Taking Sides

I’m posting this Facebook conversation here because I think it outlines my reasons for favouring the Separatists and the Russians pretty well and things get lost on Facebook.

A while (August 26th) ago I wrote on Facebook that:

I would like to call people’s attention to ‘The Sacker’s blog’ at It is the best resource I’ve seen for getting updates on the Ukraine crisis.
While I have no personal connection to Novorossia (a defiant name for the eastern provinces) the justice of their cause is obvious as is the injustice of the genocidal war against them. In a very real sense the Novorossia militias are fighting for all of us who are against the rise of fascism in Europe and the amoral and anti-rational politics of the US and EU. I urge everyone to keep an eye on this and engage in discussion about it as changing the consensus and the complacency is the only way we can support these people.

Daniel responded:

I’ll admit to being not the most informed on this situation, but it seems like a stretch to say that the Ukrainian government is fascist because some of the protesters/militias involved in the euro maidan stuff were. Seem to me to be just the nature of mass movements, much like how you could encounter anti-Semite NWO freaks at Occupy.

I posted the following videos and links with comments saying:

This short documentary could be said to be partisan but is a good introduction that shows that the problem goes beyond a few freaks

The Telegraph on the other hand is as mainstream as it gets and this article highlights the presence of fascist groups such as Azov fighting with the Ukraine army.


Even the BBC acknowledges that the neo Nazi groups are a significant problem for, and through Svaboda in, the government.

Looking deeper, Per Anders Rudling provides an interesting historical perspective on the rise of fascism and the divisions in Ukraine. I think he must be right in saying that the majority of Euromaidan protesters were not fascist and were protesting against extensive corruption but the fascists were a large minority and the best organised faction. At the end Rudling associates Putin with Yanukovich in ‘holding Ukraine back’; I think this is naive or disingenuous but he makes no argument for this.

Daniel responded:

I watched the first two videos, will watch the 3rd in a bit. I don’t doubt that fascist militias have power in Ukraine but to frame the conflict and Russia’s involvement in at as anti-fascist seems wrong. Russia has their own self-interested agenda here as much the EU. The Crimean region seems to be in favour of secession and I support their right to self-determination, but I really don’t get your support for Russia and by extension Yanukovych’s government, which was clearly corrupt.

I replied:

I don’t know that Russia can be blamed for Yanukovych’s corrupt government. I understand that Ukraine was in Russia’s sphere of influence but it had a similarly corrupt government before Yanukovych and that was pro-West. Russia has every reason to be wary of the West’s intentions in Ukraine given the expansion of NATO eastwards; theirs is a rational self-interest that seems to be based on ‘partnership’ is not in necessary conflict with the self-interest of others while that of the US/EU is based on maintaining the privileged position of the US and is in necessary conflict as is apparent in the Middle East. People may or may not like Putin’s style or some of his conservative views but he has been remarkably consistent in calling for a multi-polar world order and has been extremely effective in moving towards this through partnerships with China, BRICS and now the Latin American nations. As to framing the conflict as anti-fascist – if you are fighting fascists you are by definition anti-fascist and everything I have learned from the non-mainstream media convinces me that Novarossia or Donbass is the ‘right side’. The people who support them seem to be diverse in background and morally motivated as in the case of the volunteer of Afghan origin in this video:

And this militia member:

Daniel argued:

I’m not suggesting Yanukovych was directly controlled by Russia, but he has their support. He is likely exiled in Russia despite being wanted for war crimes. Also, Russia has always justified their involvement by calling the Ukrainian uprising ‘a coup’. Despite the involvement of the far-right, this is dishonest. It was a legitimate popular uprising. Putin might be effective, but do you agree with the methods behind that efficacy? The protests started because Yanukovych backed down after Putin engaged in economic warfare against Ukraine to keep the country under Russian influence. That doesn’t seem very democratic or justifiable. I don’t see him as any better than the West. As for anti-fascism, I disagree. This is not clear cut ethically like people joining the international brigades to fight Franco in Spain…the fascists are by your own admission not in the majority. This is a civil war with strings being pulled by the West and Russia. It doesn’t make sense to me to pick a side.

I said:

Serious analysts like William Engdahl and Stephen Cohen have shown that the ‘uprising’ was a coup and one engineered by the EU and US, with the US being less willing to compromise and agree on a Ukraine that would work with both the West and Russia. This is evident from the Victoria Nuland’s ‘F… the EU’ recording. It has also been reported that Maidan protesters were paid by the US and EU.

Yanukovych is in exile in Russia but he is not guilty of the crime he is accused of, that is, using snipers to fire on protesters. Engdahl argues (and intercepted phone conversations between EU diplomats support this) that the snipers were working for the US who were intent on scuppering a deal being worked out between EU representatives, Yanukovych and opposition parties.

According to Cohen, Putin made Yanukovych a counter offer and was prepared to work with the EU to rebuild Ukraine. It was the EU who forced Yanukovych to choose sides. I do see Putin as better than the West’s politicians; in demeanour, speech and action he is much more a conciliator and an incredibly competent manager which is entirely contrary to the aggressive, ‘thuggish’ picture painted of him in the MSM. Russia under Putin appears to be a very different entity to the Russia of the Soviet period or under Yelsin. Putin is by no means perfect and I don’t see him as the messiah but just as a really good headteacher can turn around a failing school he has been changing Russia and its role in the world for the better.

Also worth watching this interview with Stephen Cohen who gives a very coherent account of the crisis describing how it was orchestrated by the US and EU.

Daniel noted:

A quick look at wikipedia shows William Engdahl is a climate change denier and a guy who believes that oil is a ‘geological phenomenon’ that isn’t at risk of being depleted. I’m not sure that he is any more of a serious analyst than Alex Jones or David Icke. I see no reason to take his unsubstantiated claims that the Orange Revolution was instigated by the US as fact. These people seem incapable of understanding that while the masses are controlled, we are also capable of free thought and action and that real grassroots movements can exist. It reminds me of an article on infowars (one source of the claim the maidan protesters were paid) about London student protests in 2011 being infiltrated by anarchists who were actually agent provocateurs sent by the state. I had a good laugh at that since me and people I know personally organised that action. I’ve seen no evidence to support the claim of protesters being paid beyond a syndicated article on infowars and other conspiracy sites that quotes ‘a number of confirmations from readers’. I’ll finish watching these videos but these sources (Engdahl at least) are not particularly credible in my eyes.

I replied:

I’m sure that genuine grassroots movements were involved in the protests. But what good did their protests do? Why would they want to be associated with the fascist violence that accompanied the protests? Yanukovych and his government were bad but is the new government any better? I’ve found no substantial evidence of Maidan protesters being paid but there is no doubt that the US has been buying influence – sorry ‘supporting civil society’ – in Ukraine for two decades. Watch this short video of Victoria Nuland speaking at this ‘US – Ukraine Foundation’ conference. Did the US spend the admitted $5 billion over those two decades because they wanted to improve things for the Ukrainian people? Call me ‘symbol minded’ if you will but I was amused by the prominence of the US flag and the Chevron logo while the Ukraine flag hung limply in the corner.

Still, I ought to consider the view from the other side .. Not looked at much of this but I will:

Daniel concluded:

I’m certain that US aid comes with conditions that are tailored towards achieving the US’s geopolitical ambitions in the region. That is a different thing entirely from saying that they funded subversion, whatever that means in practice. This is a breakdown of US aid to Ukraine, most of which would be verifiable elsewhere (IMF etc.) –…/fact-sheet-us-assistance… – America’s successful purchase of influence is no different ethically from Russia’s failed one.


Martin John titles his video argument “MH17 – We know with 99% certainty who shot down MH17”

A few days ago I wrote:

Much of the forensic evidence has come in, it backs up witness statements and it looks like the initial suspect was being framed. If this was a homicide investigation and the Kiev regime were a person they would probably be arrested on suspicion of murder by now and be asking for a lawyer. The police would be looking at the US as an accessory and maybe even the boss that ordered the ‘hit’.

We, the ‘social media community’, have to be the cops and the court. We can make a good case that the Ukrainian regime were the perpetrators.

I still believe that we can make the case that the Ukrainian regime are the most probable perpetrators but it’s not yet conclusive.

Martin John’s video is a very useful summary however I believe that his reliance on timestamps apparently indicating that the intercepted conversations video was made prior to the shooting down of MH17 is unwarrented. A GitHub article contends that YouTube re-encodes the creation date of videos to 24 hours prior to uploading. As a non-technical person I was already wary of citing the timestamp argument which I did not know enough to verify, while I can’t assess the validity of the counter argument about YouTube re-encoding either, it should caution us against placing any reliance on this piece of evidence.

The Russian ATC records indicating the presence of another plane with MH17 and statements from witnesses on the ground that another plane was seen attacking MH17, together with the suggestion of OSCE monitor Michael Bociurkiw that damage to the MH17 cockpit was suggestive of ‘strong machine gun fire’, all point to an air-to-air rather than the surface-to-air attack of which the Separatists are accused. This is strong evidence pointing to the Ukrainian regime particularly as there has been, as far as I know, no effort to refute it.

The ‘Carlos posts’ from a Twitter account under the name #Spainbuca, purportedly from a Spanish citizen working in Ukraine as an air traffic controller, are quite persuasive but there is no evidence to support the existence of such a person. Like the recording of alleged conversations between the rebels the Carlos posts requires further investigation. The provenance of both these pieces of evidence remains mysterious but the fact that they were both posted on the same day as disaster suggests that they might throw light on what happened.

Here are some links to news sources and information resources that might be useful in considering this case:

List of MH17 airframe parts
Map of a Tragedy – WSJ
Smoking Gun that Russian Separatists shot Down MH17 – Forbes
Locklin on Science Blog
MH17Analysis Parts 1 and 2.pdf
Debunked: MH17 Video Timestamped before the crash, and other timeline issues

Defending Donbass

One one level it sounds like an introduction to one of the MMORPGs I have been too fond of playing, neverthless this video delivers a powerful message in 46 seconds.

Why exactly are our political ‘leaders’, Cameron, Clegg and Miliband, supporting flag waving NAZIS in Ukraine? Why do they seem intent on goading Russia into a conflict? Why is our mainstream media ignoring the humanitarian crisis that is the Kiev government’s assault on civilians in Donbass? It seems to me that the fighters in the Donbass Self Defense Force are indeed on the front line and we are behind enemy lines.

I am not advocating that anyone in the UK takes up arms and travels to fight in Donbass or anywhere else but I think we should be very concerned about the situation and challenge our political representatives to be clear about why they are supporting the Ukrainian regime. I think that our moral support should be for the Donbass people. Everything I have learned from the non-mainstream media convinces me that theirs is the ‘right side’. The people who support them seem to be diverse in background as morally motivated as in the case of the volunteer of Afghan origin in this video:

There is always a possibility that my conclusions may be incorrect and I am very willing to listen to arguments contrary to my position but I’m not aware of any that I would consider valid. It might be argued that the people of Donbass (East Ukraine) should not have responded as they did to the coup in Kiev, that they should have accepted the new government rather that attempt to split from Ukraine or force a federalist arrangement by taking over town halls etc. It might be argued that their leaders were opportunistic and moved quickly hoping that Russia would annex Donbass as it did Crimea. However the people of Donbass perceived an existential threat from Kiev and acted to forestall it. They did not attack the Ukrainian regime they were attacked by the regime and they remain under attack. That attack is vicious and disproportionate and bears resemblance to the Israeli attacks on Gaza.

No one should doubt the vicious and indiscriminate nature of the assaults of the Ukrainian government against its former citizens nor doubt the NAZI association of the regime whose regular army is supplemented by fascist militias waving flags with SWASTIKA like emblems. This has been reported in no less mainstream an organ than the New York Times:

The fighting for Donetsk has taken on a lethal pattern: The regular army bombards separatist positions from afar, followed by chaotic, violent assaults by some of the half-dozen or so paramilitary groups surrounding Donetsk who are willing to plunge into urban combat.
Officials in Kiev say the militias and the army coordinate their actions, but the militias, which count about 7,000 fighters, are angry and, at times, uncontrollable. One known as Azov, which took over the village of Marinka, flies a neo-Nazi symbol resembling a Swastika as its flag.

Sergei Stapashin, writing in the ‘Independent Voices’ section of The Independent comments on an anti-Russia article that David Cameron wrote following the MH17 destruction that he blamed on the separatists:

Cameron’s article stands out as the first time that the head of a leading European power has directly sought war with Russia. Stirred by such support, Ukrainian troops began their assault on Lugansk and Donetsk, mercilessly destroying those cities and all the citizens within them.
Just as in 1938, when Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain called on European leaders to support the German Nazis in their campaign against the USSR, the present Prime Minister expressed unequivocal support for the Ukrainian neo-Nazis and angrily demanded that his European colleagues “change their attitude to Russia fundamentally”.
He is attempting to lure us into war. As we seek to avoid a return to the nightmare of global conflict, it is incumbent upon us to answer the allegations and threats made by Cameron.

I think we would do well to heed Stapashin’s warning.

Who Shot Down MH17?


Vladimir Putin, ex KGB agent, ‘The Pariah’. It sounds like a comic book supervillain, and that is how Russian President Putin has been portrayed in the west. When Malaysian airliner MH17 was shot down over the separatist held Donbass region of Ukraine on July 17, the Donbass militia were immediately blamed by the Ukrainian government in Kiev and by the US and its allies. By extension Putin and the Russians were blamed, accused of stirring up the ‘insurrection’ and supplying the Donbass militia with arms including the anti-aircraft missile launcher alleged to have brought down MH17. The mainstream media became a virtual lynch mob.

The main piece of evidence implicating the separatists was a YouTube post of what was alleged to be recordings of three intercepted phone conversations between separatist officers. These conversations amounted to a confession that the Malaysian plane had been shot down by their forces:

It has been argued that there are inconsistencies in the metadata of the video suggesting that it was made prior to July 17. I don’t know enough to comment on this but I find it suspicious that this was posted to YouTube on the same day that MH17 was shot down and there is no information on the provenance of the video.

Countering this ‘evidence’ is another post to social media, this time Twitter, from someone calling himself ‘Carlos’ and posting as @spainbuka. Carlos claims to be employed by Ukrainian Air Traffic Control. The following and more can be found on the Willyloman Blog by Scott Creighton:

10:21 – 17 de jul. de 2014 Autoridades de kiev, intentan hacer que pueda parecer un ataque de los pro-rusos
“Kiev Authorities, trying to make looks like an attack by pro-Russian”
10:24 – 17 de jul. de 2014 Ojo! Que puede ser un derribo B777 Malaysia Airlines en ukraine, 280 pasajeros
“warning! It can be a downing, Malaysia Airlines B777 in ukraine, 280 passengers”
10:25 – 17 de jul. de 2014 Cuidado! Kiev tiene lo que buscaba
“Warning! Kiev have what they wanted”
10:25 – 17 de jul. de 2014 Vuelven a tomar la torre de control en Kiev
“[Miitary] has taken control of ATC in Kiev”
10:27 – 17 de jul. de 2014 El avión B777 de Malaysia Airlines desapareció del radar, no hubo comunicación de ninguna anomalia, confirmado
“The Malaysia Airlines B777 plane disappeared from the radar, there was no communication of any anomaly, confirmed”
10:30 – 17 de jul. de 2014 Avión derribado, derribados, derribado no accidente
“Plane shot down, shot down, shot down, no accident”
10:31 – 17 de jul. de 2014 Kiev, tiene lo que buscaba, lo dije en los primeros tw, kiev es responsable @ActualidadRT
“Kiev have what they wanted, I said in the first tw [Tweets], Kiev is responsible @ ActualidadRT”
10:35 – 17 de jul. de 2014 Un accidente muy normal no es, no están amenazando en la misma torre del aeropuerto de kiev,
“An accident that is not quite normal, they are threatening us in the same tower of Kiev airport”
10:35 – 17 de jul. de 2014 Nos van a quitar, nuestros tlf y demás de un momento a otro
“they will take from our phones and others stuff at any moment”
10:38 – 17 de jul. de 2014 Antes de que me quiten el tlf o me rompan la cabeza, derribado por Kiev
“Before They remove my phone or they break my head, shot down by Kiev”
11:12 – 17 de jul. de 2014 Nosotros tenemos la confirmación. Avión derribado, la autoridad de kiev, ya tiene la información, derribado, estamos tranquilos ahora
“We have confirmation. Plane downed, Kiev authorities already have the information, downed, we are calm now”
11:13 – 17 de jul. de 2014 Que hace personal extranjero con autoridades de kiev en la torre? Recopilando toda la información
“What are doing foreigners with kiev authorities in the tower? Gathering all the information”
11:15 – 17 de jul. de 2014 Cuando sea posible sigo escribiendo
“When possible I´ll keep writing”
11:48 – 17 de jul. de 2014 El avión B 777 voló escoltado por 2 cazas de ukraine hasta minutos antes, de desaparecer de los radares,
The B777 plane flew escorted by Ukraine jet fighter until 2 minutes before disappearing from the radar,
11:54 – 17 de jul. de 2014 Sí las autoridades de kiev, quieren decir la verdad, esta recogido 2 cazas volaron muy cerca minutos antes , no lo derribo un caza
“If kiev authorities want to tell the truth, It´s gathered, 2 jet fighters flew very close minutes before, wasn’t downed by a fighter”
12:00 – 17 de jul. de 2014 Nada más desaparecer el avión B 777 de Malaysia Airlines la autoridad militar de kiev nos informo del derribo, como lo sabían?
“Malaysia Airlines B777 plane just disappeared and Kiev military authority informed us of the downing, How they knew?”
12:00 – 17 de jul. de 2014 A los 7:00 minutos se notificó el derribo, más tarde se tomó la torre nuestra con personal extranjero q siguen aquí
“7:00 minutes after [plane dissapeared], the downing was notified, later our tower was taken with foreigner staff, they still here ”
12:01 – 17 de jul. de 2014 En los radares esta todo recogido, para los incrédulos, derribado por kiev, aquí lo sabemos y control aéreo militar también
“all this is gathered in radars, to the unbelieving, shot down by kiev, here we know it and military air traffic control also”
13:15 – 17 de jul. de 2014 Aquí los mandos militares manejan y admiten que militares a otras órdenes, pudieron ser, pero no, los pro-rusos
“Here the military commanders manage and support it could be military following other orders , but no, the pro-Russian”
13:29 – 17 de jul. de 2014 El ministro del interior si conocía que, hacían los cazas en la zona, el ministro de defensa no, .
“Interior Minister knew what the fighters were doing in the area, the defense minister didn’t.”
13:31 – 17 de jul. de 2014 Militares confirman que fue ukraine, pero se sigue sin saber de donde vino la orden
“Military confirm It was Ukraine, but still does not know where the order came from”
13:36 – 17 de jul. de 2014 Hace dias lo dije aquí, militares de kiev querían alzarse contra el actual presidente, esto puede ser una forma, a las órdenes de timoshenko
“Days ago I said here, kiev military wanted to rise against the current president, this may be a way, ordered by timoshenko [following timishenko orders]”
13:38 – 17 de jul. de 2014 Los cazas volaron cerca del 777, hasta 3 minutos antes de desaparecer de los radares, solo 3 minutos
“The fighters flew close to 777, up to 3 minutes before disappearing from the radar, just 3 minutes”
13:43 – 17 de jul. de 2014 Se cierra el espacio aéreo
“Airspace closed”
13:45 – 17 de jul. de 2014 Se cierra el espacio aéreo, por miedo a más derribos
“Airspace is closed, more downings feared”
15:17 – 17 de jul. de 2014 Control militar entrega ahora mismo de forma oficial que el avión fue derribado por misil
“military control now officially [say] the plane was shot down by missile”
15:23 – 17 de jul. de 2014 El informe oficial firmado por las autoridades militares de control de kiev ya lo tiene el gobierno,,,, , derribado
“Government has the official report signed by the control military authorities in Kiev,,,, [plane] shot down”
15:26 – 17 de jul. de 2014 En el informe se indica de donde abría salido el misil, y se especifica que no proviene de las autodefensa en las zonas rebeldes
“The report indicates where the missile had come out [from], and specified is not from the selfdefence in rebel areas”
15:34 – 17 de jul. de 2014Los radares militares si recogieron los datos del misil lanzado al avión, los radares civiles no
“Military radar collected data from missile fired to the plane, civilian radars didn’t”
15:36 – 17 de jul. de 2014 Los altos mandos militares no ordenaron el lanzamiento del misil, ,,alguien se le fue la mano en nombre de ukraine
“military high command did not gave the order to fire the missile, someone screw it ine the name of ukraine”
15:38 – 17 de jul. de 2014 Para el que no lo sepa, digamos así, hay militares a las órdenes del ministro de defensa y militares a las órdenes del ministro del interior
“For those who do not know, Let’s say, there are military under the orders of the defense minister and military under the orders of Interior Minister”
15:38 – 17 de jul. de 2014 Los militares a las órdenes del ministro del interior conocían en cada momento lo que sucedió, .
“The military under the orders of Interior Minister knew what happened all the time .”
16:06 – 17 de jul. de 2014 Mandos militares aquí (ATC) torre de control, confirman que el misil es del ejercito de ukraine,
“Military commanders here (ATC) control tower, confirm that the missile is from the ukranian army,”
16:07 – 17 de jul. de 2014 Mandos militares que si lo sabían y otros mandos que no,
“military commanders that knew it and others didn´t ,”
16:08 – 17 de jul. de 2014 290 personas inocentes muertas, . Por una guerra inútil, donde el patriotismo se compra con dinero
“290 dead innocent people. What a useless war, where patriotism is bought with money”
16:09 – 17 de jul. de 2014 La forma de tomar la torre de control minutos después sabiendo todo los detalles, rápido nos hizo pensar que habían sido ellos
“Thw way the control tower was taken minutes after & knowing all the details, made ​​us think that they [made it]”
16:10 – 17 de jul. de 2014 La cara de los militares que llegaron más tarde diciendo pero que habéis echo, no dejo dudas
“The face of the soldiers who came later saying [what you just did], no chance for doubts”
16:12 – 17 de jul. de 2014 Es tal la decadencia que los militares acompañados de extranjeros que llegaron primero nos llegaron a pedir que dijéramos su versión
“Such is the decline that military who came first accompanied by foreigners came to us asking us to tell their version”
16:13 – 17 de jul. de 2014 Nuestra respuesta, fue, estos radares no recogen el lanzamiento de misiles, los militares si, ya no quedaban dudas
“Our response was, these radars do not collect the launching of missiles, the military ones does, there were no doubts”

The YouTube video was widely publicised and quoted in the mainstream media, the Twitter feed was not. Neither publication can be authenticated. But for Western politicians and Western mainstream media it was an open and shut case. It was left to the alternative media to challenge the prevailing narrative.

The website 21st Century Wire made a strong case that existing evidence points to the Kiev government rather than the separatists being the perpetrators of the MH17 downing. Key points are:

1. The video posted to YouTube shortly after the downing and purporting to be intercepted radio conversations between separatists is almost certainly faked.

2. Flight MH17 was diverted by Ukrainian Air Traffic Control to fly over Donbass, it was followed by a Ukrainian fighter aircraft and was ordered by ATC to a lower altitude within the range of anti-aircraft missiles.

3. The Ukrainians had anti-aircraft weapons in the area.

4. The recordings of the conversations between MH17 and ATC have not been released by the Ukrainians.

5. The US should have satellite images showing the movements of anti aircraft weaponry by the Kiev forces or by the Separatists but they have not shared this.

These points were made to White House spokesperson Marie Hart by independent journalist Matthew Lee at a press briefing:

Lee notes that the Russians have produced a great deal of intelligence supporting contentions, such as those noted above, that challenge the US narrative whereas the US has been dependent on postings to social media.

Russia presented their evidence regarding MH17 on 21st July:

It consisted of satellite imagery and Air Traffic Control tracking. This evidence revealed the presence of Ukrainian anti-aircraft missiles on the ground within range of MH17 and a Ukrainian combat aircraft flying near MH17. The US contention that they had photographic evidence that a missile system was moved from rebel territory to Russia after the downing of MH17 was challenged on the basis that a photograph was taken in Ukraine controlled territory. The Russians challenged the US to present their own satellite imagery given that the US has been closely monitoring the region. So far no such evidence has been produced by the US nor have they challenged the Russian evidence.

A group of retired US Intelligence analysts wrote a letter to Obama expressing concern at the lack of professionalism in the US response:

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 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.”
Source: Global Research

As of August 5 no forensic evidence has emerged to support the narrative that MH17 was shot down by the separatists. But current evidence points to the Ukrainian government as being responsible and is more consistent with the @spainbuca Twitter posts than the intercept recordings posted to YouTube.

This is a deleted BBC video which shows local witnesses claiming that MH17 was shot down by military aircraft:

MH17 video report deleted by the BBC – ENG subtitles from trodas on Vimeo.

This testimony has now been corroborated by an examination of the MH17 wreckage that shows damage suggestive of machine gun fire consistent with an air to air attack. It looks increasingly likely that the Malaysian plane was shot down by a Ukrainian fighter jet. The testimony of this OCSE monitor supports the statements made by eyewitnesses on the ground:

When will western governments and their media concede that their narrative has unravelled and rethink their judgement on Russia and the separatists? How will their approach to the Kiev regime change? Will Vladimir Putin still be ‘The Pariah’?