War

MH17

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.

The Next President of France?

Leader of a party labelled ‘far right wing’ Marine Le Pen comes across as extremely charismatic and much more intelligent than most politicians. In this enlightening interview with RT’s talented Sophie Shevardnadze, Le Pen expresses views more consistent with a left libertarian. She condemns the EU’s intervention and stance on Ukraine, blasts the EU’s austerity agenda, is concerned about the loss of sovereignty implicit in the TTIP and wants to pull France out of NATO.

While I understand that it is not always wise to judge anyone by what they say publicly I am attracted to rational straight-talking politicians who oppose imperialist interventions. While judging people by what they say is is inferior to observation of what they do it is better than judging them on what others say about them. Mme. Le Pen has a good chance of becoming the next President of France and that could be good for the rest of Europe and the world.