The immediate cause of the MH17 disaster was a missile shot by pro-Russian forces who mistook it for one of the military aircraft they had been regularly shooting down. It is a terrible tragedy – and tragically not unique. There have been several such events in my lifetime, including the USS Vincennes incident and the Soviet downing of a Korean airliner.
The problem is that Vladimir Putin has revived the Soviet cult of perfectionism – the idea that the state simply cannot make a mistake. That Putin-backed forces could commit an error is therefore unthinkable, as that would imply that Putin made an error in backing and supplying them. Putin cannot make errors. We have therefore seen a stream of desperate propaganda stories emanating from the Russian media, such as the allegation that it was the government in Kiev attempting to shoot down Putin himself. These narratives are aimed at the domestic Russian nationalist audience, but are accepted by the small band of ardent Putin supporters in the West.
Many people in the West, myself included, have been shocked and alienated by the rampant and vicious immorality of Western foreign policy in what I might call the neo-con era, with the ascendancy of Bush and Blair marking a step change in the open use of military force to grab natural resources – a return to the Imperial heyday. The veneer of concern for democracy and human rights layered over Guantanamo, extraordinary rendition, the curtailment of long-cherished civil rights at home and the mass compound crimes of Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya, led to a visceral revulsion.
Putin’s successful opposition to western designs on Syria and Iran gave the impression, quite probably correctly, that a revived Russia was the only effective obstacle to western hegemony, China being passive. But unfortunately this led some who opposed Western neo-imperialism to join in the hero worship of Putin.
The mechanisms of this vary. In my view, the largest number are people who are not psychologically equipped to fight over-mighty power everywhere, which is a lonely path, and prefer the much easier option of joining the entourage of a big power, and convincing themselves that power is good. It is comforting to feel part of a powerful team. Some of course are paid by the Russians, and you see them turning up on Russia Today both as presenters and interviewees, but these are a small section. Some were supporters of the Soviet Union.
What is perhaps most extraordinary is that, the very things which these people criticise most about Western society, Russia and Putin do much worse. At the most fundamental level, the disparity of wealth between rich and poor in Russia is far, far worse than the still appalling level it has reached in the West.
The total Russian economy is 20% smaller than the total British economy. Yet Russia has almost three times as many billionaires as the UK, and the Russian billionaires’ combined wealth is over six times the combined wealth of British billionaires.
Go figure. Yet the delusional continue to contrive to believe that Russia is an alternative to global capitalism.
Russia is not only a much more unequal society than the West. It also much worse in the field of civil liberties and media freedom. Scores of real journalists have been killed, mostly unheard of internationally. The free media has vanished. In the West, the field of opinion reflected in the mainstream media has narrowed right down. In the UK, Andrew Gilligan was sacked for telling the truth about Iraqi WMD, while his source was murdered. But the West is moving in the direction of autocracy; Russia is already there. It in no sense represents an alternative, freer society than the West.
Nor is Russia any less imperialist. Putin is in fact an extremely aggressive nationalist imperialist, as his annexations of Abkhazia and Crimea have shown. Highly significant is the legislation just passed to award Russian nationality to ethnic Russians in former Soviet states. That is racially based legislation. It means for example that 40% of the population of Kazakhstan potentially become Russian citizens, with similar figures in the Baltic states. It is highly aggressive and designed to have destabilising potential.
One fact which has become undeniably clear in the Ukraine is that the pro-Russian insurgency in the East is commanded by members of the Russian military and security forces like Strelkov who are Russian, not Ukrainian citizens, and they are under tactical and strategic supervision from Russia. Again, the self-hating fantasist tendency in the West manage to convince themselves that what is happening in East Ukraine is massive destruction of civilian populations by NATO forces.
People who are that removed from reality cannot be helped.
Much more dangerous are those who do have a grip on reality, who understand exactly what is really happening, and who don’t care. That sums up the position of almost all western governments. The truth is that the financial interests of all those Russian billionaires are completely linked in with those of the super-rich of the West. To take only the UK as an example, these are the people Tony Blair, Peter Mandelson and Boris Johnson lunch and have holidays with. These are the people who employ Gerhard Schroeder and David Owen as lapdogs.
Nobody is more annoyed than Angela Merkel at the downing of MH17, not because she cares about those dead people, but because of the massive effort she has put into ensuring that, whatever Russia does in Ukraine, German economic interests will not be affected. Germany gets most of its electricity from Russian gas, and both Siemens and Mercedes, on a daily basis, have been lobbying Merkel to make sure that nothing is done that hurts German economic interests. Cameron has been receiving the same lobbying from his banker mates. In both these cases, the politicians are being talked to by the people who finance them.
The result is that there has been a strong diplomatic push, particularly by Germany, to divert the question of sanctions on to matters of process. The problem is not Russia trying to annex bits of Ukraine and funding, arming and staffing the destabilisation of a European state. The Germans are seeking to define the problem down to whether or not Russia cooperates in various stages of the air crash investigation.
Putin will continue his dangerous expansionist nationalism because it is a self-trapping path for a politician to take; but also he is encouraged that whatever he does, nobody makes any serious moves to stop him. The people on MH17 were killed because of the pusillanimity of Western politicians, financed and guided by the financial elite.
The pathetic “sanctions” adopted by the US and EU so far have been specifically designed to be completely toothless. They target middle and lower ranking individuals without major western links anyway. None of the top ten largest Russian billionaires has been touched.
Russia’s richest man – Alisher Usmanov – is extremely close to Putin and as chairman of Gazprominvestholdings has been directly involved for a decade in pressurising Ukraine, and was also Putin’s chosen instrument for closing down the free media. But you won’t see Usmanov on any sanctions list – he has 10% of Facebook, 29% of Arsenal FC, the most expensive mansion in Surrey and numerous other western connections, not to mention he is Gerhard Schroeder and David Owen’s direct boss.
Much has been said of the 1.2 billion dollars contract for two amphibious assault vessels Russia has ordered from France. Amphibious assault! Where?
But, actually much more interesting, 1.2 billion dollars incredibly happens to be the combined value of four of the World’s largest luxury yachts, which met together off Cap Ferrat and Antibes from 10 to 16 June this year. They are Dilbar, Madame Gu, Grand Bleu and Hermitage.
In Putin’s Russia, government, organised crime and secret services are absolutely integrated. All were well represented at the series of meetings that took place on those yachts, where deals were done on everything from metal prices to heroin – and Ukraine. If US drones had wanted to do some good in the world, there was their target, but they were too busy killing some 16 year old kid, and numerous bystanders, in Waziristan or Yemen for a dangerous interpretation of the Koran. None of the people at those meetings will appear on any sanctions list, though they are the men who rule Russia with Putin. They will all still be very welcome in boardrooms in London, Berlin and New York.
If Europe had followed from the start the excellent leadership offered by Radek Sikorski, the passengers on MH17 would not have died. I should like to think that the European Council will start to listen to Sikorski now. But I doubt it.
“I believed you meant “Red Side” by your RS reference”
Of course.
Phil
23 Jul, 2014 – 11:10 am
“Go fuck your logical self.”
—————————————–
You don’t like being exposed as a plonker of a man do you Phil?
Or is it a plonker of a woman (Philomena)?
Sergei Glazyev is an economist and an adviser to Putin. His ruminations on the CIA take-over of Ukraine comprise the most incisive over-view I’ve seen. This is political analysis of rare clarity, an unillusioned, precise, unflinching examination of what Russia confronts and what America intends.
http://youtu.be/nWT5HM_NMlI
To be viewed in conjunction with his excellent 1999 analysis of the Yeltsin years: http://www.scribd.com/doc/170389855/A-Genocide-Russia-and-the-New-World-Order-1999
Paul Rigby: are you the same Paul Rigby who did an interview with Adrian Heath on ToffeeWeb a few years ago? Been doing a bit of research.
Hi MJ,
No, but I wish I had: Highbury 1984 remains a very happy memory!
OK, I wonder what the bookies will offer me for this: that sometime before the end of this year there will be another dramatic incident involving a Malaysian Airlines 777 and, on the basis of virtually no evidence at all, Iran will be held responsible.
Paul/MJ,
at the risk of interrupting your inter-toffee confabulation, you might be interested in this Webster Tarpley address to the Left Forum, NYC 31/05/2014:
The End of Fukuyama: Re-Starting History After a Quarter Century of Unipolar Globalization
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FKLVFV8sGSs
Nick I agree that the hoax crash theory can not be disregarded as fanciful primarily because theatrical staging has been done before as a means of public deception for political purposes. The theory is also supported by the presence of the tents close to crash site seen in some of the video footage as well as the background and associations of Micheal Bociurkiw
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-bociurkiw/
Many things about this whole event do not add up. Could the rotting corpses be a double deception to hide that there were indeed no real corpses?
http://nodisinfo.com/inflatable-fake-corpse-detected-mh17-crash-hoax/
Check out the Channel 4 interviews with grieving parents some are not at all convincing….mother wearing eye make up and father smiling
Thanks for the Tarpley, SB, I have a lot of time for him since reading Synthetic Terror.
By way of reciprocating, here’s the pith of an interview, as summarised by Vladimir Suchan, conducted by ANNA-News with retired Air Force colonel Aleksand Zhilin:
A fuller version of what happened starts emerging piece by piece. First, as I pointed out earlier, in one his daily battle reports, Strelkov or his associates indicated as if in passing that the Malaysian airliner, Boeing 777, was shot down by Ukrainian jet fighters. Then came the briefing by the Russian Ministry of Defense, which showed a Ukrainian SU-25 within 3-5 km from the Boeing at the very moment when the Boeing was hit. In the next four minutes, the Ukrainian fighter remained in the area. At the moment, when the Boeing was hit, it was also within the range of several Ukrainian Buk batteries, which were deployed close to Donetsk and then, just for that very day, 8km south of Shakhterskoye, which is also only several miles from the crash site.
Today (July 23), Anna-News published an interview with a Russian Air Force retired colonel Aleksand Zhilin (Александр Жилин) who is a frequent military commentator on the conflict in Ukraine. The most important information is stated at 2:00-5:00 in the interview.
According to the colonel, at 16:19:45, a Ukrainian jet fighter targeted the Boeing with an air-to-air missile R-60. The missile damaged the right engine of the Boeing. The Boeing was hit, but still managed to stay in the air. However, in doing so, the Boeing turned 180 degrees to the left. It was at this moment that the false flag attack started falling apart. According to Zhilin, part of the plan controlled by the US with Ukrainian hands executing it was to have the Boeing crash past the southern frontline by the Ukrainian-Russian border. Had the Boeing fallen there, securing the crash sites with the troops in response to international pressure was on top of all else effectively allow Kiev to lift the encirclement of its brigades in the southern pocket by the Russian border.
When, however, the Boeing started to turn in the opposite direction and was still apparently manageable, “the US-Ukrainian headquarters of the special operation panicked and order the Buk battery to destroy the plane in the air in order to pre-empt the possibility of the Boeing’s emergency landing.” A Buk missile was fired and the plane was then finally destroyed.
The disclosure of the Russian electronic intelligence (in fact, only one part of it) on July 21 put the US against the wall. The existence of this intelligence and other data also means that the US cannot show the real intelligence, which they also have, including the data from their electronic warfare exercise SEA BREEZE 2014 and the data from their spy satellite, which just happened to be over the area during the downing of the Malasysian Boeing.
The other relevant information, which the Russian colonel revealed, was that the Malaysian Boeing was insured for $97 million against damages or losses as a result of military actions.
The Youtube interview is here (Russian-only, alas):
http://youtu.be/UNW7kPmuXeo?list=UUuRgUSdmne5RXVGjKuHLBCQ
Suchan’s Facebook posting is here:
https://www.facebook.com/vladimir.su…52247823488388
” When, however, the Boeing started to turn in the opposite direction and was still apparently manageable, “the US-Ukrainian headquarters of the special operation panicked and order the Buk battery to destroy the plane in the air in order to pre-empt the possibility of the Boeing’s emergency landing.” A Buk missile was fired and the plane was then finally destroyed. ”
Oh nice fairy story; I mean conspiracy theory. Covers both eventualities so even if evidence of a Buk hit is found some fools will still believe it. You’d have thought the crew would’ve at least tried to send a Mayday call whilst the aircraft remained manageable but either way I expect the telemetry and evidence from the flight recorders will soon disprove this. I notice it hasn’t addressed the vital question of why.
You possess a great redeeming virtue, Kempe: You are as dumb as you are malign.
Yats has resigned !! Now there’s a casualty from MH-17 that I didn’t expect.
All kinds of mischief going on in the Ukraine Parliament.
Could this be a coup in reverse gear ? The US military advisers might just be a few days too late to halt Ukraine’s lean back East which would leave Swoboda and Blackwater pretty lonely.
Not just ‘yats’ but his entire cabinet because the coalition fell apart? Is it just a coincidence this happened as the bodies return to Netherlands?
It seems Kiev has a lot of suspicions who was responsible for MH17.
Commence the wailing—POOOOOOOOOOOTINNNNN !
The official sanctioned explanation; (it seems like most marriage difficulties, it’s over finances. In essence they are paralyzed until IMF approves their austerity-laden cash cow.)
http://www.kyivpost.com/content/ukraine-abroad/new-york-times-yatsenyuk-resigns-as-kyiv-moves-toward-elections-357774.html
““Our government now does not have an answer to the question how to pay salaries,” he said, adding: “How to support the army and armed forces? How not to demoralize the spirits of those tens of thousands of people who are sitting not in this hall, but in trenches under bullets?”
The dissolution of the governing coalition suggested that Mr. Poroshenko and his political allies were optimistic that the Ukrainian military would soon succeed in quashing the pro-Russian separatist insurrection that has troubled eastern Ukraine since early April.”
As already pointed out the Su 25 is a ground attack aircraft that is unable to operate above 7,000 metres, 3,000 metres below the cruising altitude of MH 170. The type can carry two R-60 missiles for self defence but lacks the height, speed (it’s actually slower than a 777) and above all the airborne interception radar to be able to carry out the sort of mission described. It’s the last aircraft anyone would assign to such a task with any hope of success.
Anyway, I await evidence.
Watching the talking heads mindlessly repeating talking-points read from a chyron makes me think of 2003.
They haven’t learned a fucking thing.
Why is it that asking questions like these gets the faithful so upset?
Is it becuase they are stupid questions that the Russian military is only asking because Putin is so bad he threatened to show them more holiday shots of his nipples? Well everyone has their breaking point!
“1. Why did the MH17 plane leave the international corridor?
2. Was MH17 leaving the route a navigation mistake or was the crew following instructions by Ukrainian air traffic controllers in Dnepropetrovsk?
3. Why was a large group of air defense systems deployed to the militia-held area if the self-defense forces have no planes?
4. Why did Kiev deploy BUK missile systems on the edge of militia-controlled zones directly before the tragedy?
5. On the day of the crash Kiev intensified Kupol-M1 9S18 radar activity, key BUK system components. Why?
6. What was a military plane doing on the route intended for civilian flights?
7. Why was the military jet flying at so close to a passenger plane?
8. Where did the launcher – from the video circulated by Western media and showing a Buk system being moved allegedly from Ukraine to Russia – come from? As the video was made on the territory controlled by Kiev, where was the launcher being transported?
9. Where is it right now? Why are some of the missiles missing on the launcher? When was the last time a missile was launched from it?
10. Why haven’t US officials revealed the evidence supporting claims that the MH17 was shot down by a missile launched by the militia?”
Detail around these questions here.
OK. Ante up, US. Russia bids sat image….do you call?
Ah, I see. It’s Aces and eights, the dead-man’s hand.
I ‘see’ your bluff and raise you.
With all these jaw dropping things happening today, one fact still seems to have escaped media attention… UK journalist Graham Phillips is still being help prisoner:
http://rt.com/news/175284-ukraine-contributor-phillips-hostage/
RT-
Q: “But, Mr President, the United States and the White House claim they have evidence that Russia intervened in the conflict, sent its troops and supplied weapons. They claim they have proof. Do you believe that?”
VP: “Proof? Why don’t they show it? The entire world remembers the US Secretary of State demonstrating the evidence of Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction, waving around some test tube with washing powder in the UN Security Council. Eventually, the US troops invaded Iraq, Saddam Hussein was hanged and later it turned out there had never been any weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. You know, it’s one thing to say things and another to actually have evidence. I will tell you again:no Russian troops…”
C’mon Kerry, et al. Ante up.
@Kempe 7:22pm
“As already pointed out the Su 25 is a ground attack aircraft that is unable to operate above 7,000 metres …”
Unless it has R-195 engines like e.g. Ukraine Su25M1’s when service ceiling increases to 10,000 meters (it’s all to do with engine thrust). There’s also stuff like dynamic (zoom climb) and practical (sustained) service ceilings, but I won’t bore with detail that doesn’t quite fit your narrative.
” Unless it has R-195 engines like e.g. Ukraine Su25M1′s when service ceiling increases to 10,000 meters ”
Well you’d beter write to Sukhoi and tell them they’ve got it wrong.
http://www.sukhoi.org/eng/planes/military/su25k/lth/
R-195 engines, still only 7,000 metres.
The difference in thrust is anyway quite small, an extra 200 kgf from 4,100 on the R-95.
Ukraine’s modernised Su-25s have updated avionics and modified airframe. Same engines.
Kempe; Do you think the US should back up their allegations with some concrete evidence?
@Kempe
Ok, the problem is that the service ceiling as quoted in specs is not actually the maximum altitude an aircraft can reach. It is usually defined as the altitude at which the aircraft’s rate of climb drops below some value considered useful. You may also want to check out what zoom climb can do for you.
Oh, and the specs for the Ukraine version of Su25 from their state armaments mob are here …
http://uos.ua/produktsiya/aviakosmicheskaya-tehnika/84-cy-25
Service ceiling is quoted as 7000 – 10000 meters.
There are no longer any references to MH17 on the BBC news home page. Perhaps we can conclude that the US is not going to reveal its evidence after all. Maybe it didn’t have any, or maybe the evidence is identical to that provided by Russia.
I do hope the regular Gormless Squad who have been on here braying like jackasses (I include Craig on this particular occasion) have learned a sobering and salutary lesson on the idiocy of jumping to conclusions.
Indeed, MJ – Mr Murray has gone awfully quiet too…
Is he controlled opposition, or simply being played by his “trusted contacts?
US State Department Tells Lies To Justify War
“Apparently still laying the groundwork for their own planned military intervention, the US government has invented a narrative of massive Russian artillery strikes against Ukrainian military bases along the border.

State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf introduced the story to the press at today’s briefing, claiming that the US has secret evidence from “human intelligence information” that the attacks are taking place. The Pentagon concurred, saying such attacks have been going on “for several days.”
During the past several days, there has not been a single report out of Ukraine of an artillery strike against any of their military bases, anywhere in the country. The last such incident was two weeks ago, when rebels fired a BM-21 grad at a military base.
And this is Ukraine we’re talking about, which comes up with its own dubious stories of Russian attacks on a near daily basis. If Russia was carried out concerted shelling against Ukrainian military targets, Ukraine would be harping on about it constantly. They aren’t even alleging anything close to that is happening.
The latest invented story appears to have been produced primarily as a replacement for Harf’s increasingly debunked allegations surrounding the MH17 shoot-down, a talking point which has gained her no small mocking in the press over the past week, as she directly contradicts the US intelligence community’s own releases on the matter.
Harf’s latest allegations included the phantom artillery fire and secret evidence of Russia planning to maybe send a bunch more weapons to the rebels. One member of the assembled press, humorously, asked if there was “a YouTube video or something that you can point us to,” calling back to Harf’s regular use of social media as “proof” for her claims.
Harf declared “I just said I wasn’t going to give you the underlying source,” and asked if the press preferred she keep things to herself that she can’t prove. This led to another exchange, with someone shooting back “Marie, I think that it would be best for all concerned here if when you make an allegation like that, you’re able to back it up with something more than just “because I said so.””
Article printed from News From Antiwar.com: http://news.antiwar.com
URL to article: http://news.antiwar.com/2014/07/24/us-invents-reports-of-russia-attacking-ukraine-bases/
The US should provide their evidence.
No doubt Russia has “hi tech kit” at their disposal to…..and was also “looking at” this area at the time.
Are they going to show what they have to !!!!
I doubt they are going to show anyone what they have (or even mention they have it).
” Ok, the problem is that the service ceiling as quoted in specs is not actually the maximum altitude an aircraft can reach. ”
No but it’s generally the highest altitude at which the aircraft can operate. As with maximum speeds the very maximum heights combat aircraft can achieve are always with it being in a “clean” condition, that is not carrying any weapons or external fuel tanks. As a ground attack aircraft the Su 25 would’ve been totally the wrong kind of aircraft to sent on this mission.
I was wrong, there is an MH17-related link on the BBC home page. Seems it’s no longer a serious international incident, more a lifestyle thing: “How odd is a cluster of plane accidents?”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-28481060