Tag: United States

Whosoever arises by a lie will fall by the truth

write this piece with all intentions of dealing with the border crisis in the United States. However, I am compelled to return to Ukraine for I hear the loudening drums, and these drums beat nothing save war.

The covers of most major American magazines feature ominous pictures of Russian President Putin will even more ominous headlines appearing under the masthead declaring him an international pariah, the rogue leader of a rogue nation. I just witnessed a horrid television interview of a former American ambassador to the Ukraine, advocating the incision of an armed international force into eastern Ukraine ostensibly to secure the MH17 crash site. This preposterous notion would surely turn the Ukrainian civil war into an international one and yet was not brazen enough for the envoy. The former diplomat argued that tougher economic sanctions against Russia were inadequate. Blaming every wrong thing and every drop of blood in Ukraine on Russia, the man called for an international military coalition to war against Russia.

The irony that this mongering for the third pan-European conflagration in a century came from a man currently holding a senior position in an organisation bearing the title, “Institute for Peace” seemed not to dawn on the CNN hirelings interviewing him. Perhaps their blindness was because CNN’s parent company had just published a Time magazine edition branding Russia and its leader as pariahs.  Consequently, these reporters never questioned the conclusion that Putin and the Ukrainian rebels were culpable for the plane’s downing. For people so obsessed with assuring that no nation challenge America’s global expansionism a great and dangerous transformation has come over them. They now find, in war, the solace the normal heart finds in peace. They long for a world where there is no disagreement and no enemies. This world will not materialise because of the high wisdom of their ways or rule. They seek to accomplish this world by blowing up enough countries that they will be left with no more enemies to face.

The tragedy’s most likely explanation is the rebels downed the plane, mistaking it for a Ukrainian army transport plane. While this is the most plausible and least sinister explanation, it does not make this positive.  Evidence adduced, thus far, is inconclusive as to the identity of the wrongdoer, let alone the motives behind the act. Thus, the chorus of Western officials and corporate media figureheads ascribing the act and the most heinous motives to Russia and the rebels does compound disservice to the pursuit of truth and peace at a time when both are most needed.

Putative presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, trying to spark life into her sagging public persona after a lackluster book tour and several verbal gaffes about the extent of her family’s wealth, has taken to the interview circuit, launching her own fulsome projectiles at Putin. She paints Putin as a war merchant who bears full responsibility for the aerial calamity. Her reasoning for pinning the devil’s tail on the Russian leader is as superficial as were her reasons for backing the Iraqi war.  Because Putin has not lashed himself to the American juggernaut, he is an evil tumescent that must be excised.

As a reward for such crudity of thought on such complex things, the Anglo-American corporate media has bestowed to her a secular halo; but that false diadem cannot wash the blood from her hands. Comparing their records over the past decade, Clinton looms as an undisciplined hustler for war and the expansion of American power beyond the limits of global peace and historic propriety. Next to the Clintonian war lust, Putin stands as a model of the restraint that old world Realpolitik commands from its disciples.

He may be cold and hard; however, his military exertions have been limited to his own territory (Chechnya) or its borders (Georgia and Ukraine). Regarding Georgia and Ukraine, he has adhered to what was Russia’s traditional defensive posture even before the doomed Napoleonic invasion. Russian has always sought a line of neutral, if not servile, states as a buffer protecting it from encroachment from superior Western European military technology and power. That Western leaders feign shock at Putin neither means they are disingenuous or are so grossly ignorant of history that they should forfeit office before plunging the world into a war that the scantest respect for history would have caused them to avoid.

Meanwhile, Clinton has lent full-throttle, zealous support to every needless misadventure America has entered since she happened upon the public scene. As senator, she endorsed the fraud in Iraq. As Secretary of State, she led the hawks in the Administration into convincing President Obama that bombing Libya into ruination was a humanitarian imperative. The fallacy of that logic has become painful obvious even to America. This weekend, Washington evacuated its embassy staff from the maelstrom its belligerency created. After retiring, she joined league with those pushing for America to war against Syria. However, plaintive cries from Clinton and others about the Sarin gas episode are heard no longer. The shouting has subsided because the truth leaked in bits and pieces proved awkward for Clinton and her ilk. The Sarin gas attack most likely was hatched by American allies seeking to bring America into the conflict. It did not come from Assad, apparently.

However, there is no word of apology from Clinton and the American establishment and no sign of introspection at the near fallacy of rushing into war. Instead, theirs was a mad dash to the next crisis. This time Ukraine, and, this time, Russia must be taught a lesson for navigating a foreign policy that did not render it a vassal to American interests.

Thus, the Anglo-American media has launched an unfettered propaganda war against Russia and the eastern Ukrainian dissidents for downing MH17. Rarely has such a weighty conclusion been globally published based on so little evidence. There was more incriminating evidence against Saddam than against Putin at this stage. We all know how that earlier farce turned out.

The priests of war have gathered at their highest altars, preparing to sacrifice truth so that the clouds of war might once more gather over Eastern Europe. This ground has seen too much war and blood over the centuries.  If possible, it should be allowed to recover and see no more. Before we led to a hasty conclusion that might march us into war, the facts should be carefully examined.

Thus far, the major evidence of rebel and Russian culpability is based on the faulty logic that since the Russians have the Buk missile system and the plane was likely downed by a Buk, then the Russians or their rebel allies caused it. What the media conveniently forgets to add is that the Soviets not the Russians manufactured the Buk.  The system was stationed in every part of the former USSR. When the USSR fractured, Buk systems were inherited by the new nations. Ukraine was one of them. Thus, forces loyal to Kiev could have downed the plain with one of their launchers. They had the means and the motive.

Downing the plane and blaming it on the rebels, Kiev could exploit the resultant international firestorm by seeking to place greater pressure on Russia to jettison its support for the rebels. Conversely, there was no advantage the rebels would gain by willfully targeting the aircraft.

Days after the attack, Western media was flush with pictures of a Buk missile launcher purportedly being swiftly moved to Russia. This was alleged literally to be the “smoking gun,” the exact instrument that shot the deadly projectile. There may be something very wrong with the picture. According to the rebels and Russia, the city in which the picture was taken was under Kiev’s control.  If so, then unless the Ukrainian military is apt to give free passage to enemy heavy armaments, the pictured Buk system belonged to the government, not Russia, not the rebels.  If this were to be the smoking gun, the gun may fit the holster of the Ukrainian government.

Even President Obama’s verbal formulation that the missile was fired from within territory controlled by the rebels is vague.  Donetsk is the seat of the rebel administration, yet Donetsk currently undergoes such heavy shelling by government artillery that people hurriedly flee, carrying as much as their frightened arms and their vehicles can tote. Donetsk is under rebel control but areas near it, which the Donetsk rebels claim as their own, are effectively in the hands of advancing  troops and their artillery batteries, the modern–day battering ram.  A parcel of land may be “within rebel territory” but actually in the hands of government forces aided by heavy weapons such as artillery and Buk missile ensembles.

A senior Ukrainian government military figure added greater doubt regarding the identity of the culprit with his unusually frank admission that the rebels’ Buk launcher did not have the requisite radar complement. This means the rebels could not accurately get a radar lock on to a plane flying at high altitude. For the rebels to shoot down a plane flying over 30,000 feet would be an uncommon stroke of ill fate.  Conversely, Ukrainian missile batteries feature the missing radar component.

Then there is the alleged taped transcript of rebel commanders gloating over the plane’s downing. There is good reason the tape is no longer being touted as evidence.  Several forensic experts have found it to be fabrication, a cut-and-paste job hastily assembled from prior conversations of rebel commanders. This trick is the latest in a line of misinformation operations by Kiev such as the fake decree purportedly issued by the rebels obligating Jews to specially register with the rebel administration.

Perhaps, the information that advises extreme caution comes from the small minority of American journalists and government whistleblowers courageous enough to refuse joining the throaty, vociferous procession to war. Robert Parry, a respected investigative reporter who helped uncover the Iran-Contra scandal in the 1980’s, reports an American intelligence source stating that official satellite imagery suggests the missile was fired by the Ukrainian army. Perhaps this revelation is one reason the American government has refused to acknowledge, let alone publish, satellite imagery although it was an open secret that American satellites continuously monitor the Ukrainian theater.

Plying a soft retreat from the harsh rhetoric of war and unsubstantiated conclusions of Russian wrongdoing, a leading American newspaper let slip toward the end of an article that an American intelligence source indicated a “defector” from the Ukrainian army fired the missile. That a single person set the launch is rather a clumsy explanation to digest, like a mouse trying to swallow and elephant’s leg. Moreover, a true defector would not control such a vital piece of hardware. Apparently, some American intelligence sources believe the missile emanated from a Ukrainian army vehicle; they seek to levy the blame at some mysterious, disgruntled soldier to detract the onus from the Kiev government itself. How convenient. Bias still infects them. Thus, they seem willing to lie to again cover the lie soon to be exposed.

Another mystery is the flight path of the ill-destined plane.  Western media reported the plane took this dangerous route to save fuel. This is a canard. Ukrainian air traffic control diverted the plane from its usually path, sending it northward over the war zone and toward its encounter with catastrophe. The Kiev government says the plane was diverted because of bad weather. Yet, if the choice were between thunderstorms and flying over a war zone, dodging a bit of rain would be preferable to dodging an armed projectile.

This official explanation does not hold water. An Air India plane was flying minutes behind MH17. The Indian pilots report hearing Ukrainian traffic controllers divert the Malaysian craft to hostile territory.  If due to foul weather, the Indian plane should have received the same command since they were on the same route. The weather could not have been foul for one but not the other.

Adding to this mystery is the fact that Ukrainian security services rushed to the Kiev airport immediately after the downing, confiscating all traffic control recordings and heretofore has not release any of them.

Here, I apologize to Malaysian airlines. I initially fell victim to the media’s misinformation about the airline flying this route to shave fuel costs. The media shaved the truth and used the airline as a convenient fall guy to present a false narrative about why the plane was where it reasonably should never have been. Malaysian Airlines was not as callous as I stated last week.

It may have been a tool in a lethal deception.

The dark badge of callousness instead goes to Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu. While he plays no discernible role in Ukraine, he took advantage of the air tragedy to advance his incarnadine schemes. Upon learning the plane went down, Netanyahu unleashed his ground assault on Gaza. He did so knowing corporate media would focus its ire and outrage on Russia and the Ukrainian rebels. This would divert criticism and attention from his brutal policy. While MH17’s downing seems the product of error, what Israel has done is premeditated cruelty. The Israeli claim of provocation rings empty. The Palestinian’s military efforts have been futile and relatively harmless. The Israeli assault is highly disproportionate to danger faced. This has been willful slaughter, decimating more innocent civilians than purported Hamas members, decimating almost three times more people than the MH17 disaster.

It seems Israeli policy has disintegrated to the point where the only good Palestinian is a dead or a fleeing one.

Back to Ukraine.

Much hangs on which side downed the plane.  This means the truth will likely never be known. Again, that the rebels committed this as a tragic error is most likely explanation. However, there is enough doubt and countervailing information to make one pause. A prudent person would withhold judgment. Moreover, judgment about the propriety of the wider conflict — the civil war between the government and the rebels – should be made independent of culpability for the aerial tragedy.

In that case, one must weigh whether the rebels have a right to contest the writ of the government in Kiev just as the leaders of that government recently contested against and ousted the elected Yanukovych government.  Given the wider international  context of the war, one has to judge whether the West’s policy of extending EU/NATO to Russia’s westernmost borders is an excellent innovation that will promote security and prosperity or is it a guise to isolate and weaken an increasingly strong and independent Russia.  The West is racing against time and thus must exploit the uncertainty around this incident to compel Russia to brake its support for the rebels. In a few months, the summer and autumn will cede to winter. If the weather turns bitter cold and snowy, the military activity will subside, allowing the rebels to more firmly secure their hold on what they currently possess. Also, Europe will be in dire need of Russian gas and thus will have no stomach for imposing greater sanctions on the supplier of such a valued and timely commodity.

In other words, one must decide whether Putin behaves like a relic in his adherence to traditional Russian policy and Realpolitik or has he positioned himself on the tip of a needle as a strategist. Is he trying to balance the need to avoid a conflagration that might engulf an entire continent with his desire to establish his nation as a power at the center of an international alignment challenging the global hegemony of American power?  He and the Chinese had hoped to make the challenge via reform of the global economic system. However, his refusal to side with America on geopolitical issues such as Syria, Iran and European missile systems has brought war to his border’s edge.

He has proven himself to be the best geopolitical strategist among those now operating in the European theater. This includes the Americans. However, his craftiness may not be enough to overcome the more powerful West’s preference for larger battle. If not, we may be on a slide toward a war that would have been incomprehensible merely ten years ago. Peace is in jeopardy. Pray that it endures. Cherish it while it lasts.

Once again, I failed to address the American border crisis. I surely will cure this omission next week.

08060340825 sms only