The Downing of MAL 17 in Ukraine: What We Know So Far, Part 1

After the Malaysian airliner went down in the Ukraine, the Western media immediately started blaming Russia and the Novorussian rebels. They have continued to do this in recent days without ever considering the possibility that the jet may have been shot down the Ukie Nazis (henceforth referred to as the Nazis).
1. The Buk system:  The missile that shot down the jet was identified immediately as coming from a Buk system, and it was immediately played up that Buks are made in Russia. Therefore, it was sleazily implied, the Russians shot down the liner because if it’s a Russian system, then that means Russians did it! Nothing about this is true. Nearly all of the weapons the Ukies use are Russian-made weapons. If a weapon involved in a crime is identified as Russian, that means nothing whatsoever, only that either the Nazis, the rebels, or much less likely the Russians shot the plane it down.
Another problem is that by no means whatsoever has it been established that the plane was even downed by a Buk. That has been suggested without a lot of evidence to back it up. It is certainly possible instead that it was downed by an air to air missile from another jet, and indeed, there is some suggestive evidence so far that this may be the case due to marks on the plane suggestive of an air to air missile rather than a SAM.
2. Nazis immediately ruled out as perpetrators. After it was decided that a Buk shot down the airliner, speculation immediately shifted to who shot it down with this Russian made weapon: the only two choices were the Russians and the rebels. That the Nazis may have shot down the plane was never even suggested once. But the Nazis are very much a suspect in this crime. So why have they been excluded from the possible perpetrator list from the start? It makes no sense.
3. If it was shot down by a Buk, it had to be a Russian-supplied Buk used by the rebels. Once we established that a Buk shot the plane down and either Russia or the rebels were responsible, it was immediately suggested that the rebels had one or more of these systems, and it was suggested that they got their Buk(s) from Russia. If the rebels have a Buk, that this proves that they shot down the plane!
The problem with that is although the rebels may indeed have a Buk, the Nazis also have a Buk! And not just one – they have 35 of them scattered throughout the war zone! Why the party with one weapon was immediately fingered as the perpetrator and the party with 35 of the weapons was instantly ruled out makes no sense. Further, it is not even known if the rebels have even one Buk. The Nazi Defense Minister himself stated immediately after the crash that the rebels had no Buk systems. He quickly changed his tune later as the propaganda directives changed, and he was probably given death threats if he didn’t stop speaking the truth, but his statement remains.
4. The rebel’s Buk, if they have one, was likely seized from Nazi stores (reported a month ago on Russian sites) instead of being delivered from Russia. For some time now, the rebel side has been reporting that their only operational Buk is a war prize, and is in fact nonoperational as it lacks a radar. Without a radar, it is useless. You may as well be firing slingshots at the airliner. To this date, no one has proven that the rebels have even one Buk (though rebel commander Strelkov stated that they had one nonoperational one) or that it works at all. No photographs of this Buk have emerged. It is not known where it is being stored in the theater.
5. Rebel Buk was near the shoot-down zone. The media has been suggesting this for some time now. However, no evidence has been offered to prove that this is true. No one knows if the lone rebel Buk, which probably doesn’t even work, was anywhere near the crash site that day.
6. Nazis had a number of Buks near the crash site. While there is no evidence that the lone rebel nonworking Buk was near the site, we have excellent evidence that the Nazis had five of their 35 Buks close enough to the crash site to shoot down the plane.
7. Rebel radar would be needed to shoot down the liner. No evidence whatsoever has been offered showing that the rebels had operational radar anywhere near the crash site that day. In fact, no one has proven that the rebels have operational radar at all.
8. The only radar seen near the site that day was being emitted from a Nazi Buk system that was tracking the airliner extensively. Russian intelligence noted that they picked up many signals form a certain Nazi Buk that day near the crash site, and they even gave the exact location of this Buk very close the site and named the Nazi unit that was working it.
9. Plane was downed in rebel territory. The media started screaming about this as soon as the plane was downed. Another devious inference. The sneaky idea here being that if the plane went down in rebel territory, then that obviously means the rebels must have shot it down! Not so fast now. Just because the plane was downed in rebel territory does not by any means prove that the rebels shot it down. The Buk has a range of quite some miles. It is perfectly possible for a Buk 10-15 miles away from the crash site in Nazi territory to have shot the plane down.
10. Rebels were messing with the bodies and the black boxes! This may or may not have been a smart thing to do. Some of the bodies were apparently shipped to Russia for examination. It was suggested that one black box was too. The rebels were determined to keep the black boxes and the bodies out of the hands of the Nazis and probably the pro-Nazi US too, or really any Western pro-Nazi country because the Nazis or their allies, especially the US, would be certain to fake the investigation in order to blame Russia and the rebels no matter who shot it down.
It turns out that the black boxes and the bodies were finally handed over to the Malaysians who no doubt will conduct a fair investigation because as Muslims they are not fond of the US and most of Europe, but they have no axes to grind with Russia.
11. Demands for sanctions. The US immediately blamed Russia and the rebels and then demanded more sanctions on Russia in order to “stop Russian aggression.” There is no Russian aggression. There is no Novorussian aggression either. The Novorussians are simply antifascist self-defense forces who took up arms against the Nazis who overthrew the legitimate government with a fascist coup and installed a Nazi regime in the heart of Europe. No one yet has the faintest idea who shot down that plane. There is absolutely zero hard, fast, solid evidence tying either the rebels or Russia to the accident. Therefore demanding sanctions on Russia in response to this event is simply insane.
12. Strelkov tweeted immediately after the jet was shot down that the rebels had shot down a Nazi military cargo plane. This indicates that the rebels shot the plane down as a mistake. However, Strelkov says he did not make that tweet, and he has no idea who did. He said, “I had no idea how dishonest these Ukrainians could be.”
13. Rebels had previously used a Buk to shoot down another Ukrainian aircraft three days before. There is no evidence whatsoever a Buk was involved in this take-down. The rebels have shot down a few Ukrainian planes, but I believe so far they have all been shot down with SAM’s.
14. US complained and said work on the site is being obstructed by the rebels, thereby suggesting that the rebels are covering something up. However, the OCSE said that there was complete access to the site, showing that the US lied.
15. The US said that the rebels must lay down their arms and leave the region so that an investigation could take place. The US is therefore trying to achieve what the Nazis had not, the withdrawal and defeat of rebel forces and victory and occupation of territory by the Nazis.
16. Russia presented quite a bit of solid evidence in favor of its view suggesting that the rebels were not at fault and instead the Nazis may have been at fault. The US said it had quite a bit of evidence for the guilt of the rebels in the incident. Russia then asked the US to present its evidence. However, the US stated that it would not provide any of its evidence. The reason stated “there is no equivalence between US and Russian intel.”
This is completely unfair. This is as if the defense presents a complete and excellent case for the innocence of an accused, and then when the judge asks the prosecution to present its case, they refuse to and say we have all the evidence proving beyond a shadow of a doubt that the accused is guilty, but we are not going to show it to the court because the prosecuting attorneys are much better people so our evidence is obviously better than the evidence for the defense since the defense are scumbags and much worse people than we are, so you should not believe anything they say and instead believe us because we are better.
17.The State Department said we should use common sense in determining who was obviously guilty of this crime, assuming that anyone with half a brain could see that the rebels are clearly at fault. However, why would we assume that the rebels are automatically at fault when they had no motive to shoot down the jet and had only one Buk, possibly nonoperational, while the Nazis had fully 35 fully operational Buks all through the zone, including at least one emitting radar tracking the jet just before it was downed. It would seem that common sense would show that the Nazis were at fault, not the rebels.
17. US intelligence said that they had detected a Buk missile launch from rebel-held territory right before the plane went down. The Russians specifically asked to see this evidence, suggesting that they knew nothing about it. The US refused to present this evidence.
18. The US has stated that the Russians were training rebels at a base in Russia right on the border of Ukraine. One of the things they were training them in was air defense, apparently with Buks. However, they presented no evidence that this is true.
19. I follow the rebel updates every day for many days now. We know exactly how much equipment they have of every time. Whenever they receive or seize new equipment, they generally report it shortly thereafter. We did receive some evidence that the rebels had seized a Buk at one point, but they suggested that it was not working. They seized that Buk about a month ago. Since then, the rebels have not reported the use of this Buk on a single occasion. They have downed a few Nazi aircraft, but they always reported that they downed them with a MANPAD, which they do have a few of.
20. The Nazis quickly produced a supposed recorded conversation of two rebel officers discussing the downing of the jet as if it were an accident. One was named, and the other was not named. The production seemed rather amateurish.
However, investigators quickly found that the Nazi intelligence service had uploaded two versions of this video. One upload had been accidental and apparently no one was supposed to see it. The other was the one for public consumption. The one for the public was timestamped the day after the shoot-down.
The one not intended for the public had a time stamp of the day before the accident. So the Nazi intelligence service had actually created this video describing the shoot-down of the plane the day before the plane was actually shot down! This shows that the Nazis knew the day before that the plane was going to be shot down on the day it was. They could only have known this if they can see into the future, or if they are planning to shoot it down themselves. The time stamp data on the software used to create the video cannot be faked. The Nazis were completely busted with this fake evidence.
Since it was made the day before the shoot down even happened and people cannot record audio that occurs tomorrow today, the tape-recorded voices of the two officers cannot really be their real voices. The scenario the two rebels describe on the tape is very unlikely. They said that the Buk was at a checkpoint manned by Cossacks. There are no Cossacks who know how to operate such a gun in the theater. All Cossacks are volunteers from Russia and not members of a professional military. The checkpoint was at an out of the way town that is not important. And Buks are simply not stored at checkpoints. The whole scenario makes no sense.
21. The Nazis then produced a video showing two officers, one rebel and one unnamed Russian, discussing the handover of a Russian Buk to the Nazis. The video had the same cheap, phony look to it as the proven fake and was produced by the same people. This does not prove that this one is a fake too, but it is highly suggestive. This tape has been neither verified nor debunked, but the format and the producers do not inspire confidence in its authenticity.
23. The Nazis next produced a photo purporting to show the transfer of a rebel Buk out of the Ukraine into Russia soon after the showdown. However, the scene of the video has been identified and is instead a Nazi-held city in the region. The Buk shown driving by on the street is instead apparently one of the 35 Nazi Buks.
24. US intelligence sources were then widely quoted in the US press as verfiying both of the recordings and the photo in #23. They said they had verified the recordings by voiceprints of the rebels and Russians quoted in the recordings. However, two of the four men speaking on the recordings do not even have names and no one knows who they are, so how could voiceprints of them exist? Furthermore, one tape has been proven to be a fully manufactured fake recording that is not even a recording of the real officer’s voice and is instead the voice of an intelligence officer.
Therefore, US intelligence sources just “verified” one proven fake recording as being real. In addition, they also “verified” another proven faked photo as being real. Unless US intelligence is staffed by retarded people, they could not have made a genuine error here. Instead US intel is deliberately verifying known faked evidence as real apparently as part of a plot to frame Russia and the rebels. The implications for the honesty and integrity of US intelligence testimony are stunning.
25. Apparently not all US intelligence is corrupt. On Consortium News, a well known journalist wrote an article stating that his US CIA sources told him confidentially that the CIA had evidence that the Nazis had shot down the plane themselves. Apparently the CIA knows what really happened but is instead choosing to lie in order to frame Russia and the rebels.

Please follow and like us:
Tweet 20

0 thoughts on “The Downing of MAL 17 in Ukraine: What We Know So Far, Part 1”

  1. Robert I agree with most all you’ve said about the plane downing except,”…time stamp data on the software used to create the video cannot be faked…”. This is just not correct. Bits are bits. Graphics are just numerical representations in a file. Numbers can be changed. Any graphic can be faked. Some are more difficult than others but I would think a time stamp would be easy to fake.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.