Dr. Paul Craig Roberts / Global Research & Prof. Michel Chossudovsky / Global Research – 2014-07-27 17:18:55
US Intelligence on Malaysian Flight MH17:
Russia Didn’t Do It. “US Satellite Photos Do Not Support Obama’s Lies”
Dr. Paul Craig Roberts / Global Research and paulcraigroberts.org
(July 24, 2014) — After days of placing hostile blame for the downing of the Malaysian airliner on Russia, the White House permitted US intelligence officials to tell reporters that there is no evidence of the Russian government’s involvement.
Obviously, the US satellite photos do not support the Obama regime’s lies. If the White House had any evidence of Russian complicity, it would have released it to great fanfare days ago.
We are fortunate that the analytical side of the CIA, in contrast with the black ops side, retains analysts with integrity even after the purge of the agency ordered by Dick Cheney. Incensed that the CIA did not immediately fall in line with all of the Bush regime’s war lies, Cheney had the agency purged. The black ops side of the agency is a different story. Many believe that it should be defunded and abolished as this part of the CIA operates in violation of statutory US law.
Don’t hold your breath until Washington abolishes black-ops operations or the Obama regime apologizes to the Russian government for the unfounded accusations and insinuations leveled by the White House at Russia.
Despite this admission by US intelligence officials, the propaganda ministry is already at work to undermine the admission. The intelligence officials themselves claim that Russia is, perhaps, indirectly responsible, because Russia “created the conditions” that caused Kiev to attack the separatists.
In other words, Washington’s coup overseen by US State Department official Victoria Nuland, which overthrew an elected democratic Ukrainian government and brought extreme Russophobes into power in Kiev who attacked dissenting former Russian territories that were attached to Ukraine by Soviet communist party leaders when Russia and Ukraine were part of the same country, has no responsibility for the result.
Washington is innocent. Russia is guilty. End of story.
The day previously, State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf, one of the Obama regime’s brainless warmonger women, angrily turned on reporters who asked about the Russian government’s official denial of responsibility. Don’t you understand, she demanded, that what the US government says is credible and what the Russian government says is not credible!
Rest assured that the owners of the media and the editors of the reporters received calls and threats. I wouldn’t be surprised if the reporters have lost their jobs for doing their jobs.
There you have it. America’s free press. The American press is free to lie for the government, but mustn’t dare exercise any other freedom.
Washington will never permit official clarification of MH-17. Today (July 23) the BBC (the British Brainwashing Corporation) declared: “Whitehall sources say information has emerged that MH17 crash evidence was deliberated tampered with, as the plane’s black boxes arrive in the UK.”
After making this claim of tampered with black boxes, the BBC contradicted itself:
“The Dutch Safety Board, which is leading the investigation, said ‘valid data’ had been downloaded from MH17’s cockpit voice recorder (CVR) which will be ‘further analyzed’. The board said: ‘The CVR was damaged but the memory module was intact. Furthermore no evidence or indications of manipulation of the CVR was found.'”
The BBC does not tell us how the black boxes are simultaneously in British and Dutch hands, or how they got into British and Dutch hands when the separatists gave the black boxes to the Malaysians with the guarantee that the black boxes would be turned over to the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) for expert and non-politicized examination.
So where are the black boxes? If the Malaysians gave them to the British, Whitehall will tell whatever lie Washington demands. If Washington’s British puppet actually has the black boxes, we will never know the truth. Judging from the hostile and unsupported accusations against Russia from the bought-and-paid-for Netherlands prime minister, we can expect the Dutch also to lie for Washington. Apparently, Washington has succeeded in removing the “investigation” from the ICAO’s hands and placing the investigation in the hands of its puppets.
The problem with writing columns based on Western news reports is that you have no idea of the veracity of the news reports.
From all appearances, the Obama regime intends to turn the “international investigation” into an indictment of Russia, and the Dutch seem to be lined up behind this corrupt use of the investigation. As the Washington Post story makes clear, there is no room in the investigation for any suspicion that Kiev and Washington might be responsible.
By continuing to trust a corrupt West that is devoid of integrity and of good will toward Russia, the separatists and the Russian government have again set themselves up for vilification. Will they never learn?
As I write, more confusion is added to the story. It has just come across my screen that Reuters reports that Alexander Khodakovsky, “a powerful Ukrainian rebel leader has confirmed that pro-Russian separatists had an anti-aircraft missile of the type Washington says was used to shoot down the Malaysia Airlines flight MH17 and it could have originated in Russia.”
Reuters says that this separatist commander (or perhaps former commander as later in its report Reuters describes Khodakovsky as “a former head of the ‘Alpha’ anti-terrorism unit of the security service in Donetsk”) is in dispute with other commanders about the conduct of the war.
Khodakovsky makes clear that he doesn’t know which unit might have had the missile or from where it was fired. He makes it clear that he has no precise or real information. His theory is that the Ukrainian government tricked the separatists into firing the missile by launching airstrikes in the area over which the airliner was flying and by sending military jets to the vicinity of the airliner to create the appearance of military aircraft. Reuters quotes Khodakovsky,
“”Even if there was a BUK, and even if the BUK was used, Ukraine did everything to ensure that a civilian aircraft was shot down”
Not knowing the nature of Khodakovsky’s dispute with other commanders or his motivation, it is difficult to assess the validity of his story, but his tale does explain why Ukrainian air control would route the Malaysian airliner over the combat area, a hitherto unexplained decision.
After the sensational part of its story, Reuters seems to back away a bit. Reuters quotes Khodakovsky saying that the separatist movement has different leaders and “our cooperation is somewhat conditional.” Khodakovsky then becomes uncertain as to whether the separatists did or did not have operational BUK missiles.
According to Reuters, Khodakovsky “said none of the BUKs captured from Ukrainian forces were operational.” This implies that Russia provided the working missile to the separatists if such a missile existed.
I find the separatists’ reply convincing. If we have these missiles why do the fools in Kiev send aircraft to bomb us, and why is their bombing so successful? The separatists do have shoulder fired ground to air missiles of the kind that the US supplied to Afghanistan during the Soviet invasion. These missiles are only capable for low flying aircraft. They cannot reach 33,000 feet.
According to Reuters, the reporting of its story was by one person, the writing by a second, and the editing by a third. From my experience in journalism, this means that we don’t know whose story it is, how the story was changed, or what its reliability might be.
We can safely conclude that the obfuscations are just beginning, and like 9 /11 and John F. Kennedy’s assassination, there will be no alternative to individuals forming their own opinion from researching the evidence. The United States government will never come clean, and the British government and presstitute media will never stop telling lies for Washington.
Washington’s bribes and threats can produce whatever story Washington wants. Keep in mind that a totally corrupt White House, over the objections of its own intelligence agencies, sent the Secretary of State to the United Nations to lie to the world about Iraqi weapons of mass production that the White House knew did not exist. The consequences are that millions were killed, maimed, and displaced for no other reason than Washington’s lie and rising instability in the Middle East.
The Obama regime lied on the basis of concocted “evidence” that Assad had used chemical weapons against the Syrian people, thus crossing the “red line” that the White House had drawn, justifying a US military attack on the Syrian people.
The Russian government exposed the fake evidence, and the British Parliament voted down any UK participation in the Obama regime’s attack on Syria. Left isolated, the Obama regime dared not assume the obvious role of war criminal.
Blocked in this way, the Obama regime financed and supplied outside jihadist militants to attack Syria, with the consequence that a radial ISIL is in the process of carving out a new Caliphate from parts of Iraq and Syria.
Keep in mind that both the George W. Bush and Obama regimes have also lied through their teeth about “Iranian nukes.”
The only possible conclusion is that a government that consistently lies is not believable.
Since the corrupt Clinton regime, American journalists have been forced by their bosses to lie for Washington. It is a hopeful sign that in their confrontation with Marie Harf some journalists found a bit of courage. Let’s hope it takes root and grows.
I do not think that the United States can recover from the damage inflicted by the neoconservatives who determined the policies of the Clinton, George W. Bush and Obama governments, but whenever we see signs of opposition to the massive lies and deceptions that define the US government in the 21st century, we should cheer and support those who confront the lies.
Our future, and that of the world, depend on it.
Washington Is Escalating the Orchestrated
Ukrainian “Crisis” to War
Dr. Paul Craig Roberts / Global Research
(July 25, 2014) — Despite the conclusion by US intelligence that there is no evidence of Russian involvement in the destruction of the Malaysian airliner and all lives onboard, Washington is escalating the crisis and shepherding the World toward war.
Twenty-two US senators have introduced into the 113th Congress, Second Session, a bill, S.2277, “To prevent further Russian aggression toward Ukraine and other sovereign states in Europe and Eurasia, and for other purposes.” The bill is before the Committee on Foreign Relations.
Note that prior to any evidence of any Russian aggression, there are already 22 senators lined up in behalf of preventing further Russian aggression.
Accompanying this preparatory propaganda move to create a framework for war, hot or cold with Russia, NATO commander General Philip Breedlove announced his plan for a deployment of massive military means in Eastern Europe that would permit lightening responses against Russia in order to protect Europe from Russian aggression.
There we have it again: Russian Aggression. Repeat it enough and it becomes real.
The existence of “Russian aggression” is assumed, not demonstrated. Neither Breedlove nor the senators make any reference to Russian war plans for an attack on Europe or any other countries.
There are no references to Russian position papers and documents setting forth a Russian expansionist ideology or a belief declared by Moscow that Russians are “exceptional, indispensable people” with the right to exercise hegemony over the world.
No evidence is presented that Russia has infiltrated the communication systems of the entire world for spy purposes. There is no evidence that Putin has Obama’s or Obama’s daughters’ private cell phone conversations or that Russia downloads US corporate secrets for the benefit of Russian businesses.
Nevertheless, the NATO commander and US senators see an urgent need to create blitzkrieg capability for NATO on Russia’s borders.
Senate bill 2277 consists of three titles: “Reinvigorating the NATO Alliance,” “Deterring Further Russian Aggression in Europe,” and “Hardening Ukraine and other European and Eurasian States Against Russian Aggression.” Who do you think wrote this bill? Hint: it wasn’t the senators or their staffs.
Title I deals with strengthening US force posture in Europe and Eurasia and strengthening the NATO alliance, with accelerating the construction of ABM (anti-ballistic missile) bases on Russia’s borders so as to degrade the Russian strategic nuclear deterrent, and to provide more money for Poland and the Baltic states and strengthen US-German cooperation on global security issues, that is, to make certain that the German military is incorporated as part of the US empire military force.
Title II is about confronting “Russian aggression in Europe” with sanctions and with financial and diplomatic “support for Russian democracy and civil society organizations,” which means to pump billions of dollars into NGOs (non-governmental organizations) that can be used to destabilize Russia in the way that Washington used the NGOs it funded in Ukraine to overthrow the elected government.
For 20 years, Russian government negligence permitted Washington to organize fifth columns inside Russia that pose as human rights organizations, etc.
Title III deals with military and intelligence assistance for Ukraine, putting Ukraine, Georgia, and Moldova on a NATO track, expediting US natural gas exports in order to erase European and Eurasian energy dependence on Russia, preventing recognition of Crimea as again a part of Russia, expanding broadcasting (propaganda) into Russian areas, and again “support for democracy and civil society organizations in countries of the former Soviet Union,” which means to use money to subvert the Russian federation.
However you look at this, it comprises a declaration of war. Moreover, these provocative and expensive moves are presented as necessary to counter Russian aggression for which there is no evidence.
How do we characterize a bill that is not merely thoughtless, unnecessary, and dangerous, but also more Orwellian than Orwell? I am open to suggestions.
Ukraine as it currently exists is an ahistorical state with artificial boundaries. Ukraine presently consists of part of what was once a larger entity plus former Russian provinces added to the Ukrainian Soviet Republic by Soviet leaders. When the Soviet Union collapsed and Russia permitted Ukraine’s independence, under US pressure Russia mistakenly permitted Ukraine to take with it the former Russian provinces.
When Washington executed its coup in Kiev last year, the Russophobes who grabbed power began threatening in word and deed the Russian populations in eastern and southern Ukraine. The Crimeans voted to reunite with Russia and were accepted. This reunification was grossly misrepresented by Western propaganda. When other former Russian provinces voted likewise, the Russian government, kowtowing to Western propaganda, did not grant their requests. Instead, Russian president Putin called for Kiev and the former Russian provinces to work out an agreement that would keep the provinces within Ukraine.
Kiev and its Washington master did not listen. Instead, Kiev launched military attacks on the provinces and was conducting bombing attacks on the provinces at the moment the Malaysian airliner was downed.
Washington and its European vassals have consistently misrepresented the situation in Ukraine and denied their responsibility for the violence, instead placing all blame on Russia. But it is not Russia that is conducting bombing raids and attacking provinces with troops, tanks, and artillery. Just as Israel’s current military assault against Palestinian civilians fails to evoke criticism from Washington, European governments, and the Western media, Kiev’s assault on the former Russian provinces goes unreported and uncriticized. Indeed, it appears that few Americans are even aware that Kiev is attacking civilian areas of the provinces that wish to return to their mother country.
Sanctions should be imposed on Kiev, from which the military violence originates. Instead, Kiev is receiving financial and military support, and sanctions are placed on Russia which is not militarily involved in the situation.
When the outbreak of violence against the former Russian provinces began, the Russian Duma voted Putin the power to intervene militarily. Instead of using this power, Putin requested that the Duma rescind the power, which the Duma did. Putin preferred to deal with the problem diplomatically in a reasonable and unprovocative manner.
Putin has received neither respect nor appreciation for encouraging a non-violent resolution of the unfortunate Ukrainian situation created by Washington’s coup against a democratically elected government that was only months away from a chance to elect a different government.
The sanctions that Washington has applied and that Washington is pressuring its European puppets to join send the wrong information to Kiev. It tells Kiev that the West approves and encourages Kiev’s determination to resolve its differences with the former Russian provinces with violence rather than with negotiation.
This means war will continue, and that is clearly Washington’s intent. The latest reports are that US military advisors will soon be in Ukraine to aid the conquest of the former Russian provinces that are in revolt.
The presstitute nature of the Western media ensures that the bulk of the American and European populations will remain in the grip of Washington’s anti-Russian propaganda.
At some point the Russian government will have to face the fact that it doesn’t have “Western partners.” Russia has Western enemies who are being organized to isolate Russia, to injure Russia economically and diplomatically, to surround Russia militarily, to destabilize Russia by calling the American-funded NGOs into the streets, and in the absence of a coup that installs an American puppet in Moscow to attack Russia with nuclear weapons.
I respect Putin’s reliance on diplomacy and good will in the place of force. The problem with Putin’s approach is that Washington has no good will, so there is no reciprocity.
Washington has an agenda. Europe consists of captive nations, and these nations are without leaders capable of breaking free of Washington’s agenda.
I hope that I am wrong, but I think Putin has miscalculated. If Putin had accepted the former Russian provinces requests to reunite with Russia, the conflict in Ukraine would be over. I am certain that Europe would not have joined Washington in any invasion with the purpose of recovering for Ukraine former provinces of Russia herself. When Washington says that Putin is responsible for downing the Malaysian airliner, Washington is correct in a way that Washington doesn’t suspect. Had Putin completed the task begun with Crimea and reunited the Russian provinces with Russia, there would have been no war during which an airliner could have been downed, whether by accident or as a plot to demonize Russia. Ukraine has no capability of confronting Russia militarily and had no alternative to accepting the reunification of the Russian territories.
Europe would have witnessed a decisive Russian decision and would have put a great distance between itself and Washington’s provocative agenda. This European response would have precluded Washington’s ability to gradually escalate the crisis by gradually turning the temperature higher without the European frog jumping out of the pot.
In its dealings with Washington Europe has grown accustomed to the efficacy of bribes, threats, and coercion. Captive nations are inured to diplomacy’s impotence. Europeans see diplomacy as the weak card played by the weak party. And, of course, all the Europeans want money, which Washington prints with abandon.
Russia and China are disadvantaged in their conflict with Washington. Russia and China have emerged from tyranny. People in both countries were influenced by American cold war propaganda. Both countries have educated people who think that America has freedom, democracy, justice, civil liberty, economic wellbeing and is a welcoming friend of other countries that want the same thing.
This is a dangerous delusion. Washington has an agenda. Washington has put in place a police state to suppress its own population, and Washington believes that history has conveyed the right to Washington to exercise hegemony over the world. Last year President Obama declared to the world that he sincerely believes that America is the exceptional nation on whose leadership the world depends.
In other words, all other countries and peoples are unexceptional. Their voices are unimportant. Their aspirations are best served by Washington’s leadership. Those who disagree–Russia, China, Iran, and the new entity ISIL–are regarded by Washington as obstacles to history’s purpose. Anything, whether an idea or a country, that is in the way of Washington is in the way of History’s Purpose and must be run over.
In the late 18th and early 19th centuries Europe faced the determination of the French Revolution to impose Liberty, Equality, Fraternity upon Europe. Today Washington’s ambition is larger. The ambition is to impose Washington’s hegemony on the entire world.
Unless Russia and China submit, this means war.
Collapse of Ukraine Government:
Prime Minister Yatsenyuk Resigns amidst Pressures Exerted by the IMF
Prof. Michel Chossudovsky / Global Research
(July 24, 2014) — Ukraine’s Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk announced his resignation in the Rada (Parliament) and that of the entire Cabinet on Thursday, July 24. This decision was taken following the withdrawal of two parties from the coalition government and the non-adoption of two important pieces of legislation, which had been demanded by the International Monetary Fund (IMF)
“I announce my resignation after the collapse of the coalition and the blocking of government initiatives . . .
“In connection with the breakup of the parliamentary coalition, as well as non-adoption of a number of important bills, I announce my resignation.”
The resignation of the Prime Minister signifies the collapse of the government and the resignation of the entire cabinet.
“But the cabinet members will continue fulfilling their duties until a new coalition is formed in the Rada.”
On July 24th, the Rada failed to support the government’s bill pertaining to the 2014 budget sequestration, which had been demanded by the IMF on behalf of Kiev’s external creditors. The disbursement by the IMF of the “Second Tranche” of a 17 billion dollar policy based loan was conditional upon the prior adoption of this legislation.
“The parliament must adopt amendments to the state budget needed to finance our army and also documents needed for cooperation with international financial institutions.[e.g. IMF, World Bank, EBRD]” said PM Yatsenyuk. (emphasis added)
The entire country is in an impasse. No money will be forthcoming from the IMF until this legislation is adopted. In the meantime, Ukraine remains on the blacklist of its external creditors.
Moreover, a controversial draft law on reforming the country’s gas transportation system was rejected (Itar-Tass, July 24, 2014).
Both bills were tied into the government’s negotiations with both the EU and the IMF.
What Happens Next?
The national economy is in crisis, the political structures of the country are in total disarray, all of which is occurring in the immediate wake of the Malaysian Airlines MH17 crash in Eastern Ukraine.
The two parties which left the coalition are The Neo-Nazi Svoboda party and the Centre Right Ukraine Democratic Alliance for Reform (UDAR) Party led by former champion boxer Vitali Klitschko.
President Poroshenko has intimated that the resignation of the cabinet has paved the way for a process of meaningful political restructuring: “Society wants a full reset of state authorities,” said Mr Poroshenko.
What is implied by Poroshenko’s statement is that the parliamentary process is slated to become defunct inasmuch as Rada is obligated to adopt the legislation demanded by the IMF and the European Union. And if the Rada does not adopt the legislation, the composition of the Parliament will be changed through a process of outright political manipulation.
The 2014 budget project demanded by the IMF includes massive cuts in social spending coupled with increased allocations to the Armed Forces. Its adoption will contribute (virtually overnight) to a further process of the impoverishment of the Ukraine population.
The speaker of the Rada, Mr. Oleksandr Turchynov confirmed that the Ukraine Democratic Alliance for Reform (UDAR) and Svoboda (Freedom) would be invited to propose a candidate to occupy the post of interim Prime Minister.
So much for democracy: the leader of a Neo-Nazi formation Oleh Tyahnybok (Image right) will play a key role in the appointment of an interim Prime Minister to replace Mr. Yatsenyuk.
Parliamentary elections will only occur if the Rada fails to forge a new coalition government within the next 30 days:
The breakup of the coalition “was probably agreed on by political parties seeking elections and the president,” Yuriy Yakymenko, the head of political research at Kiev’s Razumkov Center, a non-governmental policy group, said by phone.
“Withdrawals from the coalition should not paralyze the parliament’s work,” Poroshenko said before Yatsenyuk announced his resignation.” (Business Week, July 24, 2014
Yatsenyuk intimated in his resignation speech that the State was bankrupt and that failure to abide by IMF demands would create social chaos:
“The fact is that today you failed to vote for the laws, and I have nothing (with which) to pay wages of policemen, doctors, teachers; nothing to buy a rifle with, nothing to fuel an armored personnel carrier with. Today you failed to take a decision to fill the gas storages to allow us to live through the winter, to at last free ourselves from dependence on Russian gas,” (Rada, July 24, 2014)
The IMF Program and the Interim Government
In the days following the Ukraine coup d’Etat of February 23, which led to the ousting of the duly elected president, Wall Street and the IMF–in liaison with the US Treasury and the European Commission in Brussels– had already set the stage for the imposition of the IMF’s “strong economic medicine”.
Following the installation of the interim coalition government, Prime Minister Arseny Yatsenyuk dismissed the need to even negotiate with the IMF. He called for an an unconditional acceptance of IMF shock therapy:
“We have no other choice but to accept the IMF offer”.
Yatsenyuk intimated that Ukraine will “accept whatever offer the IMF and the EU made” (voice of russia.com March 21, 2014, emphasis added)
In surrendering to the IMF at the outset of the interim government in March 2014, Yatsenyuk was fully aware that the proposed IMF-World Bank macro-economic reforms would brutally impoverish millions of people, including those who protested in Maidan against the Yanukovitch government.
The adoption of the more ruthless components of the IMF’s economic package requiring supportive legislation had been delayed until after the May 25 elections.
Cracking Down on the Party of Regions and the Communist Party
Meanwhile, the government is cracking down on the Ukraine Communist Party which is now illegal as well as on the Party of Regions, both of which were firmly opposed to the IMF policy reforms.
Ukraine as An Ally without NATO Status
In turn, the Ministry of Defense has raised the issue of direct US military support in the military campaign in Eastern Ukraine, where the Donbass militia have repealed the forces of the Kiev regime.
“The current situation testifies to clear Russian interference in Ukraine and its military support to terrorist groups active in Ukraine’s eastern regions. . . Right now, Ukraine’s armed forces need international support more than ever before”, said Deputy Defense Ihor Kabanenko to David Baldwin, commander of the California National Guard. (Kiev Post, July 24, 2014)
Commander Baldwin was in Kiev for high level consultations with the Ministry of Defense. In the course of his meetings with DeputyDefense Minister Ihor Kabanenko, Baldwin announced on behalf of the US government that:
“The United States of America is considering the possibility of granting Ukraine the status of an ally without membership in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO).
. . . Baldwin said that the American side highly appreciates its cooperation with the Armed Forces of Ukraine and that it is ready to provide comprehensive support to them.
He stressed that a draft law on prevention of Russian aggression, adoption of which will allow Ukraine to obtain the status of an ally of the United States without NATO membership, is currently under consideration by the United States government.
. . . President Petro Poroshenko has asked the United States Congress to declare the self-proclaimed “People’s Republic of Luhansk” and “People’s Republic of Donetsk” as terrorist organizations and declare their members as terrorists.
Poroshenko believes that when sanctions are not working, there are grounds for appeal to the United States Congress to grant Ukraine the special status of a major ally outside NATO (like Israel, Australia, and the Philippines) to enable it to solve its security problems. (Ukrainian News, July 24, 2014, emphasis added)
The granting of the “status of ally outside NATO” would set the stage for the possible deployment of US and NATO forces inside Ukraine in the context of joint military operations with the Ukraine Armed Forces and National Guard.
Posted in accordance with Title 17, Section 107, US Code, for noncommercial, educational purposes.
