely nobody understands. So lets use Occam’s razor, the easiest answer contains the most possibility.

    In this way the why is clear as the reason was. An accident caused by an systematic error in the weapon.

    Simply by the fact that this radar bearing rocket developed in the 70ths of last century
    comes to the world of 2014.

    Full with frequencies in GigaHz bands from mobile phones, flooded with the radar waves from the plane itself (one or several systems in the front radome) and maybe the microwave in the business class pantry too.

    Are you all too stupid to see this simple facts and the conclusions? Even if you know that a similar rocket shoots down a freight liner over the Mediterranean during a military exercise (which is near impossibility and the Ukrainians paid compensation for). I cant believe that you all are dumb as dry bread. But i have reason because i posted this in 2014 too. at this website.

    • Replies: @Bendin of Poland
  257. @Anonymous

    … you are right as long as you can explain the falling plane video. It is the cell phone video – the weak resolution one. Never the less the falling plane has the main fuseladge and the right wing intact while the left wing, the tail and the cocpit blown away.

    the 2 out of 3 main construction points blown away by one rocket?
    the 2 out of 3 blown by a rocket barerly strong enough to savadge one soft element on the other side of the plane?

    Comparing to MH17 the Glivitz Radio hoax looks competent. 🙂

    • Replies: @Philip Owen
  258. @jilles dykstra

    Solsjenytsyn explains the why excellently in his book on jews in Russia since 1800.
    Jewry just had to blame themselves, harsh trading practices.
    I have the book, trying to find out if there exists a translation of his second book, jews in the USSR since 1917…

    The books you refer to are volumes 1 and 2 of Two Hundred Years Together, in his discussion of which, Adeyinka Makinde said this:

    The book was published in Russia amid fears that it would electrify anti-Semitic sentiment and present an opportunity to calumniate the Jews. It became a bestseller there, but in the more than a decade which has elapsed since then no English language translation materialised. The reluctance of the publishing industry to put into print a substantive work created by the winner of a Nobel Prize is a development that warrants close scrutiny.

    Solzhenitsyn: The Price of Blacklisting a Nobel Laureate’s Book
    By Adeyinka Makinde
    (published online as a free, 13-page, pdf download, 23 August 2013)

    I believe it is still the case that no official complete English translation has been produced by “the publishing industry”. However, Makinde does say that

    The unavailability of Solzhenitsyn’s work in the English language has meant that the limited translations available have been facilitated by White nationalists who, largely disinterested [sic] in the first volume, have unsurprisingly focussed on the second where they are keen to give emphasis to those passages which can be projected in a manner to fit in with their views.

    In February 2017 The Occidental Observer site last year publicised one such “limited translation”:

    There is a project to publish (long-overdue) translations of Alexander Solzhenitsyn’s 200 Years Together. So far, they have posted Chapters 2, 3, 6, and 7, with more on the way. The website is: The translation reads very smoothly and seems quite professional.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
  259. @Bendin of Poland

    Part of the missiles payload was designed to slice through wings.

  260. Philip Owen says: • Website

    I saw that part of that exodus when it arrived in Saratov where I have a business. My PA, single, under 30 complained that the young Ukrainian men were in Russia. Most left when told that they would have to pick potatoes in rural areas to receive any support.

    The refugees from Lugansk who made it as far as Cardiff were mostly families, without their fathers including the teenager whose school exchange made them eligible for a visa but those were a few hundred and largely the well off.

    And what are your qualifications? How much Russian do you speak?

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
  261. Philip Owen says: • Website

    I forgot. We had this conversation before. For someone with access to Russian language media you are not very skilled at interpreting the propaganda. Perhaps you don’t want to.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
  262. @Philip Owen

    Sorry to disappoint, but I do speak Russian and Ukrainian, the latter better than most self-proclaimed Ukrainian “patriots”. What’s more, I grew up in Lugansk, and in 2015 had to organize evacuation of my 90-year old mother from Lugansk to Russia. Now she lives with us in TN. She was reluctant to move, but agreed to that after Ukrainian shell exploded near the multi-apartment building she lived in and broke all windows in one room. Ukrainian army continuously shelled the area where she lived, which had ~40 multi-apartment buildings, two schools (one of which I attended; Ukrainian shell hit it; luckily, only one of the entrances was damaged), three kindergartens, and nothing else. That’s one of the reasons I always call a spade a spade: current Ukrainian regime is Nazi in everything they do and aspire to.
    I have lots of classmates in Lugansk and I have the accounts of those who crossed the border with Russia. Their stories match each other and my mother’s story, and I have no reason to distrust any of them. I don’t know about Saratov: my info is from the border crossing into Rostov region, Izvarino, which many refugees used, some enduring hours of waiting before crossing, with little kids and elderly parents.

  263. @englishmike

    Solzhenitsyn was a liar and very likely a NKVD/MGB (later KGB) informer. If you want to know the truth, read Varlam Shalamov (e.g., Kolyma tales), and many others.

  264. @Philip Owen

    Sorry to disappoint again, but I live in the States since 1991 and have no access to Russian propaganda. But I do know the US propaganda about Ukraine, and I know the reality from many friends and relatives living there, from Lvov and Kiev to Kharkov region and Lugansk. That’s how I know that the US propaganda about Ukraine is 90% blatant lies and 10% truth twisted beyond recognition. Compared to it, Soviet propaganda was a paragon of truthfulness.

  265. Philip Owen says: • Website

    We can agree about that. Sadly, as usual, truth is the first casualty of war.

  266. Sputnik interviews Dutch dissident personalities/journalist on the latest MH-17 disinformation put forward in the propaganda war on Russia…

    …timed to smear Russia during the World Cup (recalling similar efforts for the Sochi Olympics)

  267. @AnonFromTN

    “Needless to say they are all venal”. Needless to say even intelligent people can sound off about something they don’t know about with a lot of windy BS. I can say with assurance that the relevant politicians in Australia, especially on the MH17 issue are not venal. Tony Abbott who did a bit of chestbeating on MH17 must be one of the least bright of Australian Rhodes Scholars but is notoriously straitlaced morally (since he might have – but didn’t – sired a premarital son after he stopped studying for the priesthood). Malcolm Turnbull is too rich to be bought. More detail if needed.

    I only came across your post after deciding to return to this thread after choosing to see on the Air Accident Investigation series the program on the downing of MH17. It scrupulously avoided the question of who fired the BUK missile but probably leaves open to conspiracy theorists only the possibility that a Ukrainian bomber manoeuvred so that MH17 got hit by the missile from the rebel area. More likely a flying pig brought it down.

  268. @AnonFromTN

    And now you are posing (as over the dinner table over the fourth after dinner port) as an authority on Dutch politics. My impression is very much to the contrary and would be interested in your detailing your reasons for saying the Dutch serve US overlords first or at all. The Dutch cut there losses in Indonesia decades ago.

    If you know what you are talking about you might have put it on fellow blowhard JR to justify his “technical UN mandated…. investigation”. The Dutch air safety organisation was requested by Ukraine to take over the investigation for obvious respectable reasons. That investigation found – and most would accept demonstrated – that the plane was brought down by a BUK missile detonating when above and to the left of the cockpit. The question of who fired the missile was not determined as part of that investigation.
    BTW your point about Ukraine not providing records of air traffic control communications with the pilots, even if true, is not of much significance in the light of the record of all such communications being available on the Cockpit Voice Recorder even before the investigators could visit the crash sites.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
  269. @CanSpeccy

    That 2014 Daily Mail report has been well and truly superseded if one accepts the accuracy of an Air Accidents Investigation program which displays no obvious political bias. There was a minor deviation around a storm and the pilot, from memory, was flying at 32,000 feet and wanted to fly at 33,000 so they could travel faster but was denied this – unsurprisingly, as over 100 civil airline flights flew in Ukraine’s dangerous air space on that one day.

  270. @Ronald Thomas West

    What do you make of the evidence in the civil investigation that the plane was brought down by a BUK missile which detonated above and to the left of the cockpit? Apparently butterfly shaped pieces of steel were found early in the body of the captain and much later, when the investigators were able to obtain parts of the cockpit and fuselage, embedded in those. These were uniquely from BUK missiles it seems.

    Who fired it is another issue.

  271. @jilles dykstra

    A BUK missile would have been flying at Mach 3 and closing faster so impossible for pilots to do anything. If a plane was approaching so as to be able to target the pilots it would have been not only slower but much larger and being watched when it released a missile. Thus it is very unlikely that the Cockpit Voice Recorder , which picked up the explosion of the missile, didn’t pick up even an expression of shock or surprise immediately before that.

  272. @expat47

    Wrong question. Who thinks Russians targeted MH17 deliberately? No sane person. It has always looked like a blunder with Russia only having to choose between apologising for a blunder by some out of control former military people and covering up and diverting blame.

  273. @Ron Unz

    Ron, if you can relax enough to watch a TV program I think even your critical faculties might allow the Canadian “Mayday” – elsewhere Air Accident Investigation – program on the civil investigation of the MH17 disaster to make you 95+% satisfied that the only serious question left is who fired the BUK missile. The finding of butterfly shaped steel chunks in the pilot and the cockpit seems to sew up the question of what kind of missile did the job.

    Why the missile was fired seems equally clear if it was, as appears to be the case, from the rebel held area. It has to have been a blunder. If from government held territory then there really would be something to get excited about.

  274. @Wizard of Oz

    Let me answer both of your posts.
    1. Venal. The venality of politicians is not necessarily about the money, it’s also about the support of political establishment, so personal wealth does not matter much (besides, they almost never spend their own money on political campaigns). Politicians act in perceived self-interest, totally disregarding the ethical scruples.
    2. Investigation. This “investigation” is being dragged on for more than 4 years, i.e., it is a lot longer than any investigation in airliner history where the remains of the airplane were recovered. At some point the “commission” even stated that it’s not qualified to conduct such an investigation. Judging by the length of it and meager results, this was the only true statement they made.
    3. Evidence. If one discards the “evidence” from social media, which any self-respecting court of law would through away as hearsay, there is virtually nothing left.
    4. Buk. First, exploding Buk missile generates thousands of metal fragments that produce very characteristic numerous holes in the fuselage. These were not found, and very few ostensibly Buk fragments presented are a ridiculous number, not to mention that legally necessary chain of custody was not observed. Second, Buk missile leaves long-lasting smoke trail in the sky visible for many miles. None of the witnesses reported seeing that. Third, Ukraine vehemently denied having any Buks (this is Soviet weapon), then displayed a few at the military parade. Forth, satellite pictures that Kerry promised even before the debris cooled down were never presented in more than 4 years. Do you wonder why?
    5. Nobody bothered to explain a round hole in pilot’s cabin, visible on many photos, that looks exactly like a hole that would be left by the round from SU cannon. Also, the issue of the second plane, actually first raised by witnesses in BBC report, was completely ignored. BBC video was removed from their site. Do you wonder why?
    6. Malaysia, who the plane belongs to, was booted out of investigation, which is unprecedented. Now, if one takes into account that Malaysia seriously questioned the conclusions of that “investigation”, the reason for this becomes clear: it refused to play ball, support the lies that are being foisted on us by very serious powers.
    7. I can continue in this vein, but what’s the point? All international airlines made their conclusions: they fly over Russia, but avoid Ukrainian airspace, like they avoid airspace of North Korea. As far as I am concerned, case closed. We will never know the truth because very influential interests don’t want us to know it. Roman dictum “cui prodest” is best clue we have.

  275. @AnonFromTN

    Thanks for a civil reply. A pity that it is only your unsupported assertions.

    You say Malaysia was “booted out” [how?] of the “investigation”. I wonder if you have forgotten that there were two investigations and neither of them has been called a “commission” from which it follows that I doubt your claim that the “commission” stated that it lacked the qualifications for the investigation – unless in some irrelevant way out of context. Anyway I have searched hard for Malaysia being “booted out”. To start with there was Ukraine’s delegation of the technical inquiry to the Dutch Safety Board. Then there was the criminal investigation of the Joint Investigative Team (JIT) which Malaysia joined in November 2014. My searches disclose that in July 2015 Malaysia moved a resolution about MH17 in the UN which Russia vetoed. But maybe you know some detail that I haven’t found and that is probative. If so, please tell us.

    As for your round hole that according to you no one bothered to explain but, according to you, could have been made by an SU cannon round…. well that was not the Russian version which was a faked photo supposed to show a fighter firing a missile at the plane…

    Now I have searched for MH17 citizen journalists debunk to recover the link and this is it

    Was it that fake – photoshopped – Russian satellite photograph that you are complaining the BBC took down!?

    Why do you say the holes in the plane were not made by the shrapnel from a BUK missile when the Dutch Safety Board gives its reasons for concluding that they were? What exactly is your problem with accepting that it was a nasty mistake by whoever was manning a BUK missile launcher? Anyway how could your one round hole make any difference to anything?

    The stuff above was inserted after I wrote the rest of this.

    Unfortunately my reply to you with links has disappeared mysteriously while I have been going back to find and copy other links. I was hoping for a review by you of what the Feb 2018 Air Crash investigation film showed, and had, after searches for “MH17 Air Crash Investigation” posted a 19 minute YouTube version which covered the same ground well. Here it is

    Meantime let me recommend that you try, as others have, editing the long Wikipedia article which leaves me with little doubt, subject to credible correction, that MH17 was downed by a BUK missile by mistake. (Have you anything to say about the video obtained by News Corp ,- or News Ltd – that showed early arrivals at the crash site expressing surprise that a civil aircraft had been brought down, or other alleged recordings which are effectively admissions by the rebels?)

    Here is a comment I have found on the Air Crash Investigation which I post mostly for its information on how those programs are made.

    I am not going to risk losing this so will post and continue when I have found the series of photographs of the Dutch Safety Board’s public display and explanation of the reconstructed cockpit and fuselage. The holes looked consistent with the steel cubes and bowtie shaped pieces that would come from a BUK and were found in the pilots and the plane.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
  276. @Wizard of Oz

    Well, first, let me enumerate points that I made and you studiously avoided addressing:
    1. The length of this “investigation”: it is going on for more than 4 years, a record length in civil aviation cases where plane debris were recovered.
    2. Chain of custody of the evidence: not a single piece of “evidence” in this investigation would be admissible in a court of law, as the provenance of it cannot be conclusively established.
    3. Buk generates many thousands of pieces, many hundreds to thousands of which hit the targeted airplane, hundreds get lodged in the bodies of passengers, if the plane has passengers. The “investigators” produced surprisingly few (and even those are of uncertain provenance, see point 2).
    4. Buk missile produces a huge smoke trail, visible for dozens of miles. This trail, depending on winds, remains visible for 20 min to 2 hours. Nobody saw it. Why?
    5. Satellite pictures Kerry promised on day one did not materialize for more than 4 years. Why?
    6. Russia vetoed UN resolution. The resolution called for a tribunal. There is a huge difference between the court of law, where there are rules and one needs to present real evidence, and a tribunal, which is easily converted into a political circus. Say the Hague “tribunal”, having no evidence against Milosevich, held him in custody for years, until he died of a disease that could have been treated, but wasn’t. Then the point of presenting evidence became moot. Mission accomplished.

    Now, to the things you mentioned. Donbass freedom fighters were shooting (not Buk, though) at Ukrainian military transport plane in the area, and they expected to find debris of that plane. Hence their surprise. I wouldn’t be surprised if that Ukrainian plane was in the area as part of the provocation. After seeing footage of Ukrainian nationalists deliberately killing people who jumped from the burning Trade Union building in Odessa in 2014, and singing their horrible anthem in the process, I don’t think there is a moral low they won’t stoop to.

    Things you did not mention. Belgium, the Netherlands, Australia, and Ukraine signed a non-disclosure agreement ( Interestingly, Malaysia was not a party to it. If any of these parties wanted to uncover the truth, why would they need a non-disclosure agreement?

  277. @AnonFromTN

    Taking you ladt (weak) point first, I do not regard globalresearch as a reputable source but, in any case the it is only someone without knowledge or experience of inter government dealings who would find a non disclosure agreement in any way surprising. It would be usual and particularly where crimunal charges might follow. You are probably unaware that the Australian (and UK and other Commonwealth countries’) approach to pre-trial publicity is entirely different to what the First Amendment allows in the US. I don’t know what the relevant law is in Ukraine, Belgium or Netherlands but there could well have been concern about any disclosure getting into American hands and then spreading dangerously out of control and out of context online.

    Moreover you still don’t seem to have grasped that the investigative team you are concerned with (if your writing of a “commission” is consistent with you having any definite idea about it) is not what I was suggesting had produced a credible technical verdict, namely the Dutch Safety Board. Snd you don’t seem to want to inform yourself. I had already pointed out that Malaysia didn’t join the JIT until November 2014, and yet you note as though it was significant that it didn’t sign the non disclosure agreement in August 2014!!!

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
  278. @Wizard of Oz

    You keep avoiding issues raised in items 1 through 6. No surprises there: there are no answers that can possibly fit the official narrative, for the simple reason that the narrative is a lie.

    Non-disclosure agreement: you chose purely legal route. Again, no surprises there: that’s the route any half-decent lawyer chooses when s/he wants to obfusticate something.

    Last question: name any civil airplane crash investigation where the debris were recovered that: a) lasted more than 4 years; b) involved any non-disclosure agreements.

    I know full well that the discussion with a true believer or a paid troll is pointless, so I stop here.

  279. @AnonFromTN

    1. Length of investigation. So what? Also not the longest if you count one’s still open. (I think TWA800 is one such).

    Actually I realise you are totally confused and talking through your hat.  The Dutch Safety Board reported in October 2015

    2. Don’t try and teach grandmother’s to suck eggs. If you ever decide to study first year law don’t think you’ll still be thought smart if you try something so ignorant. (a) we aren’t talking about evidence in a court case any more than a scientist is when he says “these fragments didn’t come from an exploded meteor but probably from….” (b) if we were talking of trial evidence the evidence of holes in the reconstructed cockpit and fuselage would only be objected to by counsel wanting to annoy the judge or delay the completion of the trial. Admissibilty matters would have been raised in advance and, if there really was a point because some bills of lading were missing no doubt a metallurgist or Boeing engineer could link the metal panels to the MK17. (c) Are you claiming some specific knowledge? E.g. do you have some reason to say that the pathologist who removed a bowtie shaped piece of steel from the captain’s body actually didn’t but found it elsewhere and handed it to the Dutch Safety Board investigators?

    3. I don’t know what you are saying. Are you aware of when the investigators were allowed on to the six crash sites or under what conditions?  With what authority do you say they found surprisingly few BUK sourced metal objects? With what authority (except too much listening to Russian disinformation) do you question the expert opinion of the Dutch investigators?  Yes, it is clear you really have gone off half cocked without distinguishing between the tevhnical and criminal investigations [see 1. above]

    Well now I see you concede that the local rebels expected to find the remains of a Ukrainian plane. So I really don’t understand why you are disputing that they knew a BUK missile launcher had been fired and that it accidentally brought down MH17. 

    Your expertise apparently extends to saying that a BUK missile would certainly on that day have left a smoke a highly visible smoke trail AND that *no one saw it*.  Well I can’t compete with your claim to expertise there but, particularly as to the failure of anyone to see it excuse me for asking sceptically who has been asked about it that might have been expected to see it and speak the truth to whomever inquired?

  280. @AnonFromTN

    This article on his American Pravda series by Ron is one of his best and actually suggests answers to several questions on MH17:

    1. It makes a good case for TWA800 having been brought down by accident by a US Navy missile;

    2. It makes an equally good case that the US government covered up the mistake with the cooperation of American MSM rather than admit the facts, apologise and offer compensation just as Russia has failed to admit that the MH17 was brought down by one of its BUK missiles. Please note that Russia had much more reason for its denial, but America still denied a mere accident with no question of engagement of its armed forces in foreign territory;

    So what have you got left apart from a vague belief that no one saw the contrail or smoke trail of the BUK missile. Actually which was it that wasn’t seen but should have been? Looking up “contrail” I saw that it depends on ice crystals forming above 25,000 feet. How des that reflect your expert testimony?

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  281. Tarrasik says:

    @Wizard of Oz –

    Watch this video of a BUK 2 launching. Note the obvious vapor trail and extreme noise level.

    That trail would be visible for at least 20 minutes. Regardless of ice crystals at 25,000 ft. It’s hard to believe that a BUK could have been launched without being seen and heard by hundreds of people.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  282. I stumbled across a link promoting the Ukrainian Buk and emailed the editors these following (perhaps provocative) remarks likely interesting to some readers of the Unz article (above.)

    Hello Oriental Review

    I had stumbled across this article on MH 17 at…

    …and thought to give a friendly caution over the material at Strategic Culture generally, and this (your) related article specifically. I’ll propose to you the Ukrainian BuK line has been kept open by Russian propagandists as a future ‘face-saving’ device for putting forward in case of ‘if/when’ a detente can be reached with the West concerning Ukraine. There is a world of difference between assigning blame to rogue/drunk/incompetent (you choose) Ukrainian military and assigning blame to a Western backed intelligence services special operation involving a combat jet to bring down MH 17. The former could be swallowed by Western Europe in case of new (detoxified) arrangement with Russia on the matter of Ukraine, the latter, likely not. Certainly this raises an ethical dilemma; can a falsehood serve the interests of moving forward? Or, moving forward, should there be a day come where truth does, in actuality, prevail? Can there be benevolent lies issuing from the world of spies? Perhaps an issue for future study and editorial by your organization.

    With kind regards

    Ron West

    “The history of the great events of this world are scarcely more than a history of crime” -Voltaire

  283. @Hepp

    To blame it on the Russians, I presume? You see, you are not that dumb after all.

  284. @Ron Unz

    And now for something completely new at least to me. But I don’t know who the author Simon Gunson is and he seems to have published some odd views on MH370 to the effect that Boring 777s had a mysterious sudden decompression problem.

    Who is responsible for the MH17 incident: Ukraine or Russia? by Simon Gunson

    If he is to be believed Ukraine must have fired the BUK missile but, elaborated as his technical exposition is…. It could all be rubbish from a troll or Russian plant. He apparently speaks Russian as he writes of a translation he made.

  285. @Tarrasik

    I have just seen your comment and it strikes me as running up against the valiant internet warriors who contend that it was a BUK missile fired by the Ukrainians that brought down MH17. When I click on Reply I find what appears in the three pars below so I may have posted it already. Anyway it is appropriate that your attention be brought to it.

    And now for something completely new at least to me. But I don’t know who the author Simon Gunson is and he seems to have published some odd views on MH370 to the effect that Boring 777s had a mysterious sudden decompression problem.

    Who is responsible for the MH17 incident: Ukraine or Russia? by Simon Gunson

    If he is to be believed Ukraine must have fired the BUK missile but, elaborated as his technical exposition is…. It could all be rubbish from a troll or Russian plant. He apparently speaks Russian as he writes of a translation he made.

  286. @Wizard of Oz

    As you seem to be an honest seeker after truth I draw your attention to what, for me, is the current state of play on MH17.

    My best guess has been that a BUK missile brought down MH17 as reported by the Dutch Safety Board and that it was an accident caused by errors in handling the Russian supplied missile launcher in rebel territory.

    Your last word seemed to be that it wasn’t a BUK missile at all, although you didn’t answer my last response on your point about contrails.

    Now I have posted a Quora link to an elaborate exposition of a case that it was a BUK missile fired by the Ukrainians that brought the plane down. Although you might like the conclusion it directly contradicts your forcefully made case – even highlighted by Ron – and I should be interested in your consideration of it.

    See #321 and #322

    Ronald Thomas West may now have contributed something relevant to the matter I have invited comment on too but I haven’t checked.

  287. @AnonFromTN

    Oops! See #323 intended for you.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
  288. @Wizard of Oz

    Yes, I do want to learn the truth. That’s exactly why I don’t talk to trolls paid by the countries promoting blatant lies. Case closed.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  289. @AnonFromTN

    So you think that Simon Gunson character who elaborately purported to prove that MH17 was shot down by a Ukrainian controlled BUK missile is a paid troll? That fits with the amount of work that must have gone into his presentation. But in whose interest is it to refute all the theories – including yours I think – that MH17 was not brought down by a ground launched missile but some other way? Could it be a Russian decision that the facts matter less than what the relevant public has come to believe – which is of course that a ground based missile caused the crash? It might follow that “Simon Gunson” is at least intended to muddy the waters. That is to say, from a Russian point of view, it could make sense to have people believe that if it was a BUK missile it might have been a Ukrainian owned one. Is something like that your line of thinking?

    Anyway, have you considered the Gunson version? Are there any killer points against it?

  290. Concerning recent information out of Russia on the Buk missile scenario, a short assessment:

    It would appear Russia is pre-positioning (allowing opportunity) for the eventuality of the Western democracies to ‘save face’ and assign ‘incompetence’ to the Ukrainian military in the downing of MH17 (my take) as opposed to the almost certainty it was the SU-25 brought the civilian liner down –

  291. Ukrainian intel officer defects to Russia, points the finger squarely at Kiev as responsible for downing MH17


  292. Malaysia prime minister states the MH17 investigation had been intended to frame Russia from its inception:

  293. @Ron Unz

    I’m not sure whether your early enthusiasm for a false flag explanation has remained strong after some superficially strong cases have been made for yea and nay. (I note that further complications include a case, superficially persuasive, that MH17 was shot down by two Ukrainan fighters, offset by a case that it was shot down by a Ukrainian BUK and film of rejoicing locals or rebels arriving on the crash scene horrified to find that it was an airliner). Now we have this

    Murder charges against four Russians in the Netherlands will presumably get nowhere since the Russians won’t be extradited and they are unlikely to take any part in a trial in absentia unless of course they can still produce evidence so far undisclosed that kills or raises great doubt about the prosecution case.

    My first thought was that the Russians, if innocent, might call the Dutch government’s bluff by saying “by all means prosecute, but do it in Russia where we will appoint senior prosecutors and instruct them to take advantage of your assistance in evaluating and presenting the evidence and arguments”. But there is a better solution – at least from a Russian point of view.

    They should encourage the bringing of a civil action in Russia against the alleged murderers. Somewhat disingenuously they might argue that it should more than satisfy the Dutch, at least as a first step because the standard of proof would be lower but all the evidence could come out. Indeed discovery and interrogatories could perhaps lead to much more of the truth coming out.

    Let’s turn theory into practical action. You could select some suitable potential plaintiffs (even the Dutch would nearly all speak English so language needn’t be a problem) and offer to run a modest fund raising amongst UR readers to provide say $10 or 15,000 towards finding a suitable law firm to advise and represent them; not paying the costs of the case obviously. The first very small expenditures might be expenses for academic lawyers asked to define parameters for the search.

    Of course I merely presume that Russian law would allow for some such claim for damages. At least it is not going to less effective than the Dutch criminal prosecution at bringing out the truth.

  294. The allegation that Malaysia has been denied access to the [sic – which? The cockpit voice recorder would have provided the most important evidence] sounds odd

    “”For some reasons, Malaysia was not allowed to check the black box to see what happened. We don’t know why we are excluded from the examination” Mahathir Mohammed is quoted as saying.

    Why hasn’t that part of a plane belonging to the Malaysian government been sued for in a Dutch or maybe English court?

  295. Eyewitnesses describe a military jet in proximity to MH17


  296. Article on the new investigative report (preceding comment’s video) .. Malaysia specifically rejects the JIT conclusion blaming Russia, up to and including the prime minister objecting to the process and result:


  297. New witness interviews pointing to the fighter jet take-down of MH 17:


  298. @Ron Unz

    Ron I don’t know whether you are still promoting, if not definitively supporting, various anti Ukrainian conspiracy theories about MH17 – which I have long accorded the Occamish explanation of unfortunate mistake – but this may give you food for thought

    Alex Kokcharov (@AlexKokcharov) tweeted at 8:45 pm on Sun, July 17, 2022:
    On this day in 2014 the #Russia|n TV triumphantly reported about the downing of an aircraft over the occupied areas in #Donetsk region, east #Ukraine. Back at the time they assumed it was a Ukrainian military cargo aircraft and not #MH17:

  299. TBeholder says:

    Cui bono?


    revealed that the bullets found in the bodies of both government police and anti-government demonstrators had apparently come from the same guns. The most plausible explanation of this strange detail is that the snipers responsible were professionals brought in to cause the massive bloodshed necessary to overthrow the government, which is exactly what soon followed.

    It’s not a mystery. They were, they did, and they did not bother to remain silent. More so after a few of them happened to “die mysteriously”, apparently.

Current Commenter

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone

 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenting Disabled While in Translation Mode
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Ron Unz Comments via RSS
Personal Classics
The Surprising Elements of Talmudic Judaism
Analyzing the History of a Controversial Movement
From the Leo Frank Case to the Present Day
The Shaping Event of Our Modern World
The JFK Assassination and the 9/11 Attacks?
The Hidden History of the 1930s and 1940s