Sunday, July 12, 2015

2015-07-12 Cold War 2.0 - the propaganda wars - MH17

  • 2015-07-12 Cold War 2.0 - the propaganda wars - MH17
    After publishing false, fake intelligence data, claiming Russian accountability for the downing of MH17, the international "investigation Committee" signed a secret confidentiality agreement. The aim is probably to cover up pro-US, Ukrainian accountability for the case.
    A memorial service in honor of the MH17 flight victims has been held in Kuala Lumpur, marking almost a year since the tragedy. The Malaysian PM asked for “the...

  • Joseph Zernik 2015-01-17 Dutch MH17 Investigation Omits US "Intel"
    Author: Tony Cartalucci Region: Ukraine in the world
    The absence of America's so-called "intelligence" regarding the downing of Malaysia Airlines MH17 over Ukraine in a 34 page Dutch Safety Board preliminary report raises serious questions about the credibility and legitimacy of both America's political agenda, and all agencies, organizations, and political parties currently behind it. The report titled, "Preliminary Report: Crash involving Malaysia Airlines Boeing 777-200 flight MH17" (.pdf), cites a wide variety of evidence in its attempt to determine the cause of flight MH17's crash and to prevent similar accidents or incidents from occurring again in the future. Among this evidence includes the cockpit voice recorder (CVR), the flight data recorder (FDR), analysis of recorded air traffic control (ATC) surveillance data and radio communication, analysis of the -Сontinue reading...
    The absence of America's so-called

  • Joseph Zernik 2015-04-09 Cold War 2.0 - propaganda wars - Reuters falsified eye witnesses reports on MH17 downing
    [via Anonymous Berlin]
    The downing of MH17 is a key issue in the propaganda wars and the efforts to escalate the war against Russia.
    The evidence shows that MH17 was most likely downed by US-backed, Kiev forces.
    Moreover, the the fourt nations, who are members of the international, Hague-based, investigation committee, which includes Ukraine (the main suspect), secretly signed a veto/non-disclosure agreement, regarding results of the investigation.
    Russia pushed into the shoes: the US News Agency of Reuters forged statements from eyewitnesses on the launch of MH17! Reuters, one of the largest international news agencies, has massively distorted testimony to MH17. Witness the crash of MH17 from the Lugansk region Ukrainian told RT that his interview to the crash of the Malaysian airline MH17 exactly in the opposite has turned Reuters. So, his statement that he a rocket from the area of the Ukrainian army had see Ascend was portrayed by Reuters that the missile from the "rebel territory" came. Reuters did not respond to requests from RT so far.[1]
    In the context of a report on the causes of the crash of MH17 in the Eastern Ukraine, the British news agency of Reuters conducted an interview with the foresightedness Piotr Fedotov from the village Tscherwoni of Schoiten in the region Luganks. This should have observed according to Reuters, as a ground-to air missile allegedly being fired from positions of pro Russian self-defense forces on the Malaysian airliner.
    News Agency wrote in its report:
    [...] In an interview with Reuters said Fedotov, who described the 'shaking' the rocket first towards the camera, that fired the missile from the territory of the Ukrainian army. Later, behind the camera, he acknowledged, the rocket was launched from a nearby rebel territory. On the question of why he originally claimed the opposite, saying that he had fear of the rebels. [...]
    Meanwhile, RT with Fedotov said. This however explained in an interview that Reuters correspondent Anton Zwerew in any way accurately worked in his report on the joint meeting.
    The witness told RT literally:
    [...] When we talked on camera about the Boeing, I explained, everything as it was. The things that I supposedly said when the camera was turned off, were invented by the journalists. It is all a lie. When the camera was, we talked at any time about the Boeing. [...]
    He added that the Reuters journalist contacted him but after the interview, but never put forward a draft of the article to check him. Instead, Fedotov was asked whether he did get in trouble after the interview:
    [...] The journalist called me and asked if I was in trouble. I was really surprised. Why should I be get in trouble, where I said only the truth? Then, but my friends told me that I told different things according to the article, as the camera was and when she was on. There I understood why he asked me if I was in trouble. [...]
    » So it's pure imagination by the journalist or he did it to their advantage,"he added.
    So far, the London-based news agency was not answered a request from RT to Reuters on the controversial interview with Fedotov.
    The Malaysian passenger plane MH17, a Boeing 777, crashed last year apparently on July 17 after a hit with a still unidentified high-energy projectile. All 298 passengers of the plane were killed. The culprit in the crash was immediately clear for the political leadership in Kiev and a large of Western States. You accused directly the East-Ukrainian self defense units as well Russia until today, without to present hard evidence.
    Dear bloggers and Internet users. Please share this post restated in the Internet, in forums and blogs, and of course on VKontakte, Facebook and Twitter. Right now, it is important that we can not fool us the German lies press and establish a reasonable counter public.

  • Joseph Zernik Flight MH17: Dutch government answers to Parliament
    Geplaatst op 07/11/2014
    Letter of 27 October 2014 from the Minister of Security and Justice, the Minister of Foreign Affairs and the Minister of Defence to the House of Representatives answering questions relating to the MH17 air disaster
    Attached to this letter are the government’s answers to the questions put to it by the Permanent Committee on Foreign Affairs at its meeting of 15 October on the disaster involving Malaysia Airlines flight MH17. These answers will serve as input for the government’s upcoming follow-up meeting with the Committee.
    Question 5:
    Non-disclosure. Is it possible to rule out one of the countries disclosing details of the investigation into the circumstances into the crash or the criminal investigation?
    Answer 5:
    The Dutch Safety Board is leading the international investigation into the circumstances of the crash of flight MH17 and will decide what is ultimately made public. The investigation is being conducted in accordance with the Convention on International Civil Aviation. Therefore, only the Dutch Safety Board’s final report is decisive. None of the countries can veto the final conclusions, which are for the Dutch Safety Board to determine.
    In the criminal investigation, the countries involved in the Joint Investigation Team (JIT) have entered into a partnership with the aim of uncovering the truth. They have agreed to work together and to exercise restraint with regard to the disclosure of information about the investigation. The government has no reason whatsoever to believe that the authorities in any of the countries affected is failing to honour these commitments. There is a great willingness to work together.
    Question 8:
    Do the investigators possess satellite data for the period from 10 minutes before to 10 minutes after the crash?
    Answer 8:
    It is desirable that the Public Prosecution Service obtain additional material from the USA for the purpose of the criminal investigation. This is a lengthy process because passing on intelligence information to the criminal justice authorities involves legal complications arising from US legislation. The Public Prosecution Service has every confidence that it will obtain the relevant material in a timely manner.
    The government will not at present be making any further disclosures of what specific and detailed information it possesses. In accordance with usual practice, all sources that could help establish the facts in a criminal investigation are being utilised. The Public Prosecution Service must be allowed to assess and determine in confidence what information is usable as evidence. Moreover, the Netherlands is leading the international investigation into the circumstances of the crash. This makes the need to act with due care all the more pressing. Publishing details of intelligence sources now would only further fuel speculation and would be inappropriate in light of the Netherlands’ leading role in the criminal investigation. The same concerns apply to the publication of information from the Dutch Safety Board’s investigation into the circumstances of the crash. It is up to the Dutch Safety Board and the Public Prosecution Service to draw conclusions in due course. This is a process which demands time and care (see also the answer to question 2).
    However, the Public Prosecution Service will, in the period ahead, depart from its usual practice in ongoing investigations by giving information at various stages in the process about how it is progressing, in so far as this is not detrimental to the investigation. This approach is being adopted because of the great importance of this international investigation and the next of kin’s need for information.
    Letter of 27 October 2014 from the Minister of Security...

No comments: