A month or so ago a former commander of the rebels in East Ukraine called Aleksandr Khodakovsky was interviewed by Reuters, and during that interview it is claimed that he said that the rebels had a BUK. Pro-Kiev propagandists went into overdrive and used this as proof that the rebels shot MH17 down. However, the translation they used was not quite correct or they deliberately misinterpreted what Khodakovsky actually said, which was that he heard that the rebels had a BUK and heard this only at the time that MH17 came down. This is very different to stating that the rebels had a BUK. But he also said that Kiev knew about this.
As much as I think Brown Moses is wrong on Ghouta and MH17, he and his crew have gathered some video evidence that shows a BUK in rebel held territory which cannot be ignored and needs to be explained. I believe this BUK to be the BUK that Aleksandr Khodakovsky heard about. However, I am not convinced one bit by the video uploaded by the Ukraine Security Service which is claimed to have been filmed in rebel held territory, and by I assume a member or contact of the Ukraine Security Service, and just at a time when such a BUK drove past their window which has a view with very few landmarks or signs to easily verify its location, and at a very quiet time of the day. It is just too convenient. Kiev has several times claimed that Russia has invaded Ukraine with tanks and thousands of infantry but has not once provided any shred of evidence, no matter how ridiculous or flimsy. In addition, the authorities in Kiev came to power through a violent NATO sponsored coup, are bona fide Nazis with clear links to NATO, and are being advised by MI6 and CIA, who we all know played some role in 9/11. At stake is control of Ukraine, a massive bottleneck for Russian gas bound for Europe : block that bottleneck and Europe will be desperate for gas. And lo and behold, fracking is being forced down our throats despite our governments claiming to be green while fracking is extremely environmentally unfriendly. And if Ukraine can also be NATO-ised and allow the placement of nuclear missiles aimed at Moscow in, say, Donetsk, then shooting down MH17, killing all 300 on board would be worth it. In addition, Putin had been the driving force for an alternative to the parasitic IMF system. Hence headlines like "Putin's missile" in NATO media to demonise Putin.
The US military intelligence community has been suspiciously quiet on MH17, offering no evidence or support that MH17 was shot down by rebels or Russia. And the US State Dept, despite its vast resources, the CIA and the all seeing all knowing US military intelligence community, is relying on Brown Moses, an amateur weapons expert in Leicester.
So I think:
1. the rebels did have a BUK at the time MH17 was shot down, but they did not use it;
2. Kiev knew the rebels had this BUK;
3. Kiev was up to something on 17th July, Russian photos show Ukraine anti aircraft BUKs very close to where MH17 was shot down, even though the rebels do not have aircraft, while Kiev claims they did not have any BUKs in the area at the time MH17 was shot down, and these BUKs were removed very soon after;
4. in addition, Kiev has refused to release the tapes of comms between MH17 and ATCs, yet it could immediately and conveniently get their hands on and upload to Youtube film of a BUK allegedly in rebel held territory conveniently with covers off showing a missing missile.
5. Kiev is infested with bona fide Nazis who are being advised by MI6 and CIA and no doubt NATO intelligence, those Nazis being extremely violent as shown by their burning alive anti-Kiev protestors in Odessa;
6. at stake is Russia's relationship with the EU, a great source of income for Russia from selling gas to the EU through Ukraine, placing nuclear missiles aimed at Moscow in Donetsk, and demonising Putin for the BRICS Development bank and for supporting Assad in Syria.
But wouldn't a BUK show up on any radar system?
No comments:
Post a Comment