0 0 votes
Article Rating
Notify of

oldest most voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Sep 3, 2016 4:53 PM

Well, if it becomes clear that this was a pre-meditated shooting down of a civilian airliner in Ukrainian airspace, shot down by a Ukrainian airforce jet armed with Ukrainian armed forces missiles, then a few questions emerge:
Who in Ukraine gave the order for the mission to take place?
Who else sanctioned that order and, by doing so, collaborated in a mission of cold-blooded murder?
WAs the mission’s plan formulated solely in Ukraine or with the help of outside, interested states with significantly more experience in the planning and execution of false flag events (including the propaganda management both before and after the mission)?
If the answer to question 3 verifies the contributions of actors external to Ukraine, who were they? In particular, was the US military/intelligence complex involved? Was the Mossad involved? Was MI6 involved? Were an special forces from the EU involved?
If the ‘international investigation’ in Holland was the subject of wilful interference in its objectivity, rigour and dispassionate search for the truth necessary to bring justice ultimately to family victims, at what levels of the Dutch state was such interference being delivered from? From whom in the international community did they receive their orders? And what would the sanctions have been if they had refused to cooperate?
If the entire MI17 story from start to finish is proven to be the latest in a huge list of false flag murder events, is there any case for not demanding that its organisers, planners and instigators face the death sentence with the minimum levels of human dignity, be that through a properly constituted international court or through the vengeance of international outrage??
What ramifications should this affair have on the right of certain powerful states to continue to claim global leadership in such forums as they are allowed currently to wield it? Should in fact removal from the Security Council at the UN be one of the sanctions considered??
Just a few harmless questions which will hopefully guide investigations in a proper, rigorous manner to appropriate conclusions, punishments and sanctions…….

Sep 2, 2016 10:31 AM

just on the simple matter of allowing a civilian aircraft into this airspace Kiev is clearly responsible under the Chicago Convention .

Seamus Padraig
Seamus Padraig
Sep 2, 2016 10:25 PM
Reply to  bill

That was my very first thought when I heard about the MH17 incident: ‘Why did they let this plane fly through a war zone? Whose brilliant idea was that?’ Then it hit me: ‘Oh! It had to have been Kiev air traffic control.’
After that, I never doubted.

Paul Carline
Paul Carline
Sep 2, 2016 9:42 AM

It’s been obvious for a long time that this was no fair, unprejudiced investigation. Too much covered up, too much mere insinuation. And far too little attention focussed on why the plane was ordered off course and told to fly lower – over a known war zone. Who gave those orders? It certainly wasn’t the Russians! Suspicion falls on Kolomoisky – dual Ukrainian-Israeli citizen. The female air traffic controller who passed on the orders to the plane apparently disappeared immediately afterwards. There’s plenty of evidence to suggest an attempted false flag, whether it was a BUK or a Ukrainian jet that actually shot it down. There are lots of strange anomalies – like not enough bodies, bodies completely naked and in rigor mortis, and a strong smell of formaldehyde – which could indicate a very different narrative, possibly connected to the other identical 777 that ‘disappeared’.

Seamus Padraig
Seamus Padraig
Sep 2, 2016 10:31 PM
Reply to  Paul Carline

“The female air traffic controller who passed on the orders to the plane apparently disappeared immediately afterwards.”
So did ‘Carlos’ (also known as @SpainBucca), who was said to have been working at Kiev ATC during the incident.

Bryan Hemming
Bryan Hemming
Sep 1, 2016 9:16 PM

On June 4th this year the Sydney Mornng Herald reported that Joint Investigation Team (JIT) – tellingly referred as ‘prosecutors’ – would be presenting their conclusions in a few months “after the northern summer”. Interestingly, the paper reported:
“In a statement, prosecutors said they had made “several requests” for legal assistance from countries involved in the case, but were still waiting for information from Russia about the Buk missile that is believed to have brought down, killing 298 people.”
So we don’t have to wait for the actual report then, as all the JIT is waiting for is a confession from Putin.

Sep 2, 2016 1:08 AM
Reply to  Bryan Hemming

Yes, what can the Russians say if the JIT won’t accept “No” or “Nothing” for an answer?

Bryan Hemming
Bryan Hemming
Sep 2, 2016 10:00 AM
Reply to  Jen

If Russia itself didn’t launch a BUK (an accusation dismissed by almost everyone), didn’t have any foreknowledge of a BUK being launched or, as this highly-convincing report suggests, it wasn’t a BUK that brought down MH17, any answer to a request formulated in the way presented by the Sydney Morning Herald would be self-incriminating.

Sep 1, 2016 8:39 PM

Reblogged this on TheFlippinTruth.