‘Have you any common sense?’ – Putin confronts BBC journalist’s stupid questions

putinmain
The excerpt below is from a lengthy press conference given by Vladimir Putin on December 18, 2014.

As Russia Insider remarked at the time:

Two questions, Dear Readers:

Is there any Western leader capable of standing up, without Teleprompter, and answering a mass of questions, some softball, some hostile, for several hours?

Given the recent expulsion of Giulietto Chiesa from Estonia for daring to question the Party Line, do “Western values” even permit Western leaders to be asked question like Simpson’s? [1]

This video has been viewed over one million times.

John Simpson, BBC: Western countries almost universally now believe that there’s a new Cold War and that you, frankly, have decided to create that. We see, almost daily, Russian aircraft taking sometimes quite dangerous manoeuvres towards western airspace. That must be done on your orders; you’re the Commander-in-Chief. It must have been your orders that sent Russian troops into the territory of a sovereign country – Crimea first, and then whatever it is that’s going on in Eastern Ukraine. Now you’ve got a big problem with the currency of Russia, and you’re going to need help and support and understanding from outside countries, particularly from the West. So can I say to you, can I ask you now, would you care to take this opportunity to say to people from the West that you have no desire to carry on with the new Cold War, and that you will do whatever you can to sort out the problems in Ukraine? Thank you!

Vladimir Putin: Thank you very much for your question. About our exercises, manoeuvres and the development of our armed forces. You said that Russia, to a certain extent, contributed to the tension that we are now seeing in the world. Russia did contribute but only insofar as it is more and more firmly protecting its national interests. We are not attacking in the political sense of the word. We are not attacking anyone. We are only protecting our interests. Our Western partners – and especially our US partners – are displeased with us for doing exactly that, not because we are allowing security-related activity that provokes tension.

Let me explain. You are talking about our aircraft, including strategic aviation operations. Do you know that in the early 1990s, Russia completely stopped strategic aviation flights in remote surveillance areas as the Soviet Union previously did? We completely stopped, while flights of US strategic aircraft carrying nuclear weapons continued. Why? Against whom? Who was threatened?

So we didn’t make flights for many years and only a couple of years ago we resumed them. So are we really the ones doing the provoking?

So, in fact, we only have two bases outside Russia, and both are in areas where terrorist activity is high. One is in Kyrgyzstan, and was deployed there upon request of the Kyrgyz authorities, President Akayev, after it was raided by Afghan militants. The other is in Tajikistan, which also borders on Afghanistan. I would guess you are interested in peace and stability there too. Our presence is justified and clearly understandable.

Now, US bases are scattered around the globe – and you’re telling me Russia is behaving aggressively? Do you have any common sense at all? What are US armed forces doing in Europe, also with tactical nuclear weapons? What are they doing there?

Listen, Russia has increased its military spending for 2015, if I am not mistaken, it is around 50 billion in dollar equivalent. The Pentagon’s budget is ten times that amount, $575 billion, I think, recently approved by the Congress. And you’re telling me we are pursuing an aggressive policy? Is there any common sense in this?

Are we moving our forces to the borders of the United States or other countries? Who is moving NATO bases and other military infrastructure towards us? We aren’t. Is anyone listening to us? Is anyone engaging in some dialogue with us about it? No. No dialogue at all. All we hear is “that’s none of your business. Every country has the right to choose its way to ensure its own security.” All right, but we have the right to do so too. Why can’t we?

Finally, the ABM system – something I mentioned in my Address to the Federal Assembly. Who was it that withdrew unilaterally from the ABM Treaty, one of the cornerstones of the global security system? Was it Russia? No, it wasn’t. The United States did this, unilaterally. They are creating threats for us, they are deploying their strategic missile defence components not just in Alaska, but in Europe as well – in Romania and Poland, very close to us. And you’re telling me we are pursuing an aggressive policy?

If the question is whether we want law-based relations, the answer is yes, but only if our national economic and security interests are absolutely respected.

We negotiated WTO accession for 19 years or so, and consented to compromise on many issues, assuming that we are concluding cast-iron agreements. And then… I will not discuss who’s right and who’s wrong (I already said on many occasions that I believe Russia behaved the right way in the Ukrainian crisis, and the West was wrong, but let us put this aside for now). Still, we joined the WTO. That organisation has rules. And yet, sanctions were imposed on Russia in violation of the WTO rules, the international law and the UN Charter – again unilaterally and illegitimately. Are we in the wrong again?

We want to develop normal relations in the security sphere, in fighting terrorism. We will work together on nuclear non-proliferation. We will work together on other threats, including drugs, organised crime and grave infections, such as Ebola. We will do all this jointly, and we will cooperate in the economic sphere, if our partners want this.

The transcript and video of the entire press conference are here:

http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/47250

[1] http://russia-insider.com/en/2014/12/19/2048

BBC reports RAF jets scrambled after Russian bombers seen off Cornwall

The map below of just some of the “threatened” countries tells all. Just where is NATO parking its troops, headquarters, and equipment, and conducting exercises? Who is threatening who? Exactly how does President Putin pose a “real and present danger”?

“Ukraine is thus seen as a manifestation of a much broader policy shift on the part of the Russian President Vladimir Putin.”

“Mr Fallon’s belief that there is indeed a potential threat to Nato territory – in particular the Baltic Republics – is widely shared.”

That’s horrifying. Leaders must base their actions on facts, not beliefs, not ancestral prejudices, not what’s good for the ruling class. Unfortunately for the peace of the world, British, American, and European “beliefs” are driving all of us to war against Russia. And not just for the stated reasons of “threats”. Until Western leaders start living in a fact-based world, with a desire to serve the people of their countries, with a belief system reflective of reality and a value system that includes living together in harmony, we face mutual annihilation.

The BBC’s reporting and analysis are deplorable.

From the BBC, February 19, 2015

Mr Cameron says the incident should not be dignified with a response

RAF jets were scrambled on Wednesday after two Russian military aircraft were seen off the Cornwall coast, the Ministry of Defence has said.

The Russian Bear bombers did not enter sovereign airspace, it said.

On the same day, Defence Secretary Michael Fallon warned that Russia’s President Putin posed a “real and present danger” to three Baltic states.

Map, BBC

Prime Minister David Cameron said the Russian action should not be dignified with “too much of a response”.

He added: “I think what this episode demonstrates is that we do have the fast jets, the pilots, the systems in place to protect the UK.

“I suspect the Russians were trying to make some sort of a point.”

BBC political correspondent Ross Hawkins said the appearance of Russian aircraft near the UK coast was a show of strength from the Russians, and such incidents were carried out with political intent because they would be reported on.

Our correspondent said it was part of a trend which had seen Russian aircraft flying close to UK airspace and there had also been concern about similar incidents in Europe.

Russian bomber, BBC

The two Russian Bear bombers were “escorted” by RAF jets, the MoD says (file photo)

It comes amid increased concerns over Russian involvement in the conflict in Ukraine and suggestions of Russian President Vladimir Putin’s potential future interference in Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia.

A ceasefire deal between government and pro-Russian rebel separatists in Ukraine was reached a week ago.

But battles around the strategic town of Debaltseve have seen the withdrawal of Ukrainian troops, while there was shelling in several places in eastern Ukraine, including the region’s biggest city, Donetsk, on Thursday.

‘New’ Cold War

Russia has denied helping the separatists, but it has been accused repeatedly of sending weapons and troops and using propaganda to inflame tensions.

And Russia’s UN ambassador Vitaly Churkin has labelled Ukraine’s call for the deployment of UN peacekeepers in eastern Ukraine as a destructive move.

Mr Cameron has said rebels in eastern Ukraine are using Russian military hardware, and that Mr Putin must understand there would be “economic and financial consequences for many years to come” if he did not change his behaviour.

Speaking to journalists from the Times and Daily Telegraph on Wednesday, Mr Fallon said the increase in Russian defence spending was “clearly worrying” and that he was also “worried about Putin”.

“They are modernising their conventional forces, they are modernising their nuclear forces and they are testing Nato, so we need to respond.”

Mr Fallon also said the prospect of a new Cold War was “warming up”.

“You have tanks and armour rolling across the Ukrainian border and you have an Estonian border guard who has been captured and not yet still returned.”

Vladimir Chizhov, the Russian Ambassador to the EU: ”I entirely reject accusations that Russia is responsible for the destabilisation of Ukraine”

Previous incidents

He also said Russia was likely to use covert tactics such as those he said it had used to annex Crimea and during the current Ukraine conflict.

Mr Putin had also flown two other bombers “down the English Channel two weeks ago”, Mr Fallon added.

“We had to scramble jets very quickly to see them off.

“It’s the first time since the height of the Cold War, it’s the first time that’s happened.”

A French Air Force Mirage filmed from a Russian bomber during a recent encroachment on western European airspace. Pictures from Russian TV Zvedza

Analysis

Jonathan Marcus, BBC defence and diplomatic correspondent

The comments from Defence Secretary Michael Fallon are an indication of a fundamental shift in the Nato perception of the crisis in Ukraine.

Nato governments clearly believe that what began as a localised Ukraine problem that strained ties with Moscow has now become a Russia problem, and a Russia problem that is likely to persist for some time.

Ukraine is thus seen as a manifestation of a much broader policy shift on the part of the Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Mr Fallon’s belief that there is indeed a potential threat to Nato territory – in particular the Baltic Republics – is widely shared; hence Nato’s desire to underline in the most emphatic terms that its security guarantees to its members will be honoured in full.

Russian Foreign Ministry spokesman Alexander Lukashevich said Mr Fallon’s comments went “beyond diplomatic ethics” and used “unacceptable terminology”.

He also said Russia would “find a way to respond”.

According to the Department for Transport, there was no record of disruption to civil aviation as a result of the bombers’ presence on Wednesday.

The MoD said: “RAF Quick Reaction Alert Typhoon fighter aircraft were launched [on Wednesday] after Russian aircraft were identified flying close to UK airspace.

“The Russian planes were escorted by the RAF until they were out of the UK area of interest. At no time did the Russian military aircraft cross into UK sovereign airspace.”

A similar incident occurred in January, when the UK Foreign Office said two Russian Tu-95 Bear H bombers flying near UK airspace had caused “disruption to civil aviation” and were also escorted by RAF jets while near UK airspace.

Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg said the latest incident “shows that we are of course living in a time of heightened tension with Russia… and we should remain vigilant at all times”.

 

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-31530840

On-duty Ukraine air traffic controller refuted Kiev-U.S. claims about MH17 (parte en español )

From Strategic Culture Foundation Journal, August 28, 2014:
Looking Who Is Talking! MH17 and the US Role in Downing Passenger Airplanes
By Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya

[CHRONOLOGY OF TWITTER COMMENTS BY AIR TRAFFIC CONTROLLER CARLOS ON JULY 17, 2014 ARE BELOW — ORIGINAL SPANISH COMMENTS AND ENGLISH TRANSLATION]

Approximately four months after Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 (MH370) disappeared in March 2014, while en route from the Malaysian capital of Kuala Lumpur to the Chinese capital of Beijing, another incident took place with a Malaysian passenger plane. This time Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 (MH17), en route from the Dutch capital of Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur, was shot down on July 17, 2014 over the contested airspace of the breakaway Donetsk People’s Republic. The incident took place over Torez near the Russian-Ukrainian border while the authorities in Kiev were busy militarily assaulting the separatist armed forces of Novorossiya, that is the soldiers of the breakaway Donetsk People’s Republic and Donetsk’s sister-breakaway republic in East Ukraine, the self-proclaimed Lugansk People’s Republic.

Blaming Russia and the Donetsk People’s Republic for the MH17 Crash

The downing of MH17 in East Ukraine was quickly blamed on the Donetsk People’s Republic. One way or another, the Russian Federation was also blamed by the puppet authorities in Kiev and its supporters in the US and the European Union. Salivating with another opportunity to demonize Russia and justify its existence, NATO also pointed the finger in the same direction towards Moscow. As part of the continuous anti-Russian hysteria, NATO governments and media networks lined up to blame Russia for the downing of the Malaysian passenger plane over Donetsk.

Starting in late-February 2014 with the EuroMaidan coup, for the last six months or half a year, all types of accusations have been made and directed towards Russia and its federal government in Moscow. Blaming the Kremlin for the attack on MH17 was just a continuation of the Russophobic trend that Washington and its European Union allies had unleashed with the simmering crisis in Ukraine.

Valentyn Oleksandrovych Nalyvaichenko, the post-EuroMaidan head of the Security Service of Ukraine (SSU/SBU) and an Orangist that left Viktor Yushchenko to join Vitali Klitschko in 2012, claimed that the attack MH17 was a Russian-linked false flag that went wrong. Interfax Information Service Group’s branch in Ukraine reported on August 9, 2014 that the SSU/SBU chief claimed that the Donetsk People’s Republic was planning on bombing a Russian airliner from Aeroflot that was suppose to fly south to the Mediterranean Sea from Moscow to the Greek Cypriot city of Larnaca. The SSU/SBU released an official statement on August 7, 2014 claiming that the plan was to give the Russian Federation a pretext for invading and occupying Ukraine.

The US government and its high-ranking officials joined their puppets in Kiev in trying to ultimately lay the blame on Russia for the downing of MH17. US officials made numerous public statements that were designed to pin the blame on the Russian Federation for the MH17’s crash. The US government launched an international information campaign in this regard that utilized its diplomatic missions, the internet, social media, and the mainstream media networks.

When Washington was challenged for proof about Russian involvement and the source of the attack on MH17, in the tradition of US Secretary of State Colin Powel’s weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) in Iraq presentation at the United Nations the US government presented doctored evidence which was debunked immediately. The US government released doctored satellite images that from an examination of location of physical objects and atmospheric conditions were clearly taken days after MH17 was shot down. After embarrassingly being exposed for presenting false evidence to support its claims, Washington refused to provide anymore of its so-called evidence under the justification of not revealing data sources. In reality, there Washington was lying again and had no evidence to support the ridiculous claims that Moscow had masterminded the downing of MH17. Not long after this, US officials admitted that they had no tangible evidence against Russia. Then they and their NATO allies began to look like they were losing interest in even investigation the MH17 crash in Donetsk.

The Facts Come into View: What were Kiev’s Fighter Jets Doing?

The narrative of the US and the puppet authorities in Kiev was feeble and horribly put together from the start. Not only was there an absence of evidence that the Donetsk People’s Republic or Russia were behind the attack on Mh17, which killed all two hundred and eighty-three passengers and fifteen crew members on board (a total of two hundred and ninety-eight people), but the evidence indicated the US-supported puppet Ukrainian authorities in Kiev as the culprits responsible for the downing of the Malaysian passenger jet.

Within moments before the MH17 crash, a Spaniard employee working as an air traffic controller at Ukraine’s largest airport, Borispol (Boryspil) International Airport (not to be confused with Kiev International Airport in Zhulyany, southwest Kiev), using his Twitter account (Carlos @spainbuca), refuted the claims of the Ukrainian puppet authorities in Kiev and their backers in Washington. Carlos would write at 11:48 am on July 17, 2014 that MH17 was «escorted by 2 fighters of Ukraine until minutes before disappearing from the radar» screen at the air traffic control tower. What Carlos meant by fighters was Ukrainian fighter jets. Carlos also wrote, at 1:29 pm, that the Interior Ministry of Ukraine, which is heavily politicized and under the control of the ultra-nationalist forces behind the EuroMaidan coup, knew what the Ukrainian fighter jets were doing next to MH17 whereas the Ukrainian military knew very little and, at 1:36 pm, that the Ukrainian military confirmed that Kiev had downed the Malaysian passenger jet (please see the annex for what was exactly written). It would only be at 3:17 pm that the air traffic control tower would be told officially that a missile had shot MH17 down over Donetsk. Carlos wrote at 4:06 pm that Ukrainian military air control officials had said that it the missile was one of their own. Because of his revelations, eventually the Spaniard’s Tweeter account would be blocked and deleted.

Contradicting the rhetorical claims of Washington and its puppets in Kiev, the federal government of Russia provided valid data that could be analyzed with a high level of confidence. Among the data that Moscow produced, was information that a Ukrainian Sukhoi SU-25 fighter jet had intercepted MH17. The puppet authorities in Ukraine declined to explain why a Ukrainian military jet had been sent to intercept MH17. While calling for an international investigation to be conducted by an impartial team from the United Nations, Moscow also called for the puppet authorities in Kiev to publicly release the communication records that took place between MH17 and Ukrainian air traffic control.

Even the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), which has been negatively biased towards Russia during the entire crisis in Ukraine, contradicts the allegations of the US government. Michael Bociurkiw, a Canadian citizen of Ukrainian descent, investigating the crash as an OSCE monitor contradicted the claims made by the US-supported puppet authorities in Kiev. The OSCE monitor reported that no missile was used against MH17 from the OSCE’s initial studies. Not only was no missile used, Bociurkiw mentions that it looks like MH17 looked like it was downed by bullets. In Michael Bociurkiw’s own words, he told the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) the following on July 29, 2014: «There have been two or three pieces of fuselage that have been really pockmarked with what almost looks like machine-gun fire, very very strong machine-gun fire».

As soon as photographs of the crash became available, it was noticed by many people that it looked like the Malaysian jet has been fired on (in addition to any possible missile penetration). Specifically, the MH17’s cockpit looks like it was fired at from both sides with both entry and exit bullet holes. This means that the MH17 was either shot at from two different angels or that the ammunition that was fired on it ricocheted outwards. Taken that the ammunition of the Ukrainian Sukhoi SU-25 is cannon ammunition is armor-piercing and made to destroy heavy armored military vehicles, this makes a lot of sense.

OSCE monitor Michael Bociurkiw has been criticized for using non-technical language, specifically referring to thirty millimeter caliber cannon ammunition as «machine-gun fire» while talking about the MH17 attack. The point, however, should not be lost. It looks like a Ukrainian Sukhoi SU-25 fighter jet had fired on the MH17 (in addition to any possible missile penetration of the Malaysian passenger plane). All the evidence about the downing of MH17 points in the direction of the authorities in Kiev.

Hiding the Facts via Information Censorship

The voice of Carlos, contradicting the US and its allies, would be just one of many. The Information Telegraph Agency of Russia (ITAR-TASS) also confirmed his story on July 18, 2014. ITAR-TASS reported as follows: «This information is confirmed by eyewitnesses in the Donetsk region who saw Ukrainian warplanes near the passenger jet. They say they heard sounds of powerful blasts and saw a Ukraine warplane shortly before the crash.» Even the Russian-language service of the state-owned British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) News would corroborate the account put forward by Carlos and eyewitnesses in East Ukraine. The BBC’s Olga Ivshina (Ivshyna) interviewed four residence of the area near the crash, which all said that they saw warplanes next to MH17. One eyewitness told Ivshina that the military jet «was flying under it, we could see it. It was going underneath the civilian one».

The BBC would censor Olga Ivshina’s report, because it contradicted the separatist missile attack narrative and it fit perfectly with what the Spanish air traffic controller and the Russian government claimed. After being caught red handed, the BBC responded to deleting its own report and put back a modified version of it on July 25, 2014. Yan Leder, the managing editor for BBC News’s Russian service explained that there was no «self-censorship» and that the report was removed as it contained «mistakes» and was not in «compliance of the editorial values of BBC».

The BBC’s censorship was only the tip of the iceberg. Facebook and Twitter began to block posts linked to articles about MH17 and the claims made by Carlos. Posts involving what happened to MH17 over East Ukraine were becoming unavailable or failing to open on social media. Enough people noticed and complained about this that warnings and explanations were offered about why the posts about MH17 were being blocking.

Tacitly, Matthew Peckham provides the dubious rationale of social media for restricting posts in a Time article titled «Facebook and Twitter Users: Don’t Fall for MH17 ‘Actual Footage’ Scams» on July 22, 2014. Peckham reports the following: «If you run across Facebook pages touting pictures of Malaysia Airlines MH17 crash victims, or tweets linking to reports on the disaster, warning: they may be fakes, harbor malware or redirect you to pornographic websites.» Then his article tacitly explains that such links have been removed from Facebook. In other words, the rationale being presented is that posts covering the MH17 crash can be censored or blocked to protect readers from scammers, malware, and software viruses.

Despite the reasoning behind any possible blocking of articles and posts about MH17, the rationale given does not explain why Carlos was censored or why Tweeter deleted his account (Carlos @spainbuca). The Spaniard would also do an interview with RT en Español (RT Spanish) or RT Actualidad from Madrid on May 8, 2014. Hiding his identity because of death threats he had received in Ukraine, the Spanish air traffic controller would explain that he and his family were deported from Ukraine to Spain by the puppet authorities in Kiev.

The US is the One that Downs Passenger Planes, Not Russia

The US government is the one that attacks and downs civilian passenger planes, either directly with its own military forces or through state-sponsored terrorism. When US Secretary of State John Kerry was pointing the finger at Russia, no one asked him about Cuban (Cubana de Aviación) Flight 455 (CU455) and Iran Air Flight 655 (IR655). While flying from Barbados to Jamaica, CU455 was brought down on October 6, 1976 by a CIA-linked double C-4 bomb attack. IR655, on the other hand, was shot down by a US warship over Iranian territory, while flying on its regular route from Tehran to Dubai in the UAE, on July 3, 1988.

The bombing of the CU455 was carried out by the US-supported and CIA-trained Coordination of United Revolutionary Organizations (CORU). CORU also worked out of US territory and all its actions were coordinated with the US government. Orlando Bosch, Luis Posada Carriles, and Michael Vernon Townley, the key figures involved are known to have been financed by the CIA and to have worked with it and other US agencies in a terrorist campaign against Cuba aimed at securing regime change in Havana. Townley as a professional assassin for the US helped kill Latin American figures opposing US influence in their countries.

Although the US claims that it was not involved, it has been behind a terrorist campaign that has been attacking Cuban infrastructure after the Cuban Revolution in 1959. The Cubans reacted by reporting the US to the United Nations in 1960 and by providing the United Nations Security Council with detailed records of multiple US-sponsored terrorist attacks, which included the names of registered pilots, plane identification numbers, data on the flight routes coming from the US, and physical evidence. Washington, however, continued to deny that it was involved in the terrorist attacks on the Cubans. Not only did the US continue to lie, but it launched the invasion of the Bay of Pigs in 1961.

The terrorist bombing of CU455 would be a national tragedy for all Cuban society. After winning gold medals for their Cuba at the 1976 Central American and Caribbean Championships, all twenty-four members of the entire Cuban national junior fencing team would be killed in CU455. Most of the Cuban fencers were teenagers. The other passengers were Cuban fishing and sports officials and Guyanese medical students going to Cuba to study medicine.

IR655 was shot down directly by the USS Vincennes in a clear act of aggression against a passenger airliner. The attack on IR655 took place in Iranian territory as the airplane was flying through Iranian airspace towards Dubai. All two hundred and ninety passengers and sixteen crew members were killed.

In both cases the US government lied or provided excuses about what happened. Washington’s actions, however, spell its position and intentions out clearly. Despite the US government’s shameless claims not to have supported the bombing of CU455, the US gave asylum and sanctuary to the figures behind the murder of all seventy-eight passengers onboard the Cuban passenger plane. In regards to IR655, the crew of the USS Vincennes was awarded for their ship’s actions and received combat-action ribbons for the tour of the Vincennes in the Persian Gulf. Captain (N) William C. Rogers III was awarded the Legion of Merit for his service as the commanding naval officer of the Vincennes from 1987 to 1989 whereas Lieutenant -Commander Scott Lustig, the warships’ air-warfare coordinator, received the Navy Commendation Medal for «quickly and precisely complete the firing procedure.»

Lie after lie, the modus operandi of the US government is the same. How much credence can people give to John Kerry and the US government when they claimed that the Syrian government was behind the chemical attack on Ghouta in late-2013, but the facts proved that it was the US-supported insurgents that were behind the chemical attack?

Minutes before reporting about the Ukrainian military’s involvement, at 11:13 am on July 17, 2014, Carlos wrote on Twitter that he was wondering why foreign personnel entered his air traffic control tower with Kiev authorities to gather information. The Spaniard later reported at 12:00 pm, interestingly minutes after the military authorities in Kiev had notified his air traffic control tower that MH17 was downed over Donetsk, that the air traffic control tower was filled with foreign personnel. Who were these foreign personal? Most probably they were from NATO countries and, more specifically, from the US. There is no question that the US had a role in the downing of MH17; at the very minimum Washington has knowingly and criminally worked to distort the picture of what happened to MH17. It is also important to note that Carlos described divisions among the Ukrainian soldiers in Kiev through what appeared to be upset and disgusted faces by those soldiers who reported that Kiev was responsible for the downing of MH17 whereas the Ukrainian military personnel and authorities accompanied by foreigners were busy lying and trying to spin the attack on MH17. The downing of MH17 is not the crime of Ukraine, but an act committed by US and EU proxies, embezzlers, and fanatics.

One way or another, the US government and the European Union do not have clean hands. The US accuses others of committing the actions that it itself commits. It is not Russia that bombs civilian passenger airplanes, but the United States. History is a witness to this.

ANNEX CHRONOLOGY OF TWITTER COMMENTS BY CARLOS ON JULY 17, 2014

Source: @spainbuca

• The Tweets (Twitter comments) are in original Spanish followed by translations.

• The time is presumed to be Eastern European Time (EET)

• The time is given in both 24-hour and 12-hour clock formats

10:21/10:21 AM

Autoridades de kiev, intentan hacer que pueda parecer un ataque de los pro-rusos

Kiev Authorities, trying to make seem like an attack by pro-Russians

10:24/10:24 AM

Ojo! Que puede ser un derribo B777 Malaysia Airlines en ukraine, 280 pasajeros

Pay attention! It can be a downing of Malaysia Airlines B777 in Ukraine, 280 passengers

10:25/10:25 AM

Cuidado! Kiev tiene lo que buscaba

Careful! Kiev has what it sought

10:25/10:25 AM

Vuelven a tomar la torre de control en Kiev

They have returned to take the control tower in Kiev

10:27/10:27 AM

El avión B777 de Malaysia Airlines desapareció del radar, no hubo comunicación de ninguna anomalia, confirmado

The Malaysia Airlines B777 airplane disappeared from the radar, there was no communication of any anomaly, confirmed

10:30/10:30 AM

Avión derribado, derribados, derribado no accidente

«Airplane shot down, shot down, shot down, no accident»

10:31/10:31 AM

Kiev, tiene lo que buscaba, lo dije en los primeros tw, kiev es responsable @ActualidadRT

Kiev has what it wanted, I said in the first tw [Tweet], Kiev is responsible @ ActualidadRT

10:35/10:35 AM

Un accidente muy normal no es, no están amenazando en la misma torre del aeropuerto de kiev,

An accident that is not quite normal, they are threatening us in the same tower of Kiev airport»

10:35/10:35 AM

Nos van a quitar, nuestros tlf y demás de un momento a otro

We will take from our tel. [telephones] and others stuff at any moment

10:38/10:35 AM

Antes de que me quiten el tlf o me rompan la cabeza, derribado por Kiev

Before they remove my phone or they break my head, shot down by Kiev

11:12/11:12 AM

Nosotros tenemos la confirmación. Avión derribado, la autoridad de kiev, ya tiene la información, derribado, estamos tranquilos ahora

We have confirmation. Airplane downed, Kiev authorities already got the information, downed, we are calm now

11:13/11:13 AM

Que hace personal extranjero con autoridades de kiev en la torre? Recopilando toda la información

What are doing foreigner personnel doing with Kiev authorities in the tower? Gathering all the information

11:15/11:15 AM

Cuando sea posible sigo escribiendo

When possible I keep writing

11:48/11:48 AM

El avión B 777 voló escoltado por 2 cazas de ukraine hasta minutos antes, de desaparecer de los radares,

The B777 airplane flew escorted by 2 fighter [jets] of Ukraine until minutes before disappearing from the radar, [sic.]

11:54/11:54 AM

Sí las autoridades de kiev, quieren decir la verdad, esta recogido 2 cazas volaron muy cerca minutos antes , no lo derribo un caza

If Kiev authorities, want to tell the truth, it is recorded that 2 jet fighters flew very close minutes before, was not downed by a fighter

12:00/12:00 PM

Nada más desaparecer el avión B 777 de Malaysia Airlines la autoridad military de kiev nos informo del derribo, como lo sabían?

Just as the Malaysia Airlines B777 airplane disappeared the Kiev military authority informed us of the downing, how did they know?

12:00/12:00 PM

A los 7:00 minutos se notificó el derribo, más tarde se tomó la torre nuestra con personal extranjero q siguen aquí

7:00 minutes after crash was reported, our tower was overtaken with foreigner staff, they are still here

12:01/12:01 PM

En los radares esta todo recogido, para los incrédulos, derribado por kiev, aquí lo sabemos y control aéreo militar también

All this is gathered in radars, for unbelievers, shot down by kiev [sic.], here we know it and military air traffic control also [knows]

13:15/1:15 PM

Aquí los mandos militares manejan y admiten que militares a otras órdenes, pudieron ser, pero no, los pro-rusos

Here the military commanders administer and suppose it could be the military following other orders, but could be the pro-Russians

13:29/1:29 PM

El ministro del interior si conocía que, hacían los cazas en la zona, el ministro de defensa no,

Interior minister knew what the fighters were doing in the area, the defence minister did not.

13:31/1:31 PM

Militares confirman que fue ukraine, pero se sigue sin saber de donde vino la orden

Military confirms that it was Ukraine, but still does not know where the order came from

13:36/1:36 PM

Hace dias lo dije aquí, militares de kiev querían alzarse contra el actual presidente, esto puede ser una forma, a las órdenes de timoshenko

Days ago I said here, kiev [sic. ]military wanted to rise against the current president [Petro Poroshenko], this may be a way [to oust him], ordered by [Yulia] Tymoshenko

13:38/1:38 PM

Los cazas volaron cerca del 777, hasta 3 minutos antes de desaparecer de los radares, solo 3 minutos

The fighters flew close to 777, up to 3 minutes before disappearing from the radar, just 3 minutes

13:43/1:43 PM

Se cierra el espacio aéreo

Airspace closed

13:45/1:45 PM

Se cierra el espacio aéreo, por miedo a más derribos

Airspace is closed, more downings feared

15:17/3:17 PM

Control militar entrega ahora mismo de forma oficial que el avión fue derribado por misil

Military control now officially [say] the plane was shot down by missile

15:23/ 3:23 PM

El informe oficial firmado por las autoridades militares de control de kiev ya lo tiene el gobierno,,,, , derribado

«Government has the official report signed by the military control authorities in kiev [sic.],,, , [sic.] [the airplane was] blown»

15:26/3:26 PM

En el informe se indica de donde abría salido el misil, y se especifica que no proviene de las autodefensa en las zonas rebeldes

The report indicates where the missile had originated, and specified it is not self-defence from the rebel areas

15:34/3:35 PM

Los radares militares si recogieron los datos del misil lanzado al avión, los radares civiles no

Military radar collected data from missile fired to the plane, civilian radars did not

15:36/ 3:36 PM

Los altos mandos militares no ordenaron el lanzamiento del misil, alguien se le fue la mano en nombre de ukraine

The military high command did not give the order to fire the missile, someone did it in the name of ukraine [sic.]

15:38/3:38 PM

Para el que no lo sepa, digamos así, hay militares a las órdenes del ministro de defensa y militares a las órdenes del ministro del interior

For those who do not know, let us say, there are soldiers under the orders of the defence minister and soldiers under the orders of the minister of interior

15:38/ 3:38 PM

Los militares a las órdenes del ministro del interior conocían en cada momento lo que sucedió

The soldiers under the orders of minister of interior knew what happened the whole time

16:06/4:06 PM

Mandos militares aquí (ATC) torre de control, confirman que el misil es del ejercito de ukraine,

Military commanders here (ATC) control tower, confirm that the missile is from the army of [sic.] ukraine,

16:07/4:07 PM

Mandos militares que si lo sabían y otros mandos que no,

«[There are] military commanders that knew it and others that did not,

16:08/4:08 PM

290 personas inocentes muertas. Por una guerra inútil, donde el patriotismo se compra con dinero

290 innocent people dead. What a useless war, where patriotism is bought with money

16:09/4:09 PM

La forma de tomar la torre de control minutos después sabiendo todo los detalles, rápido nos hizo pensar que habían sido ellos

The way the control tower was taken minutes after and knowing all the details, quickly made us think that they [did it]

16:10/4:10 PM

La cara de los militares que llegaron más tarde diciendo pero que habéis echo, no dejo dudas

«The faces of the soldiers who came later saying [what you just did], no chance for doubts»

16:12/4:12 PM

Es tal la decadencia que los militares acompañados de extranjeros que llegaron primero nos llegaron a pedir que dijéramos su versión

Such is the decadence that the soldiers who came first accompanied by foreigners came to us asking us to tell their version [of the MH17’s downing]

16:13/4:16 PM

Nuestra respuesta, fue, estos radares no recogen el lanzamiento de misiles, los militares si, ya no quedaban dudas

Our response was, these radars do not collect the launching of missiles, the military ones does, there were no doubts

—————————————————————-

Mahdi Darius NAZEMROAYA

Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya is a social scientist, award-winning writer, columnist, and researcher. His works have been carried internationally in a broad series of publications and have been translated into more than twenty languages including German, Arabic, Italian, Russian, Turkish, Spanish, Portuguese, Chinese, Korean, Polish, Armenian, Persian, Dutch and Romanian. His work in geopolitical sciences and strategic studies has been used by various academic and defense establishments in their papers and defense colleges for military officers. He is also a frequent guest on international news networks as a geopolitical analyst and expert on the Middle East.

Source:
http://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2014/08/28/looking-who-talking-mh17-and-us-role-downing-passenger-airplanes.html

Reposted at
http://www.globalresearch.ca/looking-who-is-talking-mh17-and-the-us-role-in-downing-passenger-airplanes/5398153