Local inhabitants inspect site of Malaysian liner crash in eastern Ukraine.
(image by RINF)
The US TV networks --the West's Ministry of Truth organs--and other media have been blabbering all morning almost nonstop about the Malaysian airliner downed in Eastern Ukraine, blown clear out of the sky, as Joe Biden so delicately put it, by some malevolent force. Events of this nature taking place in areas where the two long contending blocs clash and overlap almost invariably mean trouble for world peace, so, brothers and sisters, fasten your seat belts.
Beyond the immediate tragic loss of life, this latest casualty in the Malaysian civil aviation fleet packs a great deal of peril for the prospect of European independence from intensified American meddling in the Continent's politics.
The plane fell apart over a zone where an unfurling civil war is raging, involving a proxy of the West with highly dubious moral and political credentials, and an almost preternatural eagerness to please its Washington sponsors. (It's curious that no one seems to have alerted the Malaysian pilots to the danger of overflying a part of the world where surface-to-air projectiles are becoming common.) That alone and other contradictions should have given a professional press some pause before proceeding to indict the Russian and the pro-Russian militias, but we don't have such a press in the United States. What we have is a very biased and smooth machinery of state propaganda in private hands. This ostensible separation of jurisdictions gives the American press (along with the rest of the media in capitalist nations) the illusion of independence from the commands of the state or any ruling class.
In any case, as is by now customary for the American media, its assets immediately swung into action. Hence from the earliest coverage on CBS, ABC, CNN, etc., it was easy to perceive a marked tendency to suggest "Russia or her proxies did it", as fingers were pointed at the separatists in East Ukraine, a rabble (judging by the invidious tone of the reports) that supposedly "had been shooting at planes" indiscriminately. Now, as these lines are being written (it's almost 17:00 EST in the US), the US media are cheerfully parroting the convenient statements supplied by the puppet Ukrainian military (Kiev), talking openly of the plane having been downed by a Russian missile. Need we say any more? The perfidy has been demonstrated.
This latest accusation seems to be a strong card in the propaganda approach being used by the West to assassinate the character of the Russian government and its allies. CBS anchor Scott Pelley, for one, a man loyal to his duties, was insistent on the fact that the plane could have been brought down only by a missile from an antiaircraft battery provided by the Russians, in direct contravention, mind you, to Washington's pleas not to make such weapons available to the Ukrainian rebels. Tsk, tsk, those irresponsible, childish and untrustworthy Russians, always up to no good and defying the maximum goodness emanating form the American president. The sheer sanctimoniousness and hypocrisy implicit in such type of posturing is clear (and I hope revolting) to those who understand the way American news manipulation works.
Indeed, as the accusations fly, it is noteworthy that the context for these events remains nebulous for most Americans--perhaps the developed world's worst informed people. The American media, in full compliance with the US government's line, has shielded Washington's new client regime in Kiev from any sort of real criticism by blatantly under-reporting or simply ignoring the savagery of its offensive against lightly armed separatist militias in the Eastern provinces of Ukraine, a campaign conducted by President Peroshenko quite probably on direct instruction and counsel from his Western advisors.
Cherchez the motive, or, rather cui bono?
Who stood to gain?
It's easy to determine several scenarios in varying degrees of plausibility and culpability. While it's very plausible the plane was shot down by Eastern Ukraine separatists, it's also obvious they (and Russia) have little to gain from such an act. So at worst, even if "they" did it, we can still argue it was simply an error, a miscalculation on their part.
Plausibly guilty but no criminal intent
Indeed, in the heat of battling Kievan air force assets that have been brutally and indiscriminately pounding their positions--an offensive that has often deliberately rained bombs and death on scores of civilian targets and devastated entire villages and townships--East Ukraine rebels could have easily fired the fatal missile, especially since many in their ranks apparently lack the professional expertise to properly manage some of these weapons. This is a militia, after all. [Update: Reports seem to confirm it was an Eastern Ukraine militia that shot the plane, albeit, by accident. Hold your faith in these reports until absolutely certified by reliable sources.--Eds]
But that's not where the argument should end. While the culpable missile may have indeed be of Russian design and even manufacture, what does that prove?
The Ukraine, and much of the world, is awash in Russian arms (not to mention US weapons, the biggest seller of such items), and the Kievan regime certainly has such weapons in their arsenal as all former Warsaw Pact nations shared many weapons designs, maintained similar arsenals, and probably even manufactures some to this day. More to the point, its own forces are currently operating deep inside Eastern Ukraine territory, which cannot discount them as the folks behind the dastardly deed. Hell, even the CIA maintains huge stockpiles of all types of such weapons, from AK-47s to sophisticated ground-to-air systems, for reasons we can only imagine given the sordid nature of the CIA and its sister agencies. If necessary, could a specialist team have done it? You bet.
Guilty with a cause?
The second type of suspect involves not mere error but direct and deliberate intent and therefore moral culpability. What folks in the judiciary trade call, "malice aforethought." I'm talking here about an act carried out by agents provocateurs working for the West.
1 | 2