ANOTHER OLIPHANT PROPAGANDA PIECE AGAINST RUSSIA

Roland Oliphant claims to be the first to have identified the field where the alleged BUK missile was allegedly launched from 5Km south of Shnizhne. This field is also the favourite of RTL Nieuws and Belling Cat, but not Correctiv and Der Spiegel who believe that a field 3Km north of Shnizhne was the alleged launch point, or the SBU who believe that Cossacks based at Chernukino shot down MH17. Oliphant went to that field and found a piece of plastic. Belling Cat and RTL were ecstatic, believing that the plastic belonged to a BUK system. But guess what? IT DIDN'T! It belonged to a battery case used by a vehicle other than a BUK. But maybe that vehicle or its crew were the source of the fire in that field on 17th July?

Anyway, Oliphant has compiled this list of alleged incursions by Russia into NATO space. See Mapped: Just how many incursions into Nato airspace has Russian military made? for further explosive details.

Well, actually, explosive is completely the wrong adjective.

Out of the 15 'suspected' (his word) incursions of NATO airspace and waters, how many are undeniable? NONE!!

According to Oliphant, there were 3 incidents involving suspected Russian submarines off the west coast of Ireland. Note the key word : suspected. A sub is a sub. It could have been one of ours, or American. Russia is not the only country to have subs. And on the subject of submarines, Oliphant also includes the laughable incidents in Scandanivia. Last year Sweden claimed a Russian sub had somehow travelled up the narrow channels near Stockholm. The Swedish Navy went on a massive sub hunt. NATO media suggested it was time for Sweden to join NATO. But guess what? Just a few weeks ago the Swedish Navy said that the threatening vessel was...NOT A RUSSIAN SUBMARINE!! But the Swedish Navy got a massive injection of cash from the scare...

Note to Oliphant : Sweden is not a member of NATO anyway, so this laughable incident should not have been included. And Oliphant knows it. When this incident was occuring Oliphant wrote an article for The Daily Telegraph, entitled Why would a Russian submarine enter Swedish waters? suggesting reasons why Russia would risk sending a sub into the narrow channels near Stockholm. In that article Oliphant states that Sweden is not a member of NATO. But the possible reasons that Oliphant suggests are these:
1. servicing underwater spy equipment, perhaps installed during the Cold War, or possibly shadowing Swedish navy exercises;
2. Russia wanted the sub to get caught;
3. extract spies.

Did you laugh? I did. A guffaw and a giggle.

Oliphant also quoted the rumour that the Russian sub was nuclear and was threatening an underwater Chernobyl. The source of this claim? UKRAINE!!

And if you go to the latest article about alleged incursions that were definitely Russian, there were none. In fact, you could argue that Russia was being harassed in international airspace!!

There was one possibly dangerous incident off the coast of Cornwall on 28th January, but besides that:
1. no Russian planes have made incursions into NATO airspace, but Russian planes were harassed in international air space;
2. 3 incidents involving a submarine off the west coast of Ireland, but they could be due to subs other than Russian;
3. Oliphant includes the recent incidents involving Sweden and Finland, neither of whom are members of NATO, and in the Swedish incident the suspected sub turned out to be NOT Russian, and in the Finland case the alleged sub was not said to be Russian.

So it looks like Oliphant has an anti-Russia agenda.

Which makes me wonder how Oliphant identified that field so quickly and why he went to that field and raised suspicions that a BUK had been there through a piece of plastic, which turned out not to be from a BUK at all.

Hmm...