Who was REALLY responsible for the downing of flight MH-17? Let's take a look at the facts

On July 17th, 2014 two major events took place: Malaysian flight MH17 was downed over eastern Ukraine, presumably by a missile, and Israel began a ground invasion of Gaza. Israel's invasion was granted an almost complete media blackout. The MH17 tragedy, however, got full coverage, and was immediately propagandized. (This in spite of the fact that far more civilians have been killed by Israel's bombardment of Gaza over the past few weeks.)

The U.S. government and the western media pinned the responsibility for the MH17 tragedy on Russia within minutes, long before investigators had time to even arrive at the scene, much less provide any actual conclusions. Then came an all out information war, with lies, omissions and disinformation coming from all sides.

The geopolitical implications of this event should not be underestimated. If this was ever in doubt, the fact that Obama just sent military advisers to Ukraine to help Kiev in its assault against the east should make it very clear. Depending on how much mileage Washington can get out of it, the downing of flight MH17 could end up being extremely pivotal.

Anyone who knows their history, knows that media coverage of events like these often lay the psychological groundwork for war. Consider the sinking of the Lusitania for example on 5/7/1915 (or the murder archduke Ferdinand in 1914). These combined with the Zimmermann Telegram (which was dispatched on 1/16/1917) pushed US public opinion over the tipping point, and on 4/6/1917 the United States declared war on Germany.

It is worth noting that though the U.S. denied it at the time, later diving expeditions revealed that the Lusitania was indeed smuggling war munitions at the time that was sunk (as Germany had asserted from the beginning). Of course, by the time the truth was known it was far too late for the 116,000 Americans who were killed in that conflict.

So who was REALLY responsible for the downing of flight MH17?

First let's start by asking some obvious questions.

Why was flight MH17 routed over directly over a war zone? This was not a normal flight path. In fact it was 300 miles off course. Normally planes this flight path keep significantly farther south, and the decision to allow MH17 to fly over Donetsk was ultimately the decision of the the authorities in Kiev.

Now, Kiev initially claimed that they were acting under the assumption that this route was safe as long as the flight stayed above 32,000 feet, which is out of range for man-pad surface to air missiles. But that statement was later contradicted by Ukraine officials who said they knew three days before the downing of MH17 that that the separatists had the Buk missile system, which is capable of hitting aircraft at much higher altitudes. So either the Ukrainian government is lying about the separatists having the missiles, or they routed flight MH17 300 miles off course, KNOWING that it could be easily shot down.

Now to fully understand the implications of this decision, we have to look at what's really been going on in Ukraine lately. The mainstream media hasn't been talking about this very much, but for the past month and a half the Ukrainian military has been using heavy artillery and airstrikes against entire towns in east Ukraine. This shelling has been indiscriminate with many of the munitions striking in residential areas. The civilian death toll for this bombardment was estimated at over 257 people one month ago, and the attacks intensified shortly after. Even Human Rights Watch has finally come out to condemn the Ukrainian military's bombardment of civilians.

For a glimpse of what this assault looked like on the ground watch the video below (Warning: extremely brutal footage):

Washington was silent. European officials were silent. And the U.N. was also silent.

The separatists in turn retreated from Slavyansk, regrouped and over the past few weeks they have shot down several Ukrainian military aircraft, effectively stalling the the advance towards Donetsk. But the shelling hasn't stopped.

In that context, Kiev's decision to route a civilian airliner 300 miles north of its normal flight path, putting it directly over an active war zone, a war zone where they themselves were the primary aggressor, wasn't just stupid, it was criminal.

And let's remember how east Ukraine became a war zone in the first place. Did east Ukrainians invade west Ukraine or bomb them? No, the east Ukrainians held referendum to declare their dependence, they had a massive voter turn out (much higher in fact than the official elections that Washington endorsed) and the self appointed government in Kiev responded by attempting to bomb them into submission. And again, the so called "international community" just stood by and watched.

And this wasn't the first time.

Remember we had the Odessa massacre where Ukrainian police stood by and did nothing as Neo-Nazis burned over 40 anti-Kiev protesters alive. Among those killed was a pregnant woman who appeared to be strangled or beaten to death. The Ukrainian government totally covered up these crimes and blamed the tragedy on the anti-Kiev protesters. Apparently these people burned themselves alive. Watch "The Odessa Massacre What You're Not Being Told" for more details on this (below).

But let's not stop there, let's take this all the way back to the beginning. We have the evidence that it wasn't Yanukovich that used snipers on the protesters in February, the real killers came from within the Maidan coalition.

The short version of the leaked phone call between EU foreign policy chief Cathy Ashton and Estonia's foreign minister Urmas Paet:

Urmas Paet: "All the evidence shows that the people who were killed by snipers from both sides, among police men and people in the street, that they were the same snipers killing people from both sides."

Cathy Ashton: "Well that's, yeah..."

Urmas Paet: "And she also showed me some photos and she said that has medical doctor, she can say that it is the same handwriting..."
Cathy Ashton: "Yeah..."

Urmas Paet: "Same type of bullets... and it's really disturbing that now the new coalition, that they don't want to investigate what exactly happened. So that there is now stronger and stronger understanding that behind the snipers, it was not Yanukovich, but it was somebody from the new coalition."

(Note: Urmas Paet is not a native English speaker, so his wording is a bit odd at points. This transcript doesn't correct his errors. )
The long version:

There actually was an investigation, but the mainstream media was very quiet about the results. Why? Because the Ukrainian M.P. that led the investigation, Grennady Moskal, a man with a long history of criticizing the Berkut police, announced that he found no evidence that the Berkut police were responsible. The investigation also found that the bullets used in the killings did not fit the weapons used by the Berkut police.

For the full evidence of U.S. involvement in the toppling of the Ukrainian government watch "The Ukraine Crisis - What You're Not Being Told" (below).

Why is this background information important? Because it demonstrates just how far Washington's puppets in Kiev are willing to go for the sake of power, and that allows to start asking some harder questions.

Questions such as: was this just a case of gross incompetence on Kiev's part, or was it something else?

It's pretty obvious who benefits from this tragedy (it's certainly clear who is attempting to make use of it), and we know Kiev has a history of killing civilians and blaming it on others, but would they really take it this far?

For a lot of people these kinds of questions are simply off limits. They just aren't prepared to let their mind go down that path, especially considering the fact that the U.S. government is in bed with these guys.

So let's tread carefully and just ask a few more questions that these so called journalists in the mainstream media are neglecting to ask. For example: Why hasn't the U.S. government released its satellite pictures of the area right after the event?

Right after Russia challenged the U.S. government to produce the satellite imagery to back up their accusations, this is what Washington released to0CNN:

THAT is your photographic evidence, seriously?!
This isn't a recent map at all, in fact the map itself has a date written right on it: 2010. This is just an outdated screen shot from google maps with an amateurish drawing layered on top.

Why don't they want to show us the real images?

Russia, on the other hand, has released satellite images. These first two images (see below) are dated July 14, and according to Russia they show Buk missile launch systems located about 8 kilometers northwest of the city of Lugansk (an area under the control of the Ukrainian military).

The next two images were taken on July 17th. The first one shows that the Ukrainian military's Buk systems are no longer in their previous position, and the last image shows them in a new position 5 kilometers north of Donetsk.

Washington has not responded to this information, and interestingly has lowered it's tone since.

On July 21 Russia also released a radar image showing what they claimed to be an SU-27 fighter jet in close proximity to flight MH17. Ukraine had previously denied that there were any military aircraft near MH17, but they then reversed their story and said that the SU-27 was "escorting" the flight.

UPDATE: The following video (which was later taken down by the BBC) shows that eye witnesses on the scene saw military aircraft approaching flight MH17 right before the crash (make sure you turn on the English subtitles):

Eastern Ukraine has been watched like a hawk for months now. We've seen the U.S. government hyping their satellite images every time there is a change of Russian troop concentrations anywhere near the border. You're telling me that now, when it really counts, the worlds most sophisticated spy machine can't provide us with satellite pictures of a massive missile battery as it was positioned right after the downing of an aircraft? You're telling me they can't provide snapshots of the area following the missile battery as it was moved to its current location? You're telling me that they don't know where this missile battery is right now? Or that they actually do have these images, but they're just refraining from spreading this juicy tidbit all over the mainstream media like they usually do as soon as they have something that helps their case?

That stretches credulity.

Interestingly, investigative journalist Robert Parry, who is best known for his work exposing the Iran Contra scandal in the 1980s, for NewsWeek and the Associated Press, has published an article stating that one of his trusted sources has informed him that "U.S. intelligence agencies do have detailed satellite images of the likely missile battery that launched the fateful missile, but the battery appears to have been under the control of Ukrainian government troops dressed in what look like Ukrainian uniforms."

Does this mean that we should just take Robert Parry and his source at their word? No, of course not. But by the same token, why is the western media taking the U.S. government's word at face value without demanding evidence? Washington is a den of pathological liars. Their word is less than worthless, and it certainly doesn't count as proof. Robert Parry's account on the other hand is validated by the satellite images released by Russia, and like it or not, this is the strongest evidence that has been released so far.

If Washington actually had evidence to support their case, don't you think they would have released it by now?

IMPORTANT UPDATE: On July 27th, the U.S. government played a very sneaky move, but this move actually damages their case even more. They released grainy satellite images of what they claim is proof of Russia using ARTILLERY against Ukraine. Why do I say that this is sneaky? Because the way it is timed many people will not read carefully and will instantly think that this is imagery of the missiles that they claim shot down flight MH17, and that's simply not the case. Artillery can't hit an airplane. It can't even come close. Now how does this damage their case? Well, it shows that they are specifically avoiding pulling the images related to the missile launchers.

No one is even talking about artillery attacks. This isn't the scandal of the decade like the MH17 debacle may end up being if it turns out Washington's puppets in Kiev brought down a civilian airliner on purpose. So this release is clearly a smoke screen.

But what about the audio evidence that the Ukrainian government uploaded in the form of a youtube video which supposedly proves that the rebels admitted to shooting down the plane in a phone conversation?

Is that recording genuine? Or did someone just splice it together? Who is this Oleksiy character anyway? Can anyone actually this voice to a real person? So far no one has (and this is kind of important given the circumstances).

Oh right, we know it's real because the Ukrainian government told us it was real.

Let's put this into context. Remember this is the same Ukrainian government that arrested two Russian journalists in May after those journalist released footage of U.N. helicopters being used by the Ukrainian military in the assault against the east.

The Ukrainian government claimed that the journalists were transporting rocket launchers, and even video taped the men bound and gagged next to a set of rocket launchers (see video below). The U.S. government went along with the story.

But then after there was a major uproar, and Human Rights Watch came out to condemn their arrest, the journalists were suddenly released without any comment or explanation.

Why is the relevant? Because the current government in Kiev has a history of fabricating and manipulating evidence when it's politically expedient. The veracity of the audio should be determined by an independent investigation, by multiple audio experts, in multiple countries.

Now if the implications of what I'm presenting here sound crazy to you, then you might want to look up Operation Northwoods. Operation Northwoods was a series of proposals written by Department of Defense back in the 60s, which directly advocated committing acts of terrorism within the United States, and even proposed shooting down a civilian airliner in order to blame it on Cuba, and this would be used to justify a war. These documents were declassified in 1997, and there are thousands of copies available for download on the internet (for example this one from George Washington University). Don't take my word for it, go read it.

You might be thinking, if any of this is true, why on earth would the U.S. government go out of their way to target Russia like this? This is really extreme. Might it have something to do with the fact that just this month the Brics nations met and put together an international development bank specifically designed to rival the World Bank and the IMF? Could it be because Russia is now openly pushing for the de-dollarization of international trade? Russia poses a threat to the dollar. That's all the motive the U.S. government has ever needed.

But what if we are given incontrovertible proof that the rebels mistook flight MH17 for a military aircraft and shot it down? What should happen then?

Well ask yourself this: what would be done if this mistake had been made by the U.S. military?

Oh wait, that actually happened. In fact it happened exactly 18 years before the MH17 tragedy, on the very same day. On July 17, 1996 TWA flight 800 was downed over Long Island. The U.S. government claimed that the explosion was the result of an internal malfunction, but numerous eye witnesses reported that they saw a missile being fired from the ground, and even the New York Times referred to the evidence of a coverup as "formidable". The U.S. government never admitted that they were responsible.

But that's really a bad example isn't it?

Here's a better example: what if Ukraine had shot down a Russian airliner. Oh wait that actually did happen... in October of 2001. The Ukrainian government initially lied about it, but they finally came clean (which is more than we can say for the U.S. government).

We'll conclude here with what may seem to be a non-sequitur: a speech given by IMF chief Christine Lagarde on January 15, 2014 1:00 PM This was one month before the U.S. government helped topple the Ukrainian government, leading to the crisis which then resulted in Russia's expulsion from the G8. The IMF then swooped in and saddled Ukraine with a set of their signature predatory loans.

P.S. You're going to have to review this information several times to fully understand it. Also note that we did not include some of the more bizarre evidence (conspiracy fodder) in this case. We plan to address those issues in a later article.

CORRECTION: The previous version of this transcript (and the current audio in the video) states that the TWA Flight 800 was Iranian. This is incorrect. I was mixing this up with the U.S.S. Vincennes incident which I also intended to mention but didn't due to a lack of time. The U.S.S. Vincennes was a U.S. ship which mistakenly shot down an Iranian Airbus jetliner in July 1988. Both incidents should actually be listed here as they both illustrate the same principle.

The dates, likelihood that TWA 800 was shot down, and the evidence of a coverup stands. I'm leaving the video up with an annotation on the error because this detail had no real importance for the MH17 case.