Why aren't people sick to death of war?
Thursday, April 09, 2015
Wednesday, April 08, 2015
THOUGHT FOR T'DAY ON THE VAPOUR TRAIL OF A BUK MISSILE
Below are just some of the videos filmed by several people close to the crash site of MH17, some very, very close indeed. In these videos we:
1. do not see any vapour trail of a BUK missile;
2. do not hear anyone pointing out that they see a vapour trail of a BUK missile.
The vapour trail of a BUK missile can be seen for a number minutes after launch, depending on atmospheric conditions.
At the moment there are just two photographs, taken by the same person, showing a plume of smoke which some say is the vapour trail of a BUK missile. That photographer just happened to have close contacts with the Ukraine Security Service.
So let's recap the evidence for a missile strike on MH17.
The evidence for is two photographs of a plume of smoke which some say is the vapour trail of a BUK missile, but
(a) the photographer had close links to the Ukraine Security Service;
(b) the photographer was 8Km from the alleged launch site;
(c) nobody else took a photograph of this plume smoke even though there are several towns and villages within just a few miles of the alleged launch site, and there were even members of the Ukraine military just a mile or two from the alleged launch site who were fighting in the Battle of Saur-Mogila, none of whom photographed the plume;
(d) a Reuters report on residents in a village seeing the smoke was discredited when one of the interviewees said that Reuters made it all up.
The evidence against consists of:
1. at least 7 eyewitnesses who state on camera that they saw fighter jets close to MH17;
2. several videos (see above) filmed almost immediately after MH17 fell out of the sky which show no vapour trail or people pointing out or shouting that they see a vapour trail.
In addition there are the contradictory 'proofs' from Der Spiegel and Correctiv who state that, based on anonymous eyewitnesses (as opposed to those who state on camera for RT and BBC that they saw fighter jets), a BUK was launched from a field 3Km north of Shnizhne (and if so why did nobody photograph the vapour trail?), and the Ukraine Security Service who within hours of MH17 crashing released a tape of alleged phone intercepts which they said proved 100% beyond doubt that Cossacks based at Chernukino shot down MH17 with a BUK. However, the US State department cannot believe those tapes because according to data collected from their 'sensors' a missile was launched from the Shnizhne area, but instead of releasing the raw data they instead released a simple image of an arc and a straight line intercepting over East Ukraine, an image that a schoolboy could create in a few minutes.
And yes, that is the same US State Department that ran the Arab Spring, and told us that Iraq had WMDs and was involved in 9/11, and that Osama bin Laden had done 9/11 and was hiding out in Afghanistan dragging his kidney dialysis machine behind him as he was allowed to escape from Tora Bora, etc. Their list of lies goes on and on and on...
And we now know that in the Belling Cat team pushing the BUK missile theory:
1. Aric Toler is paid by George Soros;
2. Eliot Higgins is up to something with The Atlantic Council which is run by the Neocon-CIA warmongers.
So the thought for t'day is: why did only one person 8Km away photograph a plume of smoke, but nobody filmed that plume on videos that were obviously filmed just after MH17 came down, and why on those videos is nobody pointing out a plume of smoke, while there are at least 7 eyewitnesses who state on camera that they saw fighter jets?
1. do not see any vapour trail of a BUK missile;
2. do not hear anyone pointing out that they see a vapour trail of a BUK missile.
The vapour trail of a BUK missile can be seen for a number minutes after launch, depending on atmospheric conditions.
At the moment there are just two photographs, taken by the same person, showing a plume of smoke which some say is the vapour trail of a BUK missile. That photographer just happened to have close contacts with the Ukraine Security Service.
So let's recap the evidence for a missile strike on MH17.
The evidence for is two photographs of a plume of smoke which some say is the vapour trail of a BUK missile, but
(a) the photographer had close links to the Ukraine Security Service;
(b) the photographer was 8Km from the alleged launch site;
(c) nobody else took a photograph of this plume smoke even though there are several towns and villages within just a few miles of the alleged launch site, and there were even members of the Ukraine military just a mile or two from the alleged launch site who were fighting in the Battle of Saur-Mogila, none of whom photographed the plume;
(d) a Reuters report on residents in a village seeing the smoke was discredited when one of the interviewees said that Reuters made it all up.
The evidence against consists of:
1. at least 7 eyewitnesses who state on camera that they saw fighter jets close to MH17;
2. several videos (see above) filmed almost immediately after MH17 fell out of the sky which show no vapour trail or people pointing out or shouting that they see a vapour trail.
In addition there are the contradictory 'proofs' from Der Spiegel and Correctiv who state that, based on anonymous eyewitnesses (as opposed to those who state on camera for RT and BBC that they saw fighter jets), a BUK was launched from a field 3Km north of Shnizhne (and if so why did nobody photograph the vapour trail?), and the Ukraine Security Service who within hours of MH17 crashing released a tape of alleged phone intercepts which they said proved 100% beyond doubt that Cossacks based at Chernukino shot down MH17 with a BUK. However, the US State department cannot believe those tapes because according to data collected from their 'sensors' a missile was launched from the Shnizhne area, but instead of releasing the raw data they instead released a simple image of an arc and a straight line intercepting over East Ukraine, an image that a schoolboy could create in a few minutes.
And yes, that is the same US State Department that ran the Arab Spring, and told us that Iraq had WMDs and was involved in 9/11, and that Osama bin Laden had done 9/11 and was hiding out in Afghanistan dragging his kidney dialysis machine behind him as he was allowed to escape from Tora Bora, etc. Their list of lies goes on and on and on...
And we now know that in the Belling Cat team pushing the BUK missile theory:
1. Aric Toler is paid by George Soros;
2. Eliot Higgins is up to something with The Atlantic Council which is run by the Neocon-CIA warmongers.
So the thought for t'day is: why did only one person 8Km away photograph a plume of smoke, but nobody filmed that plume on videos that were obviously filmed just after MH17 came down, and why on those videos is nobody pointing out a plume of smoke, while there are at least 7 eyewitnesses who state on camera that they saw fighter jets?
Tuesday, April 07, 2015
THE CIA, THE ATLANTIC COUNCIL AND ELIOT HIGGINS : WHAT IS GOING ON HERE?
When I posted ELIOT HIGGINS AND THE CIA he mocked me, posting a link to that post in a tweet.
But over the weekend it was revealed that Higgins has been up to something with The Atlantic Council. What that something is I don't know. As far as I know he hasn't said.
But in FAUSTUS HIGGINS SELLS HIS SOUL TO THE ATLANTIC COUNCIL I pointed out just how close to the warmongers Higgins was now.
And regarding specifically the CIA, The Atlantic Council has the following former Directors of the CIA as management:
Michael Hayden (Board member)
Robert Gates (Honorary Director)
Leon Panetta (Honorary Director)
William Webster (Honorary Director)
And not only that, there is a former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff in Michael Mullen, a couple of US Secretaries of Defense, and war criminal Henry Kissinger in there too.
I think Higgins needs to tell us all, come clean, what he has been doing and plans to do with or for TheCIA Atlantic Council.
But over the weekend it was revealed that Higgins has been up to something with The Atlantic Council. What that something is I don't know. As far as I know he hasn't said.
But in FAUSTUS HIGGINS SELLS HIS SOUL TO THE ATLANTIC COUNCIL I pointed out just how close to the warmongers Higgins was now.
And regarding specifically the CIA, The Atlantic Council has the following former Directors of the CIA as management:
Michael Hayden (Board member)
Robert Gates (Honorary Director)
Leon Panetta (Honorary Director)
William Webster (Honorary Director)
And not only that, there is a former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff in Michael Mullen, a couple of US Secretaries of Defense, and war criminal Henry Kissinger in there too.
I think Higgins needs to tell us all, come clean, what he has been doing and plans to do with or for The
A GUARANTEED VOTE WINNING POLICY
Here I humbly suggest a policy guaranteed to win votes from all sections of society. All except one, that is.
That policy is to tax the City of London with an at least 1% financial trading tax.
This can be implemented easily and immediately and thus raise large revenues easily and immediately. Those revenues can then be put to work to rebuild Great Britain for the British people not the Venetian bankers who have usurped our sovereignty by creating that legal anomaly, The City of London.
But for whatever reason the mainstream parties are not proposing this effective and easily implementable policy.
Why?
Because they are either owned or scared.
Vote Labour, LibDem, Tory, Green, UKIP. It doesn't matter what colour you vote for you will get austerity. We are being given the opportunity to vote for one of 50 shades of austerity to bail out the banks.
Tax The City of London and there will be no austerity. And it will also send a message to the City of London: we haven't forgotten and we're comin' to get you.
And if the bankers leave The City of London then I say good riddance. We don't need them. They, the parasites, need us much, much more than we need them.
A 1% financial trading tax on the City of London, the bastards who have just fucked us all.
It's easy.
Honest.
That policy is to tax the City of London with an at least 1% financial trading tax.
This can be implemented easily and immediately and thus raise large revenues easily and immediately. Those revenues can then be put to work to rebuild Great Britain for the British people not the Venetian bankers who have usurped our sovereignty by creating that legal anomaly, The City of London.
But for whatever reason the mainstream parties are not proposing this effective and easily implementable policy.
Why?
Because they are either owned or scared.
Vote Labour, LibDem, Tory, Green, UKIP. It doesn't matter what colour you vote for you will get austerity. We are being given the opportunity to vote for one of 50 shades of austerity to bail out the banks.
Tax The City of London and there will be no austerity. And it will also send a message to the City of London: we haven't forgotten and we're comin' to get you.
And if the bankers leave The City of London then I say good riddance. We don't need them. They, the parasites, need us much, much more than we need them.
A 1% financial trading tax on the City of London, the bastards who have just fucked us all.
It's easy.
Honest.
Monday, April 06, 2015
WE ARE RULED BY THE BOG
The BOG is the Banker Occupied Government (BOG).
Banking vs Democracy: How power has shifted from Parliament to the banking sector > http://t.co/01TASgCJuI > pic.twitter.com/Sn2vUfOGYL
— Positive Money (@PositiveMoneyUK) April 6, 2015A CRITICAL AND DANGEROUS SITUATION
A "critical and dangerous situation".
That is how the Ukraine Foreign Minister in July 2014 described to a Dutch diplomat the situation in East Ukraine.
As I have pointed out several times, on 14th July a Ukraine Air Force Antonov An 26 was shot out of the sky as it approached Luhansk Airport on 14th July. The separatists claimed they shot it down with a BUK. At that time the Ukraine Armed Forces on the ground were trying to create a corridor south of Luhansk to Luhansk Airport to relieve UAF trapped there. Ukraine told the Dutch government just how dangerous the situation was.
So, let us assume for a moment that the separatists did shoot MH17 with a BUK. My question is: if on 17th July 2014
1. the Kiev Nazis knew the separatists had a BUK because one had been used to shoot down an Antonov An 26 on 14th July;
2. the Dutch had been told the situation over East Ukraine was "critical and dangerous";
3. the Kiev Nazi Air Force was flying fighter jets close to MH17, as stated on camera by at least 7 eyewitnesses;
then who would be guilty?
Is this situation very similar to knowing that a mad axe murderer is rampaging through the streets with a very sharp axe and not telling anyone? And then using any resulting murder to your benefit?
Why did Ukraine not shut down their airspace completely? The airspace over Crimea had been shut down.
Why did Ukraine fly fighter jets close to MH17?
Atlantic Council Boy is 'spinning' this revelation about the Dutch government being told that the equivalent of a mad axe murderer was rampaging through the streets of Amsterdam with a very sharp axe:
Is this why there are allegations that the Dutch government wasn't interested in getting to the bottom of the mystery? (see DUTCH INTELLIGENCE IS OBSTRUCTING MH17 INVESTIGATION).
Why have the Dutch kept this secret for so long?
I have already raised my suspicion that of all the flights that flew over East Ukraine, the one civilian plane that was shot down just happened to lead to The Netherlands being in charge of the investigation, when The Netherlands was one of the initial five founders of NATO, NATO wants Ukraine as a member and the putschists in Ukraine want Ukraine to join NATO.
This evidence, which is being spun by Atlantic Council Boy, supports the theory that someone in NATO wanted MH17 shot down to lead to an investigation that NATO would control and thus lead to the conclusion that Russia shot down MH17.
And to add to the mystery, here is an interesting theory as to why the Kiev Nazis were flying fighter jets close to MH17, as stated on camera by at least 7 eyewitnesses. In June 2014, a month before MH17 came down, NATO ran electronic warfare exercises involving spoofing radar systems into thinking a civilian passenger plane, such as MH17, was actually a military plane. Apparently the exercises were successful, and caused a great deal of trouble to civilian air traffic control at the time.
But be warned. This theory is from Adam Curry. Curry's uncle Donald Gregg was big in the CIA and in implementing US foreign policy.
And on 17th July, NATO was running the electronic warfare exercise BREEZE 2014 in the Black Sea, not that far from Shnizhne. And recall that during this time, the Ukraine military radar systems showed increased activity.
But let's not forget: no guilt has been decided or proved yet. There are a wide range of theories on MH17, supported by evidence. To just blindly focus on one theory which leads to sanctions on and friction with a nation with a massive nuclear arsenal is dangerous.
That is how the Ukraine Foreign Minister in July 2014 described to a Dutch diplomat the situation in East Ukraine.
As I have pointed out several times, on 14th July a Ukraine Air Force Antonov An 26 was shot out of the sky as it approached Luhansk Airport on 14th July. The separatists claimed they shot it down with a BUK. At that time the Ukraine Armed Forces on the ground were trying to create a corridor south of Luhansk to Luhansk Airport to relieve UAF trapped there. Ukraine told the Dutch government just how dangerous the situation was.
The Dutch government knew three days before the crash of the MH17 that a cargo plane of the Ukrainian army at high altitude in the sky was shot with Russian military equipment. This is evident from the report of a Dutch diplomat who was on July 14, 2014 at a briefing of the Ukrainian government on the security situation in the country.
The report of the diplomat is in possession of the radio program Argos that the afternoon has been made public. The government refused until now to reveal the report, despite repeated requests from the House to do so.
...To the report of the briefing in Kiev was rather a lot to do because many parties in the House wondered if the [Dutch] government following the briefing did not have to take more action. The diplomat was told by Ukrainian Foreign Minister that there was a "critical and dangerous situation" in eastern Ukraine arise. The tearing down of the cargo plane with a missile called the minister "the latest example" thereof.
Following the briefing, the Dutch government increased the minimum flight altitude above Ukraine to 9.7 kilometers. In the Chamber sounded after the disaster MH17, where 298 people were killed, whether the government should not have forbid airlines to fly over eastern Ukraine.
[source : Google translation of: ‘Regering wist dat Antonov werd neergeschoten met Russische raket’, NRC, http://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2015/04/04/regering-wist-dat-antonov-werd-neergeschoten-met-russisch-materieel/, 4th April 2015]
So, let us assume for a moment that the separatists did shoot MH17 with a BUK. My question is: if on 17th July 2014
1. the Kiev Nazis knew the separatists had a BUK because one had been used to shoot down an Antonov An 26 on 14th July;
2. the Dutch had been told the situation over East Ukraine was "critical and dangerous";
3. the Kiev Nazi Air Force was flying fighter jets close to MH17, as stated on camera by at least 7 eyewitnesses;
then who would be guilty?
Is this situation very similar to knowing that a mad axe murderer is rampaging through the streets with a very sharp axe and not telling anyone? And then using any resulting murder to your benefit?
Why did Ukraine not shut down their airspace completely? The airspace over Crimea had been shut down.
Why did Ukraine fly fighter jets close to MH17?
Atlantic Council Boy is 'spinning' this revelation about the Dutch government being told that the equivalent of a mad axe murderer was rampaging through the streets of Amsterdam with a very sharp axe:
Doublethink - The Dutch gov was responsible for MH17 because they knew about Russian surface to air missiles, and Ukraine shot down MH17
— Eliot Higgins (@EliotHiggins) April 5, 2015Is this why there are allegations that the Dutch government wasn't interested in getting to the bottom of the mystery? (see DUTCH INTELLIGENCE IS OBSTRUCTING MH17 INVESTIGATION).
Why have the Dutch kept this secret for so long?
I have already raised my suspicion that of all the flights that flew over East Ukraine, the one civilian plane that was shot down just happened to lead to The Netherlands being in charge of the investigation, when The Netherlands was one of the initial five founders of NATO, NATO wants Ukraine as a member and the putschists in Ukraine want Ukraine to join NATO.
This evidence, which is being spun by Atlantic Council Boy, supports the theory that someone in NATO wanted MH17 shot down to lead to an investigation that NATO would control and thus lead to the conclusion that Russia shot down MH17.
And to add to the mystery, here is an interesting theory as to why the Kiev Nazis were flying fighter jets close to MH17, as stated on camera by at least 7 eyewitnesses. In June 2014, a month before MH17 came down, NATO ran electronic warfare exercises involving spoofing radar systems into thinking a civilian passenger plane, such as MH17, was actually a military plane. Apparently the exercises were successful, and caused a great deal of trouble to civilian air traffic control at the time.
But be warned. This theory is from Adam Curry. Curry's uncle Donald Gregg was big in the CIA and in implementing US foreign policy.
And on 17th July, NATO was running the electronic warfare exercise BREEZE 2014 in the Black Sea, not that far from Shnizhne. And recall that during this time, the Ukraine military radar systems showed increased activity.
But let's not forget: no guilt has been decided or proved yet. There are a wide range of theories on MH17, supported by evidence. To just blindly focus on one theory which leads to sanctions on and friction with a nation with a massive nuclear arsenal is dangerous.
Sunday, April 05, 2015
A JUST AND LASTING PEACE AMONG OURSELVES AND WITH ALL NATIONS
I watched Spielberg's Lincoln last night. Lincoln was let down by several leaders of the Union forces. It wasn't until Sherman and Grant got going that the Union began to kick Confederate ass. Anyway, the Union eventually won. And Lincoln was very cunning in his attempt to eventually outlaw slavery in the USA.
This is what Lincoln said in his inauguration speech of 4th March 1865:
Lincoln was assassinated by a nest of British operatives just a few weeks later.
This is what Lincoln said in his inauguration speech of 4th March 1865:
Fellow-Countrymen:
At this second appearing to take the oath of the Presidential office there is less occasion for an extended address than there was at the first. Then a statement somewhat in detail of a course to be pursued seemed fitting and proper. Now, at the expiration of four years, during which public declarations have been constantly called forth on every point and phase of the great contest which still absorbs the attention and engrosses the energies of the nation, little that is new could be presented. The progress of our arms, upon which all else chiefly depends, is as well known to the public as to myself, and it is, I trust, reasonably satisfactory and encouraging to all. With high hope for the future, no prediction in regard to it is ventured.
On the occasion corresponding to this four years ago all thoughts were anxiously directed to an impending civil war. All dreaded it, all sought to avert it. While the inaugural address was being delivered from this place, devoted altogether to saving the Union without war, insurgent agents were in the city seeking to destroy it without war--seeking to dissolve the Union and divide effects by negotiation. Both parties deprecated war, but one of them would make war rather than let the nation survive, and the other would accept war rather than let it perish, and the war came.
One-eighth of the whole population were colored slaves, not distributed generally over the Union, but localized in the southern part of it. These slaves constituted a peculiar and powerful interest. All knew that this interest was somehow the cause of the war. To strengthen, perpetuate, and extend this interest was the object for which the insurgents would rend the Union even by war, while the Government claimed no right to do more than to restrict the territorial enlargement of it. Neither party expected for the war the magnitude or the duration which it has already attained. Neither anticipated that the cause of the conflict might cease with or even before the conflict itself should cease. Each looked for an easier triumph, and a result less fundamental and astounding. Both read the same Bible and pray to the same God, and each invokes His aid against the other. It may seem strange that any men should dare to ask a just God's assistance in wringing their bread from the sweat of other men's faces, but let us judge not, that we be not judged. The prayers of both could not be answered. That of neither has been answered fully. The Almighty has His own purposes. "Woe unto the world because of offenses; for it must needs be that offenses come, but woe to that man by whom the offense cometh." If we shall suppose that American slavery is one of those offenses which, in the providence of God, must needs come, but which, having continued through His appointed time, He now wills to remove, and that He gives to both North and South this terrible war as the woe due to those by whom the offense came, shall we discern therein any departure from those divine attributes which the believers in a living God always ascribe to Him? Fondly do we hope, fervently do we pray, that this mighty scourge of war may speedily pass away. Yet, if God wills that it continue until all the wealth piled by the bondsman's two hundred and fifty years of unrequited toil shall be sunk, and until every drop of blood drawn with the lash shall be paid by another drawn with the sword, as was said three thousand years ago, so still it must be said "the judgments of the Lord are true and righteous altogether."
With malice toward none, with charity for all, with firmness in the right as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in, to bind up the nation's wounds, to care for him who shall have borne the battle and for his widow and his orphan, to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace among ourselves and with all nations.
Lincoln was assassinated by a nest of British operatives just a few weeks later.
FAUSTUS HIGGINS SELLS HIS SOUL TO THE ATLANTIC COUNCIL
That's a wrap for productive days in Kyiv w/ a kicking @AtlanticCouncil task force team—@EliotHiggins & @Alinasphere pic.twitter.com/R5P5Ifz0AN
— Maks Czuperski (@MaksCzuperski) April 4, 2015It looks like Eliot Higgins may have just sold his soul to The Atlantic Council.
The say what Council?
The Atlantic Council, arguably the most dangerous cabal of warmongers you could ever meet.
The man in the above photo to Higgins' right is Maksymilian Czuperski, Special Assistant to the President and CEO of The Atlantic Council, Frederick Kempe.
Now, Kempe doesn't seem to be that dangerous. A quick search reveals that he is a member of the CFR, but nothing more than that.
No.
It is who 'advises' and 'directs' The Atlantic Council that Faustus Higgins should be very, very concerned about.
Standout members of the Advisory Board are:
H.E. Carl Bildt, Former Prime Minister and Minister for Foreign Affairs of Sweden [Bilderberg]
Dr. Zbigniew Brzezinski, Former National Security Advisor to US President Jimmy Carter [Bilderberg, founder of al Qaeda and professional Russia-hater]
Dr. Thomas Enders, President and CEO, Airbus Group [Bilderberg]
Ms. Marillyn A. Hewson, Chairman and CEO, Lockheed Martin Corporation [Military-Industrial Complex]
Mr. Rupert Murdoch, Executive Chairman, 21st Century Fox [Bilderberg]
Mr. Paul Polman, CEO, Unilever [Bilderberg]
The Rt. Hon. Lord Robertson of Port Ellen, Former Secretary General of NATO [Bilderberg]
Mr. Stephen A. Schwarzman, Chairman, CEO, and Co-Founder, The Blackstone Group [Skull & Bones]
Mr. James C. Smith, President and CEO, Thomson Reuters [Reuters were just caught out lying about MH17]
Sir Martin Sorrell, Group Chief Executive, WPP Group PLC [Knight of the kiddie-fiddling Realm, Trilateral Commission]
Dr. Lawrence Summers, Former Director, National Economic Council [Bilderberg, the man who pushed the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act that led to the recent global financial disaster]
Mr. Jacob Wallenberg, Chairman, Investor AB [Bilderberg]
Mr. John S. Watson, Chairman and CEO, Chevron Corporation [Rockefeller]
Mr. Robert B. Zoellick, Chairman, International Advisors, Goldman Sachs [Founding member of Project for New American Century]
Standout members of the board are:
Richard L. Armitage
Nicholas Burns
Wesley K. Clark
Paula J. Dobriansky [PNAC, NED]
Michèle Flournoy
Michael V. Hayden
Zalmay M. Khalilzad
Henry A. Kissinger
Jane Holl Lute
Brent Scowcroft
James Stavridis
Dov S. Zakheim
And the Honorary Directors are:
David C. Acheson
Madeleine K. Albright
James A. Baker, III
Frank C. Carlucci, III
Robert M. Gates
Michael G. Mullen
Leon E. Panetta
William J. Perry
Colin L. Powell
Condoleezza Rice
George P. Shultz
William H. Webster
WTF is Faustus Higgins doing with the Special Assistant to the guy who runs a powerful Neocon warmongering outfit advised and directed by this megalomaniac bloodthirsty lot?!
Friday, April 03, 2015
TSIPRAS TO VISIT PUTIN ON WEDNESDAY
Russia has already offered financial help to Greece.
On April 8, Vladimir Putin will meet with Greek Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras in #Moscow
— President of Russia (@KremlinRussia_E) April 2, 2015WHERE IS THE DEBATE ON THE BANKERS?
If you live in the Essex area then support this fella'. He is the only man with a sensible and easily implementable plan to get us out of the shit that the bankers caused.
Why is there a debate on #immigration but no debate on #CityOfLondon finance oligarchs responsible for financial crisis? #leadersdebate
— Stuart J. Hooper (@StuartJHooper) April 2, 2015Train more doctors, build more hospitals! Fund with 1% FTT, nationalised Bank of England - I am only candidate proposing this #leadersdebate
— Stuart J. Hooper (@StuartJHooper) April 2, 2015Thursday, April 02, 2015
EYEWITNESSES TO FIGHTER JETS CLOSE TO MH17
Here are three videos with a total of 7 different people stating on camera that they saw fighter jets close to MH17 when it was shot down.
Video 1:
The first is from the BBC. The BBC pulled the English version so we have to listen to the Spanish version.
At about 0:30 into the video three women state that a fighter jet was close to MH17 when it came down.
Here is a transcript of the witnesses:
Through July and August 2014 there was a battle raging just down the road from the proposed launch site 5 Km south of Shnizhne. That battle was The Battle for Saur-Mogila. I'm surprised that, considering they were just a few miles from the alleged launch site, not one member of the Ukraine military photographed the alleged plume of smoke from Saur-Mogila. Nor did any of the other residents from the surrounding area.
Video 2:
This second video is the Russia Today documentary MH17 : The Untold Story
At about 02:00 a woman describes seeing two planes, one flying off shortly after MH17 came down.
At about 08:10 a man describes seeing "a small military aircraft in the sky" at the time MH17 came down.
Video 3:
The third video is another Russia Today documentary Reflections on MH17.
At about 10:08 a man and a woman describe seeing a fighter jet when MH17 came down.
Now, there is only one photograph of the alleged trail. Only one. Everyone in the area from within several miles of the crash site heard the booms and saw the plane falling from the sky, but they did not see any vapour trail leading from the exploding plane to the launch site. However, as shown above, there are people prepared to go on camera for the whole world to watch and say to the whole world that they saw fighter jets close to MH17 when it came down.
Now, why isn't the MH17 JIT putting out requests for witnesses who saw fighter jets close to MH17?!
Video 1:
The first is from the BBC. The BBC pulled the English version so we have to listen to the Spanish version.
At about 0:30 into the video three women state that a fighter jet was close to MH17 when it came down.
Here is a transcript of the witnesses:
Eyewitness 1: There were two explosions in the air. And this is how it broke apart. And the fragments blew apart like this, to the sides. And when.
Eyewitness 2: And there was another aircraft, a military one, beside it. Everybody saw it.
Eyewitness 1: Yes, yes. It was flying under it, because it could be seen. It was proceeding underneath, below the civilian one.
Eyewitness 3: There were sounds of an explosion. But they were in the sky. They came from the sky. Then this plane made a sharp turn-around like this. It changed its trajectory and headed in that direction.
Through July and August 2014 there was a battle raging just down the road from the proposed launch site 5 Km south of Shnizhne. That battle was The Battle for Saur-Mogila. I'm surprised that, considering they were just a few miles from the alleged launch site, not one member of the Ukraine military photographed the alleged plume of smoke from Saur-Mogila. Nor did any of the other residents from the surrounding area.
Video 2:
This second video is the Russia Today documentary MH17 : The Untold Story
At about 02:00 a woman describes seeing two planes, one flying off shortly after MH17 came down.
At about 08:10 a man describes seeing "a small military aircraft in the sky" at the time MH17 came down.
Video 3:
The third video is another Russia Today documentary Reflections on MH17.
At about 10:08 a man and a woman describe seeing a fighter jet when MH17 came down.
Now, there is only one photograph of the alleged trail. Only one. Everyone in the area from within several miles of the crash site heard the booms and saw the plane falling from the sky, but they did not see any vapour trail leading from the exploding plane to the launch site. However, as shown above, there are people prepared to go on camera for the whole world to watch and say to the whole world that they saw fighter jets close to MH17 when it came down.
Now, why isn't the MH17 JIT putting out requests for witnesses who saw fighter jets close to MH17?!
SAUDI ARABIA'S ACTIONS IN YEMEN
So for years Al Qaeda has been rampant in Yemen, so rampant that the USA has been droning the place for years, killing many civilians in that time, provoking many to join al Qaeda and other terrorist organisations. Saudi Arabia played very little part in trying to kill al Qaeda, even though the area that al Qaeda controls in Yemen shares a large border with Saudi Arabia.
But when the Houthis, who are apparently the only Yemen-based force capable of taking on al Qaeda in Yemen, take power, the Saudis rush to war against the Houthis, killing over 60 children in the process.
The Houthis have also allied with President Bashar al-Assad in Syria against the Saudi-sponsored international cutthroat Jihadi butchers who Saudi Arabia, the USA and Israel agreed in 2007 to unleash onto Syria, Lebanon and Iran, and who Roland Dumas was asked to smuggle into Syria by the British in 2009.
Here is Prince Charles getting down with the Saudis last year. They do love their swords, don't they? They even have a sword on their flag! What on earth do they do with all those swords?
But when the Houthis, who are apparently the only Yemen-based force capable of taking on al Qaeda in Yemen, take power, the Saudis rush to war against the Houthis, killing over 60 children in the process.
The Houthis have also allied with President Bashar al-Assad in Syria against the Saudi-sponsored international cutthroat Jihadi butchers who Saudi Arabia, the USA and Israel agreed in 2007 to unleash onto Syria, Lebanon and Iran, and who Roland Dumas was asked to smuggle into Syria by the British in 2009.
Here is Prince Charles getting down with the Saudis last year. They do love their swords, don't they? They even have a sword on their flag! What on earth do they do with all those swords?
Wednesday, April 01, 2015
HMM. SOUNDS FAMILIAR : KIEV UNCOOPERATIVE AND OBSTRUCTIVE IN MAIDAN SHOOTINGS INVESTIGATION
“uncooperative and obstructive.”?
Weren't they the same words used to describe how the Dutch intelligence service is behaving towards the MH17 JIT?
And with those words came the allegation that the Dutch government is not too keen on finding out what exactly happened to MH17, now that the initial claims are firmly entrenched in the minds of the general public.
Anyway, the Council of Europe has stated that they think the investigation carried out into the Maidan shootings, which provoked the violence that led to Yanukovich fleeing for his life, by the Ukraine Ministry of the Interior was incoherent and inefficient, and that the Ukraine Ministry of the Interior was "uncooperative and obstructive" with their investigation.
Now why would that be?
Because just a few weeks ago the BBC surprisingly ran an interview with someone who claimed that he was one of the snipers on the Conservatory shooting at and killing both protestors and police, and that he was working for the Kiev Nazis. This is backed up by photographic evidence.
Weren't they the same words used to describe how the Dutch intelligence service is behaving towards the MH17 JIT?
And with those words came the allegation that the Dutch government is not too keen on finding out what exactly happened to MH17, now that the initial claims are firmly entrenched in the minds of the general public.
Anyway, the Council of Europe has stated that they think the investigation carried out into the Maidan shootings, which provoked the violence that led to Yanukovich fleeing for his life, by the Ukraine Ministry of the Interior was incoherent and inefficient, and that the Ukraine Ministry of the Interior was "uncooperative and obstructive" with their investigation.
Now why would that be?
Because just a few weeks ago the BBC surprisingly ran an interview with someone who claimed that he was one of the snipers on the Conservatory shooting at and killing both protestors and police, and that he was working for the Kiev Nazis. This is backed up by photographic evidence.
HOW PATHETIC ARE THE KIEV NAZIS?
Two days ago the MH17 JIT released a call for eyewitnesses to a BUK travelling through separatist-controlled territory. Also in that call were alleged phone calls intercepted by the Ukraine security service.
But how were the Ukraine security services able to intercept those phone calls?
BECAUSE THE SEPARATISTS APPARENTLY USE THE PUBLIC TELEPHONE SYSTEM OF UKRAINE!!
So let's think this through.
Imagine you are a separatist, fighting the Kiev Nazis. Would you use the Ukraine public telephone system, to say where you are, using real names, talking about delivery of BUKs from Russia and what you are going to do with them?
And let's assume that you use the public telephone system of Ukraine to communicate. Would you use the word "BUK"? Particularly after MH17 was shot down? Surely they would think of a much more secure system and use code words and keep communications to a minimum. But apparently, if the Ukraine security service is to believed, the separatists spoke quite freely about their plans, using words like "BUK" and "Russia" quite freely.
But if:
1. the separatists use the Ukraine public telephone system (and thus their communications are easily intercepted);
2. and their phone calls and thus plans are easily intercepted by the Ukraine security service,
then why have the Kiev Nazis not been able to defeat the separatists?
If the Kiev Nazis are intercepting the phone calls of the separatists and thus have a pretty good idea of the locations of the separatists and their future plans then how come the Kiev Nazis have been unable to defeat the separatists?
And what's more, the Ukraine security service released tapes of alleged intercepted phone calls shortly after MH17 came down which they said proved 100% beyond doubt that Cossacks at Chernukino shot down MH17. Yet when Der Spiegel and Correctiv released parallel reports in January this year which suggested that, based on 'eyewitness' statements, MH17 was shot down from a field 3 Km north of Shnizhne, the Ukraine Ministry of Foreign Affairs fully backed those reports, thus implying that they, the Ukraine Ministry of Foreign Affairs, do not trust the Ukraine security service!
Just how pathetic are the Kiev Nazis?
They can't beat an opponent whose every move they know in advance because they are intercepting their phone calls and their opponents are apparently quite willing to talk openly and freely about their plans on that public phone network, their own government doesn't trust them, and when they release alleged intercepts suggesting that Cossacks based at Chernukino shot down MH17, nobody believes them, not even the USA, who released an image (not the alleged raw data) of an arc originating at Shnizhne and a straight line intercepting over Hrabove.
And regarding this:
The CIA may or may not pay Toler. I don't know.
But he is paid by George Soros through RuNet Echo, which is funded by The Open Society Institute.
And where did Soros get his fortune from? Soros was allowed to run the Pound Sterling down in 1992. This was agreed beforehand with the British Monarchy. Soros has since survived (suggesting it was all a scam) and has since become big in Bilderberg. So it was all a scam.
But how were the Ukraine security services able to intercept those phone calls?
BECAUSE THE SEPARATISTS APPARENTLY USE THE PUBLIC TELEPHONE SYSTEM OF UKRAINE!!
The rebels in eastern Ukraine use the Ukrainian mobile phone network, which can be easily intercepted. In recent months, the SBOE has put on YouTube a large number of these calls.
[source : Google translation of: Russische ex-legerofficier herkend op justitietape MH17, NRC, http://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2015/04/01/russische-legerofficier-herkend-op-justitietape-mh17/, 1st April 2015]
So let's think this through.
Imagine you are a separatist, fighting the Kiev Nazis. Would you use the Ukraine public telephone system, to say where you are, using real names, talking about delivery of BUKs from Russia and what you are going to do with them?
And let's assume that you use the public telephone system of Ukraine to communicate. Would you use the word "BUK"? Particularly after MH17 was shot down? Surely they would think of a much more secure system and use code words and keep communications to a minimum. But apparently, if the Ukraine security service is to believed, the separatists spoke quite freely about their plans, using words like "BUK" and "Russia" quite freely.
But if:
1. the separatists use the Ukraine public telephone system (and thus their communications are easily intercepted);
2. and their phone calls and thus plans are easily intercepted by the Ukraine security service,
then why have the Kiev Nazis not been able to defeat the separatists?
If the Kiev Nazis are intercepting the phone calls of the separatists and thus have a pretty good idea of the locations of the separatists and their future plans then how come the Kiev Nazis have been unable to defeat the separatists?
And what's more, the Ukraine security service released tapes of alleged intercepted phone calls shortly after MH17 came down which they said proved 100% beyond doubt that Cossacks at Chernukino shot down MH17. Yet when Der Spiegel and Correctiv released parallel reports in January this year which suggested that, based on 'eyewitness' statements, MH17 was shot down from a field 3 Km north of Shnizhne, the Ukraine Ministry of Foreign Affairs fully backed those reports, thus implying that they, the Ukraine Ministry of Foreign Affairs, do not trust the Ukraine security service!
Just how pathetic are the Kiev Nazis?
They can't beat an opponent whose every move they know in advance because they are intercepting their phone calls and their opponents are apparently quite willing to talk openly and freely about their plans on that public phone network, their own government doesn't trust them, and when they release alleged intercepts suggesting that Cossacks based at Chernukino shot down MH17, nobody believes them, not even the USA, who released an image (not the alleged raw data) of an arc originating at Shnizhne and a straight line intercepting over Hrabove.
And regarding this:
But the CIA already pays me for doing this?
@maxseddon: Great blogging opportunity at Brookings for Russian speakers http://t.co/lYPCaJVvVx
— Aric Toler (@AricToler) April 1, 2015The CIA may or may not pay Toler. I don't know.
But he is paid by George Soros through RuNet Echo, which is funded by The Open Society Institute.
And where did Soros get his fortune from? Soros was allowed to run the Pound Sterling down in 1992. This was agreed beforehand with the British Monarchy. Soros has since survived (suggesting it was all a scam) and has since become big in Bilderberg. So it was all a scam.
MUMBLE MUMBLE MUMBLE
New evidence of intercepted phone calls has been released by the trustworthy Ukraine Security Service. The translated transcript is as follows:
This conversation resembles those recently released by the JIT so much that it is believed that the same people wrote the script for all of them.
Mumble mumble mumble.
BUK.
Mumble mumble mumble.
Russia.
Mumble mumble mumble.
MH17.
Mumble mumble mumble.
Guilty.
Mumble mumble mumble.
This conversation resembles those recently released by the JIT so much that it is believed that the same people wrote the script for all of them.
Tuesday, March 31, 2015
WHY DOESN'T THE MH17 INVESTIGATION TEAM VISIT CHERVONYI ZHOVTEN?
It's a small village. There's a ceasefire. They can be there tomorrow.
Why don't they get down there and knock on a few doors, ask a few residents themselves?
Do they really want to know?
There were four residents of Chervonyi Zhovten that Reuters allegedly spoke to:
Valentina Kovalenko;
Her daughter Anastasia Kovalenko;
Olga Krasilnikova;
Pyotr Fedotov.
We now understand that there is some doubt about Fedotov's interview, and Reuters don't seem to be in a hurry to show their interview of him.
So that leaves the other three, who we can assume know about what was said in the article, and may well have been talking to each other.
Did RT speak to them?
Why don't they get down there and knock on a few doors, ask a few residents themselves?
Do they really want to know?
There were four residents of Chervonyi Zhovten that Reuters allegedly spoke to:
Valentina Kovalenko;
Her daughter Anastasia Kovalenko;
Olga Krasilnikova;
Pyotr Fedotov.
We now understand that there is some doubt about Fedotov's interview, and Reuters don't seem to be in a hurry to show their interview of him.
So that leaves the other three, who we can assume know about what was said in the article, and may well have been talking to each other.
Did RT speak to them?
Monday, March 30, 2015
MH17 : REUTERS CITES ITS OWN DISPUTED REPORT ON EYEWITNESSES WITHOUT RESPONDING TO RUSSIA TODAY
In its report on the release today of a video by the JIT requesting witnesses to a BUK being transported through East Ukraine, Reuters refers to the report that is disputed by Russia Today. In that initial Reuters report Pytor Fedotov is claimed to have said that he saw the missile wiggling as it flew over his head when he was in his garden in a village south of Shnizhne.
But today Russia Today has reported that Fedotov has told them that he did not say this and that Fedotov says the Reuters report is "mere fantasy".
To help to clarify the situation Russia Today has asked Reuters and the reporter to provide the the raw footage of the interview, which Reuters has so far not done.
And on those intercepts in that video released by the JIT: are they having a laugh?
They mention BUK and Russia, as if the people speaking were actually trying to implicate themselves!!
And as for the proposed route as to how the BUK got from Shnizhne to Luhansk, the BUK would have had to travel through territory occupied by the Kiev Nazis!!! That area south and west of Luhansk was either occupied by Kiev Nazis or was a war zone as the Kiev Nazis tried to create a corridor to Luhansk airport.
Villagers in eastern Ukraine told Reuters earlier this year they saw a missile flying directly overhead just before flight MH17 was shot out of the sky, providing the most detailed accounts to date that suggest the rocket was launched from territory held by pro-Russian rebels..
[source : Dutch MH17 crash investigation focuses on Russian missile theory, Reuters, http://uk.reuters.com/article/2015/03/30/uk-ukraine-crisis-mh-idUKKBN0MQ1B620150330, 30th March 2015]
But today Russia Today has reported that Fedotov has told them that he did not say this and that Fedotov says the Reuters report is "mere fantasy".
To help to clarify the situation Russia Today has asked Reuters and the reporter to provide the the raw footage of the interview, which Reuters has so far not done.
And on those intercepts in that video released by the JIT: are they having a laugh?
They mention BUK and Russia, as if the people speaking were actually trying to implicate themselves!!
And as for the proposed route as to how the BUK got from Shnizhne to Luhansk, the BUK would have had to travel through territory occupied by the Kiev Nazis!!! That area south and west of Luhansk was either occupied by Kiev Nazis or was a war zone as the Kiev Nazis tried to create a corridor to Luhansk airport.
IT IS TOO EARLY TO BE DRAWING ANY CONCLUSIONS ON MH17
These are not my words (though I do think they are true).
These are the words of the Dutch team investigating MH17.
So they still haven't ruled out "an airborne assault".
I'm not surprised about that with all the eyewitnesses who have stated on camera, some within minutes of MH17 coming down, that they saw fighter jets close to MH17 when it came down.
But note in the RCL report these statements:
Regarding the claim about the smoke trail, it has not been proved that it was THE smoke trail. This is only a belief of some.
And regarding the claim that the electronic communications were registered, I assume that this was made by the 'sensors' that the USA says it has, the data from which has not been released, but they did release an image of an arc and a straight line intercepting over Shnizhne, an image a schoolkid could knock up in 30 seconds. Why not release the raw data?
And regarding Jeroen Akkermans, he violated all criminal and journalistic protocol and claims to have removed a piece of evidence that he allegedly found at a crime scene, he did not notify the investigating authorities until months later when some one who was paid to provide an opinion said that the evidence belonged to a BUK.
These are the words of the Dutch team investigating MH17.
The Dutch public prosecution underlines that, despite the release of this information, there is still no irrefutable proof that explains the crash. “It is too early to be drawing any conclusions regarding the cause of the crash.” The investigation team is researching another scenario, in which MH17 was the target of an airborne assault. Two other scenarios, a terrorist attack and technical failure, have been ruled out.
[source : Strong evidence found of separatist involvement in downing of MH17, NRC, http://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2015/03/30/strong-evidence-found-of-separatist-involvement-in-downing-of-mh17/, 30th March 2015]
So they still haven't ruled out "an airborne assault".
I'm not surprised about that with all the eyewitnesses who have stated on camera, some within minutes of MH17 coming down, that they saw fighter jets close to MH17 when it came down.
But note in the RCL report these statements:
The missile’s smoke trail was photographed from Torez and the electronic communication between the missile and its launcher was supposedly registered as well.
Regarding the claim about the smoke trail, it has not been proved that it was THE smoke trail. This is only a belief of some.
And regarding the claim that the electronic communications were registered, I assume that this was made by the 'sensors' that the USA says it has, the data from which has not been released, but they did release an image of an arc and a straight line intercepting over Shnizhne, an image a schoolkid could knock up in 30 seconds. Why not release the raw data?
And regarding Jeroen Akkermans, he violated all criminal and journalistic protocol and claims to have removed a piece of evidence that he allegedly found at a crime scene, he did not notify the investigating authorities until months later when some one who was paid to provide an opinion said that the evidence belonged to a BUK.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)