MH-17:
Russia Convicted By Propaganda, Not Evidence
By Paul
Craig Roberts
July 17,
2016 "Information
Clearing House"
- Today is the second anniversary of the
downing of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17, and we still
do not know the explanation.
Washington
and its European vassal politicians and media
instantly politicized the event: The Russians did
it. End of story. After 15 months of heavy
anti-Russian propaganda had imprinted the message on
peoples’ minds, the Dutch Safety Board issued its
inconclusive report.
By then, it
was irrelevant what the report said. Everyone
already knew that “the Russians did it.”
I remember
when pre-trial media accusations resulted in
dismissed cases. Anyone declared guilty prior to
presentation of evidence and conviction was
considered to have been convicted in advance and
unable to receive a fair trail. Such cases were
dismissed by judges.
Washington’s story never made any sense. Neither
Russia nor the separatists in the Donetsk region had
any reason to shoot down a Malaysian airliner. In
contrast Washington had enormous incentives as
Washington’s propaganda machine could place the
blame on Russia and use the incident to compel
European governments to accept Washington’s
sanctions placed on Russia.
It worked
for Washington. Washington successfully used the
incident to wreck Europe’s political and economic
relationships with Russia.
Four months
into the anti-Russian propaganda campaign, a website
called Bellingcat, claiming to be an open source
site for citizen journalists, but which could be a
MI-5, MI-6, or CIA front, issued a report that the
Buk missile was fired by a Russian unit, the 53rd
Buk Brigade, based in the Russian city of Kursk.
This allegation exposed the propaganda for what it
is.
Whereas it
is possible that separatists unfamiliar with the Buk
weapon system could accidentally shoot down a
civilian airliner, it is not possible for a Russian
military unit to make such a mistake.
Moreover,
it is unclear why separatists or the Ukrainian
government would have any reason to use Buk missiles
in their conflict. The separatists have no air
force. The Ukrainians attack the separatists at
ground level with ground attack aircraft and
helicopters, not with high altitude bombing. The Buk
missile is a high altitude missile. The only way the
separatists could have acquired Buk missiles is by
overrunning and capturing Ukrainian positions that
for unfathomed reasons had deployed Buk missiles.
It seems to
me that if a Buk missile was present in the conflict
area, it was moved there for a reason unrelated to
the conflict.
A European
air traffic controller said that MH-17 and the
airliner carrying Russian President Vladimir Putin
were initially on the same course. Possibly
Washington and its vassal in Kiev thought MH-17 was
Putin’s plane and destroyed the Malaysian flight by
mistake.
In order to
avoid the consequences of such a provocation, the
Russian government would deny that Putin’s plane was
on a similar course.
Even the
Western presstitute media reports that separatists
found the Malaysian airliner’s recorders, or black
boxes, and turned them over to the investigation and
that the recorders had not been tampered with. If
the separatists were responsible for the attack, why
would they hand over evidence against themselves?
Why does
Kiev refuse to release the communications between
Ukrainian air traffic control and MH-17? Why was a
civilian airliner routed over a combat zone? The
Dutch report does not answer these questions.
Washington prevented all answers that conflict with
its propaganda.
Only
Washington, whose presstitutes can be relied on to
control the explanations for Washington, and
Washington’s vassal in Kiev had anything to gain
from downing the airliner. Whether intentional or an
accident, the downing of MH-17 was used to blacken
Russia and to convince the EU to go along with
Washington’s economic sanctions and military moves
against Russia.
As the
Romans always asked: “Who benefits?” The answer to
that question tells you who did it.
Dr.
Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary
of the Treasury for Economic Policy and associate
editor of the Wall Street Journal. He was columnist
for Business Week, Scripps Howard News Service, and
Creators Syndicate. He has had many university
appointments. His internet columns have attracted a
worldwide following. Roberts' latest books are
The Failure
of Laissez Faire Capitalism and Economic Dissolution
of the West,
How America
Was Lost,
and
The
Neoconservative Threat to World Order.
|