Post K. Updates and Supplementary to Main Posts A to J

            For an index to earlier main posts search ‘Inpost’

14/8/16                                                                                                                                                                                     Eastgate Villa – The End of the Affair                                                                                                                Links

Ta Pedia tou Pirea from Never on Sunday

The whole film is there if you fancy it.

Yialo, Yialo                                                                                                                                        The most traditional performance is that in the clip fromThe Guns of Navrone from 1.45

Sto Periagli                                                                                                                              With Greek scenery background

The original singer with English subtitles

Im Chambre Séparée – English Subs

Zorba – The Original

A YouTube search will find you many more, but I prefer the original.


                           Truthful, Balanced, Impartial, Dispassionate???                                                                                                 Dream On                                                                             UK Media’s Scurrilous MH17 Reporting

An open email to the following sent 10/8/2016:                                                                      Daily Telegraph, The Guardian, The Times, The Independent, The NewStatesman, The Economist, The Spectator, BBC Newswatch, BBC Newsnight, Channel 4 News, Financial Times, Time Magazine, Newsweek, Der Spiegel, Private Eye, The Week, Washington Post, New York Times, Izvestia, New Internationalist,  Associated Press

“How quietly the second anniversary of the MH17 crash has passed, and yet over the past eighteen months the Dutch investigating authorities have published two documents vitally important to an understanding of that tragedy which should have been of interest.

On 8/4/2015 the General Intelligence and Security Service of the Netherlands (AIVD) and the Dutch Military Intelligence and Security Service (MIVD) published an English edition of its Review Report Arising from the Crash of Flight MH17.*

On 19/4/2016 in a letter** headed Criminal Investigation MH17 the coordinator of the Dutch JIT wrote to the relatives of those killed in the tragedy.

Both documents (links below) come from sources of unimpeachable integrity and competence and yet despite the major importance of their contents neither appears to have come to the attention of the mainstream media. There certainly seems to have been no significant coverage.

In brief the two documents state:

That there is no evidence to indicate that the Russian Separatists possessed an operational, powerful anti-aircraft system such as a BUK system, prior to the crash of flight MH17.

That only the Ukrainian (Kiev) armed forces possessed operational BUK systems of which a number were located in the east.

That there is no evidence indicating that the Russians supplied the Separatists with BUK systems, nor was there any evidence to indicate that they were being trained to use such systems.

That the Ukrainian Minister of Foreign Affairs, Klimkin stated that the separatists did not possess BUK type systems.

That there is no evidence to indicate that the Separatists had the capacity to hit civil aeroplanes at cruising altitude.

That General Breedlove (SACEUR) stated 30 June 2014 that the Americans had not yet observed any vehicle-borne air defence systems being transported across the border to Ukraine.

That there is no video footage available of the launch or trajectory of the missile.

That in arriving at the above conclusions the DISS have had access to U.S. state secret data generated by their own security forces.

That five billion web pages and more than half a million images and audio were examined in the course of the investigation in which Cyber specialists of the JIT played an important role.

Of the amateur investigation collective Bellingcat whose views receive so much media attention the document states:                                                                                                             That many of the sources which Bellingcat relies on were known to the JIT, and that in addition, the research team has more and other information on this subject, which is not mentioned by Bellingcat.                                                                                                                   That insofar as Bellingcat has offered new sources they are examined and assessed.          Of the Bellingcat draft report of 26/12/2015 to the JIT the document notes that the report has been gathered using social media and other public Internet sources, including information about members of a Russian military unit with, according to Bellingcat, a possible BUK-missile system in Ukraine, but that no evidence of direct involvement of individual members of the unit at the shooting of MH17 follows from the Bellingcat report.

Or to put all of the above more succinctly:

The Netherlands’ Military Intelligence and Security Service (MIVD) have concluded that the only anti-aircraft weapons in eastern Ukraine capable of bringing down MH-17 at 33,000 feet belonged to the Ukrainian government, not the ethnic Russian rebels. 

In view of the immense interest shown by the public in this tragedy and by way of endorsing the reputation of the British Media for balanced, impartial and dispassionate reporting you will I am sure wish to publish the truth as it is now seen by the Dutch investigating authorities in as prominent a way as the banner headlines and blanket coverage given to the false accusations, ill-informed speculation and unproven allegations that were carried throughout the media in the immediate aftermath of the tragedy.


**          It may take some time to load, but it will come –  look bottom left of screen

Perhaps  Newsnight’s expert Sir Anthony Russell “Tony” Brenton KCMG might return to offer a corrective to the extraordinary and outrageous ‘expert’ views he expressed on the programme within eight hours of the crash which have proved to be wrong in so many respects that I forbear to list them, but would willingly do so if required.##

For information, the following communication was sent today to:                                       Daily Telegraph, The Guardian, The Times, The Independent, The NewStatesman, The Economist, The Spectator, BBC Newswatch, BBC Newsnight, Channel 4 News, Financial Times, Time Magazine, Newsweek, Der Spiegel, Private Eye, The Week, Washington Post, New York Times, Izvestia, New Internationalist,                                                                                   My thanks to Matt Lee for his excellent contributions at the White House briefings.#

The above sent to all major UK media outlets and selected foreign outlets.”


## This paragraph to BBC only.

# This paragraph included only in email to Associated Press

Note: The Sir Anthony Russell “Tony” Brenton KCMG referred to above was at one time our ambassador in Moscow – God help us.


                                                      Russian Doping Scandal                                                                                              Notes on the WADA/McLaren Fit-up                                    Oooops Sorry, Investigation

Just for starters. Evidence? Don’t be naive.

McLaren in interview verbatim:                                                                                                         “We haven’t published it, but we certainly have it, but we’re not going to publish it because of the need to protect the sources that provided the information and their concerns about what might happen to family members.”

McLaren says that he has ‘electronic data’ (can one get much vaguer than that?). Well if he has emails that implicate a Deputy Minister at the Ministry of Sport he should put up or shut up. In the absence of evidence these are mere allegations.

When McLaren is criticised for failing to identify any specific athlete who was engaged in violation, he replies that the goal of the investigation was never to identify specific individuals.                                                                                                                                        This is a lie.                                                                                                                                     Para iii of the mandate’s ‘Objectives/Key Activities’ was ‘to identify any athlete that might have benefited from those alleged manipulations to conceal positive doping test.’   McLaren signally fails to do this.

No opinion or comment was sought from the Russian authorities.                                               The report states:                                                                                                                               The IP did not seek to interview persons living within the Russian Federation. This includes government officials.                                                                                               McLaren in an interview said verbatim:                                                                                            ‘I did not make contact with them nor did they come forward to offer anything to me. I made the decision that within the 57 days I had to do my work I did not have the time and they didn’t seem to have the interest.’                                                               Another lie.                                                                                                                                         At page 22 of the report he writes,                                                                                                    ‘I also received, unsolicited, an extensive narrative with attachments from one important government representative described in this report.’

That’s it! We are told nothing more about this narrative and McLaren quite arbitrarily decides that it is not worthy of further pursuit.

Is it not a fundamental part of any fair and properly conducted investigation to allow the accused, the Russian Ministry of Sport, the right to state its case?

And since the principal purpose of the investigation as stated in its terms of reference is stated to be that of evaluating the evidence provided by Rodchenkov, would it not have been proper to evaluate the arguments and information coming from the Russian side, or at least to have let the public see what the narrative and attachments had to say?.

Page 41 of Report alleges 35 paralympic sports violations, but provides no source for that data.

The report is entirely one-side and relies on one witness Grigory Rodchenko, now a defector living in the U.S.A.                                                                                                                 In a report published by WADA in Nov 2015 Rodchenkov (former director of Moscow based anti-doping laboratory) is described as being, ‘at the heart of the positive drug test cover-up’ Yet in the McLaren report he is described as ‘credible and truthful.’

While Rodchenkov may indeed have been telling the truth to McLaren he may also simply have been deflecting responsibility away from himself. The report says there is extensive documentation to corroborate R’s claims but these documents have never been made public. Where is the evidence?

At page 14 of the report we are told that Rodchenkov provided ‘credible evidence’ of the ‘mouse hole’ (no don’t laugh) sample swap story, but we are not told what that evidence was.                                                                                                                                                    What is considered credible by a man may well not be by another.                                    Once again: where is the evidence?

And finally, the very integrity of the investigation as an unbiased, balanced and impartial piece of work is vitiated from the start by its terms of reference which are:                           ‘to conduct an independent investigation and review any evidence in support of the allegations . . . made by Grigory Rodchenko.’                                                                                 In other words it is free to ignore such evidence as there may be which runs counter to those allegations, and indeed it does so to excess.                                                                        It’s been a technique much favoured by the UK police in those many wrongful convictions that have come to light.

It’s the old, old story isn’t it?                                                                                                           Just trust us. Sure we’ve got the evidence, lots of evidence but for this reason or that we just aren’t in a position to let you see and test it.                                                                   Haven’t we heard all this before:                                                                                                 MH37 overwhelming evidence, Iraq war ‘incontrovertible evidence’, Maidan snipers, Russian invasions of Ukraine – all five or six or them, Russian invasion of Crimea, Russian threats to Baltic states, Russian nuclear bombers . . . intercepted over Bournemouth, on and on and bloody on.

I suppose at the end of the day it all adds a little to the gaiety of nations if you have a black sense of humour.                                                                                                                                  As for myself I’m driven to echo the words of one frustrated American dissident:      Where is the evidence? Where is the evidence? Where is the fucking evidence?

For the full report see:

For original terms of reference see:

29/7/16                                                                                                                                                                                                       The Guardian                                                                                            Scurrilous Lies or Criminally Irresponsible Reporting?

 On 24/2/2016 in an article by Alec Luhn (who also contributes to the Kyiv Post – ‘nuff said?) the headline was:                                                                                                                         MH17 report identifies Russian soldiers suspected of downing plane in Ukraine                                                                                                                                       The sub-heading was:                                                                                                                            Investigative team says it can link Russian soldiers to missile thought to have downed Malaysia Airlines flight in 2014

From those lines alone one might be forgiven for supposing that the reference was to the Dutch JIT, but no, the reference is to a report from Bellingcat**, which ‘paints a picture’ of Russian soldiers and officers who ‘could have known about or been involved in’ (a few get-out-of-jail cards there) the downing of MH17.

The Guardian article refers to a letter from Fred Westerbeke the head of the MH17 JIT (to which it seemingly provides a link) stating that the finding and prosecuting of those responsible ‘could take a long time.’ But, says Eliot Higgins (such a modest chap) his new report raises the likelihood that ‘justice could be served, and shows that responsibility for the outrage ultimately lies with . . .’                                                                                                  All together now . . .                                                                                                                                 ‘Vladimir Putin.’

If you have any wish to read any more of this unmitigated tosh then you’ll find the full Guardian article at:                                                         

Unfortunately, like so many of today’s ‘sit-on-their-arse’ ‘click-link, cut-and-paste’ hacks that pass as journalists, Luhn hasn’t bothered going to the source material to which he refers, the letter from Westerbeke, but only to an incomplete report on the letter in news agency Agence France-Presse.

Had Luhn gone to the original## he would have found that Westerbeke is only slightly less dismissive of the Bellingcat work than I am, and of the Bellingcat draft report on the involvement of the Russian military unit submitted to the JIT on 26/12/2015 Westerbeke writes:                                                                                                                                              ‘Many sources which Bellingcat relies on were known to the JIT. In addition, the research team still has more and other information on this subject, which is not mentioned by Bellingcat. Insofar as Bellingcat has offered new sources, they are examined and assessed for suitability for the criminal investigation.                                                                                 No evidence of direct involvement of individual members of this unit at the shooting of MH17 follows from the report of Bellingcat.’                                                                              Just about as close to calling the Bellingcat report totally worthless as Westerbeke can go while remaining polite.

** Bellingcat, glorified as a ‘British-led online investigative team,’ is in fact a loose cooperative of conspiracy theorists who spend their days pursuing online shadows through every hedge-row in the eastern Ukraine, and whose ‘leader’ Eliot Higgins (aka ‘Brown Moses’ – he loves pseudonyms) positively oozes smug self-satisfaction when his nonsense is given serious attention by the mainstream media because he’ll always sing the song they want to hear.

## See link at:                                                                                                                                               It may take some time to make the link, but it will come.

28/7/16                                                                                                                                                                                                                  MH17                                                                                                Dutch JIT Confirm no evidence re launch or trajectory of missile                                                        or identity of perpetrators

On 19th February 2016 the coordinator of the JIT wrote## to the relatives of those killed in the MH17 tragedy re the criminal investigation. He said:

There is no video or film footage available of the launch or trajectory of the missile.

The JIT has no satellite images of the launch of the missile.

Raw primary radar date which might potentially provide information on rocket trajectory was not recorded by Ukraine and apparently not by Russia.

That more than five billion web pages and more than 500,00 audio and video files have been examined.

That the information provided by Bellingcat has added nothing new to the understanding of the event.

That Bellingcat’s allegation of involvement of a Russian military unit with a BUK system has no direct evidence to support it.

That currently the JIT has no evidence as to the identity of the perpetrators.

America has data* which could potentially provide information on rocket trajectory, and this has been confidentially shared. Consideration is being given as to the form in which this ‘state secret information’ could be used in a criminal prosecution.                                     * The nature of this data has not been disclosed, nor whether it is the ‘knock down’ evidence that John Kerry referred to in 2014 – see Post F below.

And most astonishing of all the letter states:                                                                              “For the second half of this year the JIT expects to provide criminal evidence of what type of weapon and from where the MH17 was shot”                                                                               a statement which apparently calls into question the conclusion in the report from the Dutch Safety Board that the weapon was BUK missile fired from a location in the Ukraine that pointed to Russian separatists as the perpetrators.                                                           The letter and its implications were ignored by the western mainstream media as was the report referred to at 27/7 below.

## English translation (it looks to be a poor one) of the letter can be found at:                  It may take some time to make the link, but it will come.


27/7/16                                                                                                                                                                           Lies, damned lies, and the Mainstream Media (MSM)                                                                            The Crash of MH17

It’s over a week now since the second anniversary of the MH17 tragedy and you may have noticed the deafening silence with which it has been received by the MSM.

No accusations from the BBC, ITV or Sky that the Dutch Joint Investigation Team (JIT) is dragging its feet in assigning responsibility. No reporters from the Guardian, Telegraph, Mail or Times hammering on John Kerry’s door and telling him to put up or shut up about the knock-down evidence he claims to have showing who fired the missile.

One could be forgiven for thinking that they are not after all quite so anxious for the truth to come out.

You will remember well the response to the crash of the MSM just two years ago.                It was the Russian separatists what done it, wasn’t it?                                                    Obama said so, Kerry said so, the U.S. Ambassador to the UN said so, and that idiotic ignoramus Sir Anthony Russell “Tony” Brenton KCMG (once our ambassador to Moscow God help us) given pride of place to spout his nonsense on Newsnight said so, and the rest of the media pack dutifully followed the script . . . Evidence? Oh come on now who needs evidence?

But it wasn’t the separatists was it?                                                                               Says who, say you, and quite right to ask.

Well it wasn’t one of those internet clowns like Bellingcat who pursues shadows through every hedge row in the eastern Ukraine and is given serious attention by the BBC because he sings the right song.

What follows is taken from work carried out by the General Intelligence and Security Service of the Netherlands (AIVD) and the Dutch Military Intelligence and Security Service (MIVD) and is included in a report published with an edition in English on 8th April 2015, over a year ago. See:

The report was completely ignored, not even a reference to its existence, by the western MSM presumably because it did not advance the desired propaganda theme of pining responsibility on the separatists. I came across it when making a further review of MH17 material on the second anniversary.

8th April 2015 Review Report Arising from the  Crash of Flight MH17           Brief Abstract of Conclusions         (See Full paragraphs below)

The Ukrainian (Kiev) armed forces possessed BUK systems of which a number were located in the east.

There is no evidence indicating that the Russians supplied the Separatists with BUK systems, nor was there any evidence to indicate that they were being trained to use such systems.

General Breedlove (Shades of Dr Strangelove there) stated 30 June 2014 that the Americans had not yet observed any vehicle-borne air defence systems being transported across the border to Ukraine.

The Ukrainian Minister of Foreign Affairs, Klimkin stated that the separatists did not possess BUK type systems.

There is no evidence to indicate that the Separatists possessed an operational, powerful anti-aircraft system such as a Buk system, prior to the crash of flight MH17.

There is no evidence to indicate that the Separatists had the capacity to hit civil aeroplanes at cruising altitude.


The Netherlands’ Military Intelligence and Security Service (MIVD) concluded that the only anti-aircraft weapons in eastern Ukraine capable of bringing down MH-17 at 33,000 feet belonged to the Ukrainian government, not the ethnic Russian rebels. 

Hardly surprising then that the second anniversary of the crash received scarcely a mention in the mainstream media.

Should you have time and inclination to put this information into context you’ll find my full report on MH17 at Post F below.                                                                                                    Or if you have time for nothing else at least have a look at:

It’s oligarch Kolomoisky (drunken??) former governor of the Odessa province who runs his own private army, apparently admitting that MH17 was shot down by the Ukrainian troops by mistake.           Best to start at 3 min in, and make of it what you will.

Dutch Report  –  Relevant Sections re Separatist Involvement

Information in the MIVD’s possession

P 23. The general impression with regard to anti-aircraft defence systems was that the Russian armed forces possessed advanced systems that had been installed in the territory of the Russian Federation close to the border with Ukraine. These systems had sufficient range to be able to hit a civil aircraft at cruising altitude, which is a height of at least 7.5 kilometres. Anti-aircraft systems that have sufficient range to reach this height are referred to hereafter as powerful anti-aircraft systems.

According to the MIVD’s information, the Ukrainian armed forces mainly possessed outdated resources, including, however, certain powerful anti-aircraft systems. A number of these systems were located in the eastern part of the country.

Prior to the crash, the MIVD knew that, in addition to light aircraft artillery, the Separatists also possessed short-range portable air defence systems (man-portable air-defence systems; MANPADS) and that they possibly possessed short-range vehicle-borne air-defence systems. Both types of systems are considered surface-to-air missiles (SAMs). Due to their limited range they do not constitute a danger to civil aviation at cruising altitude.

On 29 June 2014, the Separatists captured a Ukrainian armed forces military base in Donetsk. At this base, there were Buk missile systems. These are powerful anti-aircraft systems. This development was reported extensively in the media prior to the crash. The MIVD also received intelligence information on the subject, on 30 June and 3 July 2014 as well as on other dates. During the course of July, several reliable sources indicated that the systems that were at the military base were not operational. Therefore, they could not be used by the Separatists.

Since the beginning of the unrest in Eastern Ukraine, the question arose whether the Separatists were receiving material support and training from the Russian Federation. It was fitting that attention would be devoted to this matter in the MIVD’s investigation. Even though there was information pointing to the fact that the Separatists had been supplied with heavy weapons by the Russian Federation, there were no indications that these were powerful anti-aircraft systems.

P 24.  The MIVD’s impression was that the Separatists were trained to use weapon systems, including MANPADS, in the Russian Federation. There were no indications that they were being trained to use powerful anti-aircraft systems. The Separatists’ training in the Russian Federation came to light as a result of the press conference given by General Breedlove, Supreme Allied Commander Europe (SACEUR) of NATO, on 30 June 2014. Breedlove stated that Separatists on the Russian side of the border had been trained to use vehicle-borne air defence systems. He also stated that the Americans had not yet observed that these systems were being transported across the border to Ukraine. These statements contained little new information for the MIVD. The terms ‘vehicle-borne capability’ and ‘air defence vehicles’ are generic and are also used to refer to short-range anti-aircraft systems.

On 14 July 2014, an An-26 military cargo aeroplane (referred to hereafter as: the Antonov), belonging to the Ukrainian airforce, was shot down. The Ukrainian authorities reported the event the same day in a briefing with Ukraine’s presidential administration in Kiev. The MIVD also received a concise report of the briefing from the Dutch Defence attaché. The report revealed that the Ukrainian Minister of Foreign Affairs, Klimkin, declared that the situation in the east had reached a new and dangerous phase because the Russian Federation was now openly providing the Separatists with military support. As an example of the escalation, Klimkin cited the Antonov’s being shot down in the area of Lugansk. Klimkin reported that the Antonov was flying at an altitude of 6,200 metres and could only have been hit with Russian equipment, because the Separatists did not possess this kind of anti-aircraft systems.

Information in the AIVD’s Possession

P 26.  The Team was aware, via the MIVD, that Russian armed forces on their side of the border with Eastern Ukraine possessed powerful anti-aircraft systems.

The Team was also aware that the Ukrainian armed forces possessed powerful anti-aircraft systems in certain parts of Eastern Ukraine.

The AIVD was aware that the Separatists, in addition to a broad range of artillery (eg machine guns), light anti-aircraft artillery (e.g. rocket launchers), anti-tank weapons and tanks, also possessed MANPADS and possibly short-range vehicle-borne anti-aircraft systems. Both types of systems are considered surface-to-air missiles (SAMs). Due to their limited range, the aforementioned weapons do not constitute a danger to civil aviation at cruising altitude.

On 16 July, the AIVD received a report from a reliable source that stated that there was no information that indicated that the Separatists possessed a medium-range SAM system. This comment was made in view of the circumstances related to the Ukrainian armed forces’ Antonov being shot down on 14 July 2014 in Eastern Ukraine.

The AIVD did not have any information that indicated that the Separatists possessed an operational, powerful anti-aircraft system such as a Buk system, also called an SA-11, prior to the crash of flight MH17.

P27.  The AIVD had no indications that the Russian Federation had provided the Separatists with powerful anti-aircraft systems.

The AIVD had indications that the Separatists were being trained to use weapon systems, including MANPADS, in the Russian Federation. There were no indications that they were being trained to use powerful anti-aircraft systems. 

P29. The AIVD and the MIVD did not have any indication that the Separatists had the capacity to hit civil aeroplanes at cruising altitude. Moreover, there were no indications either that they would target civil aeroplane or that they were engaged in activities with this objective in mind.


                                      Lies, Deceptions and Propaganda by the Odessa                                                               2 May Group is Propagated and Endorsed By                                          Council of Europe, BBC & Guardian

 The Odessa 2 May Group (2MG) is an association of self-appointed, self-professed experts and specialists, (allegedly bipartisan) the independence, credentials, competence and objectivity of which have been uncritically accepted on trust both by the Council of Europe and by the  mainstream media (BBC and Guardian).

In December 2013 the Council of Europe initiated the International Advisory Panel (IAP) on the Ukraine to consider the violent incidents in the Ukraine since November 2013.           On 4/11/2015 the IAP issued its final report.                                                                                 Uncritical Acceptance                                                                                                              In that report the IAP accepted without any attempt at verification the facts/timeline and conclusions presented by 2 MG, specifically endorsed the work of 2MG and criticised the Ukrainian investigation authorities for failing to attach sufficient importance to that work. (Report Para 300)

The BBC and Guardian had previously quoted from the work of 2MG with approval.

Egregious Deficiencies                                                                                                       When subjected to a detailed and critical examination (see below) however the investigative work of 2MG far from being authoritative is shown to be riddled with such egregious deficiencies as to render the ‘facts’ that it presents and the conclusions at which it arrives effectively worthless insofar as they relate to events at Kulikovo Field and the fire at the Trade Union Building.

On 26/11/2015 a copy of this critique, together with full supporting documents was sent to the IAP and comments invited from the IAP or 2MG.                                                                     IAP & Media Wash Their Hands of the Affair                                                                   On 28/1/2016 the response was that as the mandate of the IAP ended with the submission of its last Report (04/11/2015) no comment on the critique could be offered.                            The BBC and the Guardian were similarly notified, but neither felt any obligation to correct their grossly misleading reports. Unsurprising as it wouldn’t fit in with the all-prevailing USA narrative.

Is it not extraordinary that having put the considerable authority of an International Panel appointed by the Council of Europe behind a report which is demonstrably riddled with inaccuracies the Council of Europe should neither respond to legitimate criticism nor take any steps to correct the totally false picture the Report presents?

Catch 22                                                                                                                                         It’s the ultimate ‘Catch 22.’ You can’t analyse or influence the content of the Report prior to publication because you don’t know what it contains. When you do know what it contains you are equally helpless because the Panel’s mandate has ended, and the Council of Europe apparently washes its hands of the whole affair.

The inevitable result is that the weight of the authority of the Council of Europe and the IAP are now being cited in support of the (superficial and defective) work of 2MG by Radio Free Europe and Human Rights in Ukraine in connection with the current brouhaha over French Canal+ TV broadcast of Masks of Revolution.                                                                                   


                                                                         CRITIQUE                                                                                                    ODESSA 2  MAY  2014  FIRE  IN  TRADE  UNION  HOUSE                                               ERRORS OF COMMISSION AND OMISSION IN THE                                              IAP REPORT AND THE WORK OF 2 MAY GROUP

Notes                                                                                                                                               Where English subtitles exist on the videos they have been transcribed.                             Links to videos referred to:                                                                                                                     Video A                                                                                                                                                             Video B                                                                                                                                                                      IAP Report – extensive, and not essential as all relevant quotations are given in full in the Critique                                                                                   

  1. Paragraphs of the IAP Report

Para 23. ‘At a certain point the pro-unity protesters prevailed in the clashes and pursued their retreating opponents towards Kulykove Pole.’

There is nowhere in any of the videos produced by the 2MG or elsewhere any evidence that any pursuit of retreating opponents took place.

Indeed video evidence, including some not produced by 2MG, makes it quite clear that there were no retreating opponents and no pursuit.                                                                   See Video A at 13.48, 14.23, 17.05, and most importantly 19.04

The effect of this misleading statement presented as a fact is to conflate two events that were entirely separate in character and place:  the violent confrontations in and around Hretska Square and the peaceful exhibition, concert and talking shop that was taking place in Kulikovo Field almost 3 kms away.

It was an unfortunate conflation because apart from the ethnicity they had in common, there was in fact absolutely no connection between the men and women, many elderly, who were attending a peaceful gathering and concert in Kulikovo Square and the pro-federalists who fought in the violent street battles in downtown Odessa against the pro-unity supporters.                                                                                                                                  As the video evidence shows there were no ‘retreating opponents’. It was pro-unity supporters only who were first marching and then running towards Kulikovo Field.

Even to imply, as such a conflation does, that the people in Kulikovo Field in any way drew the attack upon themselves by sharing the pro-federalist allegiances of those engaged in the downtown violence is simply an insult to the intelligence of anyone who has made a detailed study of the video evidence.

Para 23. ‘At around 6.50 p.m. pro-federalists broke down the door . . . using wooden pallets . . . blockaded the entrances to the building from the inside and erected barricades.’

Video evidence and witness statements make it clear that the doors at the main entrance to the building were open long before the confrontation began, and that there would have been no need to break the door down to gain entrance to the building or to blockade the entrance on the inside.                                                                                                                           See Video B at 0.02, also 2MG Chronology Part 1 which at 16.03 of the video at 16.15 shows that the doors to the Trade Union Building are standing open and would not need to be broken down.                                                                                       Evidence of survivors at Video A at 15.10 and 16.32                                                                 Photographs of the fire on Google images clearly show the main framework of all front doors still intact but blazing fiercely with burning tyres at their base. See URLs at end of analysis of Video A.

Para 24. ‘Several attempts by the pro-unity protesters to storm the building proved to be unsuccessful, although a few of them managed to enter the building through the back door.’

It is very difficult to understand how any investigating group which professes to carry out its enquiries ‘in an open, independent and objective manner’ (Para 54) could produce such a statement which so egregiously misrepresents the true facts of the case.

Even in 2MG’s own Chronology Part 2 at 19.37 the pro-unity supporters are shown crowding into the building through a side door that has been broken down. There are many more waiting to pass in and others can already be seen in the distance inside at the foot of the stairway. To described numbers of this sort as ‘a few’ is chicanery.

In Video A at 23.24 (which shows the same scene) there are shouts of ‘Let’s move faster, move faster’ and ‘We ought to tell our guys that there’s an entrance here.’

The camera follows them inside where in considerable numbers they have unfettered access to the stairs and to the corridor that runs along the side of the building where (Video A at 25.17 to 26.04) they make frenzied attempts to break down a locked internal door. Other evidence establishes that the pro-federalists tried to obtain some protection behind locked doors.

They are subsequently shown returning from the upper floors down a stairway which is already burning at the foot of the wall. Despite the fire on the stairs, which they ignore, the crowd continues to pass along the lower corridor.

Video A at 26.03 shows a woman being manhandled out of the building and calling out, ‘Guys, please don’t do this.’

Video A at 24.o6 presents a clip which seems to have been entirely overlooked by 2MG (see B7 below) showing pro-unity supporters pouring in through another open door.

Video A at 36.18 shows a Ukrainian flag being cheered by the crowd as it is waved from the top floor of the building.                                                                                                 In “2MG Chronology Part 2 at 20.38 there is a 6 second clip of the flag waving but the cheering is not heard or shown.                                                                                                         Video A at 38.05 and 52.00 contain evidence from survivors referring to pro-unity supporters on the upper floors.

In view of the evidence referred to above it hardly seems necessary to draw the obvious conclusion that far from being unsuccessful the pro-unity supporters’ assault on the building left them with substantial numbers of their supporters, indeed as many as wanted to enter the building, with unfettered access to and in control of the building with the exception of the roof and those rooms in which the pro-federalists were sheltering behind locked doors.                                                                                                         This is a fact which is of particular importance in connection with Para 25 below.

Para 24 ‘The remaining pro-federalist protesters entered the Trade Union Building, from where they exchanged shots and Molotov cocktails with their opponents outside. One of the pro-unity gunmen, who was captured on video footage, was subsequently identified as Mr Mykola Volkov.’

There is certainly unequivocal video evidence of a pro-unity gunman shooting at pro-federalists trying to escape the flames (B10 below), but 2MG have provided no similar evidence of pro-federalists shooting back. It must also be noted that at Video A 46.23 and 51.08 both pro-unity supporters and pro-federalists state that no guns were found in the building.

Para 25.  ‘Other than the fire in the lobby, the fires could only have been started by the acts of those inside the building.’

For anyone who simply read and accepted at face value what 2MG say at Para 24 the implications would be obvious. As only ‘a few’ pro-unity supporters ‘managed to enter the building’ the fires must have been started by the pro-federalists.

But as the evidence shows it was in fact the pro-unity supporters who were in effective occupation and control of the building from ground to top floor quite early on in the proceedings, and who were in a position to start a fire wherever they chose, as was their expressed intention from the outset – see several references at B below.

2MG Investigation Work Superficial and Negligent                                                   Before proceeding further with specific aspects of the report it seems appropriate to document the one overarching criticism of the 2MG investigation, its superficiality and negligence.                                                                                                                                               It purports (Para 54) to be ‘using all fact-finding means available under Ukrainian law, for instance, media files posted on the Internet, witness testimony.’                                         There is, however, much significant video and internet evidence which 2MG have either failed to identify or simply chosen not to present in their chronologies.                                   If due weight and consideration is given to this evidence it leads to a final conclusion that differs materially from that of 2MG.

Omissions itemised – all timings relate to the point on Video A:                                          1. At 9.56 pro-unity supporters are shown threatening the police and ‘them’, a group who are unspecified, but can be assumed to be the pro-federalists.                                        

2. At 11.16 a pro-unity supporter addresses the camera:                                                       ‘Death to the enemies of Ru . . . Death to the enemies of Ukraine.’

3. At 11.29 there are shouts:                                                                                                                    ‘We have to kill them all. We have to . . . If we don’t it will be Donetsk tomorrow.’

4. Reference is made in Para 23 above to the absence of the video clip at 13.48 which shows conclusively that there was no ‘pursuit.’ That clip also includes at 19.34 a shout from the crowd                                                                                                                                         ‘Start burning them . . . Keep surrounding them, surround them, surround them.’

5. At 22.10 a helmeted and masked pro-unity supporter speaks to the camera:                        ‘They did not build this building and now we’re going to have to burn it along with them.’

6. At 22.57 cries from the crowd:                                                                                                     ‘Let’s burn these mother-fuckers right here, fucking faggots.’

7. At 24.06 the pro-unity supporters stream into the building through the second door referred to in Para 24 above. Shouts of:                                                                                              ‘Kill Russians, hang Russians . . . Hang communists.’ The one restraining voice ‘Guys don’t do it. It’s not needed,’ goes unheeded.

8. At 26.47 outside the building. There is a shout:                                                                          ‘Burn them to hell.’                                                                                                                             A brief conversation follows, possibly between the cameraman and someone in the crowd: ‘They’ll burn the building’                                                                                                                       ‘Who is inside?’                                                                                                                                   ‘Odessa citizens. Anti-Maidan.’                                                                                                            ‘And who are these?’                                                                                                                    ‘Right sector. 300 arrived today. Football ultras.’

10. At 27.16 the crowd yell ‘Goal’ when a Molotov cocktail breaks through a window.

  1. At 27.47   outside the building a man with gun fires at people inside the building who are trying to escape the fire.           28.10 He shoots again.
  1. 35.54 Voices from the crowd:                                                                                                       ‘There are calls to leave them inside of the building so they could burn alive.’    ‘It’s not a woman it’s a separatist.’
  1. From 42.52 to 47.00 Pro-unity supporters enter the building immediately after the fire. At 46.11 there is the following conversation between the cameraman and those searching the building:                                                                                                                 ‘Guys, I won’t stream this.’                                                                                                        ‘What do you mean?’                                                                                                                          ‘The thing you are doing now – I run live stream.’                                                                  We are left to speculate what it might have been.
  1. From 48.11 to 49.26 Pro-federalists enter the building some days later. Dried blood can be seen splattered on the walls and desk within rooms untouched by fire.                                                                                                                                                                               Evidence Omitted By 2MG                                                                                           Evidence from survivors if judiciously assessed and evaluated is of vital importance but the interviews with two survivors are not shown by 2MG in their Chronologies.

The lady                                                                                                                                         At 15.10 she refers to the pro-federalists meeting at Kulikovo as grannies of her age, Afghan war veterans who were doing a concert, women and children. The video evidence seems to confirm all this. She refers to running into the building (no reference to breaking down the doors) along with a woman and her children when they had news that the pro-unity supporters were approaching.

At 24.49 she refers to hearing that two floors had been taken by pro-unity supporters (she calls them ‘radicals’) who were killing pro-federalists.

At 38.05 she refers to two men being badly beaten when they left the roof and went down to the top floors.

At 58.38 she refers to the number taking refuge on the roof as ‘around 50.’

At 1.02.23 she says that only they on the roof escaped being attacked, and that everyone else was severely beaten and wounded.

The supervisor                                                                                                                            At 16.42 he refers to carrying the icons and other property into the building. There is no indication that doors will need to be broken down to do this.

At 52.00 he gives a long interview.                                                                                                       He states that the pro-unity supporters came prepared with firearms, flare guns and Molotov cocktails.

He describes the impact of the fire and smoke and describes retreating to a safer area as it advances.

He refers to the pro-unity supporters (he calls them ‘bandits’) entering the building and to hearing gunshots. He reports hearing a pro-unity supporter calling out, ‘There’s one more door, burst it open, there are alive people in there.’

He describes the defence of the roof by men standing at the head of the staircase defending it with shovels or anything else that came to hand.

He refers to an attempt to use a hose only to find that the water had been turned off in the building. (see also 57.38 below).

Another male survivor                                                                                                               At 57.38 ‘We had nothing to extinguish the fire. The water in the building by some bizarre accident disappeared.’

Returning to other paragraphs of the report:

Para 25. ‘The forensic reports did not find any evidence to suggest that the fire had been pre-planned.’                                                                                                            It seems unlikely that any forensic scientist would hope to find on-scene evidence that a fire had been ‘pre-planned.’ Presumably that the intention was to say that forensic evidence did not suggest that there had been a deliberate act of arson: use of accelerants etc.

That there should have been forensic evidence of arson at the main entrance doors had an examination been promptly carried out seems clear from video and photographic evidence.

In the 2MG Chronology Part 2 at 19.49 there is a video shot of the front of the building which in opening seconds shows a man carrying a burning tyre towards the main door of the building which shows no other sign of fire as he approaches.

As mentioned in Para 23 above there are photographs on Google images which clearly show the front doors burning fiercely with burning tyres lying at their base.

One must assume that all traces that burning tyres had been used had been removed before the forensic expert arrived on-scene.

Add to the video and photographic evidence the frequently expressed intention of the pro-unity supporters to burn the building and all those in it, it seems reasonable to conclude that the fire was indeed both pre-planned and a deliberate act of arson.

Para 122 ‘The (forensic) report concluded that the building could have caught fire as a result of one or more persons bringing combustible materials and a source of fire into the building.’                                                                                             What an utterly meaningless and banal observation to form part of a scientific report.

The fire centres other than in the lobby could only have been started as a result of the actions of persons inside the building.’                                                   This is fully commented on in Para 25 above, and Para 9 of my conclusion below.

Annex VII                                                                                                                                                 ‘The fire in the Trade Union Building started when the barricade in front of the entrance to the building caught fire as a result of the exchange of Molotov cocktails between the opposing groups of supporters.’

There is nothing in any of the videos of the early stages of the fire at the front entrance to support this contention. Indeed as indicated in Para 25 above there is every indication that the fire was started when a burning tyre was placed at the foot of a door.

‘According to the 2 May Group, no-one died in the Trade Union Building other than as a direct result of the fire.’                                                                                           Annex IV of the report shows 42 dead from the fire in the Trade Union Building, none of them from gunshot wounds.                                                                                                              At 49.27 of Video A there is a list of 48 dead including 6 from gunshot wounds.

Beyond noting the discrepancy no comment can be offered, other than to point out that a similar discrepancy appears in the report itself which at Para 29 shows a total of 39 dead (31 + 8).

Conclusions concerning the fire in the Trade Union Building

  1. Having prevailed in the violent confrontations in and around Hretska Square the pro-unity supporters begin to assemble and declare their intention to deal with the pro-federalist supporters once and for all. Before the final assault on the Trade Union Building they will have expressed their intention to kill them and burn them on several occasions: all detailed in B above.
  2. There are no defeated pro-federalists in flight towards Kulikovo (some 3 kms away), and there is no pursuit.
  3. A substantial number of pro-unity supporters assemble in the streets around Spaso Preobrazhensky Cathedral. Many of them are helmeted and masked and armed with clubs and shields. They march through a huge crowd who applaud and cheer them and there are many cries of ‘To Kulikovo.’ They set off down the road that will take them there: Video A at 13.48. The march breaks into a charge as they arrive at Kulikovo, overrun the square and start burning tents and exhibits.
  4. At Kulikovo a peaceful and unarmed gathering of pro-federalists had been attending an exhibition, concert and talking shop. They receive advance warning of the intentions of the approaching pro-unity supporters. Some flee the scene before they arrive; others retreat into the building through the open doors (they do not need to break them down) and close them against the attackers. There are men and women, many elderly and at least one child. They are completely overwhelmed by the numbers besieging the building.
  5. The pro-unity supporters arrive with Molotov cocktails which they throw at and through the windows of the building, and at least a couple are thrown at them in response from the roof.
  6. As dusk begins to gather a pro-unity supporter can be seen carrying a burning tyre to set a fire at the foot of one of the main doors. There is no sign of fire at the door prior to this: see above re Para 25 and Annex VII of the IAP Report. The fusillade of Molotov cocktails continues.
  7. At some earlier time pro-unity supporters had broken down one side door to the building and opened another and were entering the building in large number. They can be seen in a crowd in occupation of a ground floor corridor and ascending a staircase to the upper floors.
  8. A flag waved from an upper floor window and cheered by the crowd shows them to be effectively in control of the building from ground floor to top floor apart from the roof and those rooms in which pro-federalists have locked themselves in behind closed doors.
  9. Before the fire forces them to leave the building pro-unity supporters can be seen streaming down stairs where the fire has already taken hold at the foot of the wall. They show no interest in extinguishing the fire.

As regards fires at points other than the main entrance doors and lobby and the observation in the IAP Report that they ‘could only have been started by the acts of those inside the building,’ then it is pertinent to point out that the pro-unity supporters were not only all over the building, but they were the ones in complete control.

They had expressed the intention to burn the building and those in it, and in terms of the categorical trinity of criminology they had the motive, means and opportunity. The pro-federalists had none of these.

If then inferences have to be drawn as to who set the other fires it would seem that it is to the pro-unity supporters and not the pro-federalists that we have to look.

  1. Pro-unity supporters are shown in the ground floor corridor making frenzied attempts to break down a locked door behind which pro-federalists are sheltering. The visible condition of pro-federalist survivors brought out of the building and the evidence of survivors indicates that when pro-federalists were encountered by pro-unity supporters they were savagely beaten.

See Video A at 39.05, 41.23 and 42.22.

Video evidence shows blood on the walls, floor and desk in a room untouched by fire. It is difficult to envisage the type and degree of violence that would be necessary for this.

  1. Attempts at assault continue as survivors are brought from the building. One pro-unity supporter is shown shooting at pro-federalists who are attempting to escape smoke and flames by sheltering on window ledges. Another pro-unity supporter is shown clubbing a man who had jumped from the building and is lying on the ground.
  2. No pro-unity supporters seem to have suffered any harm at the hands of pro-federalists.

In brief the pro-unity supporters set out en masse with the expressed intention of committing arson and murder by killing the pro-federalists by burning or by any other means. That they achieve their objective with a crime of such enormity for it to be so grossly misdescribed or ignored by the bulk of the world’s media defies comment.

26/11/2015  Turkish downing of Russian bomber.                                                               A new concept in international relations. The use of lethal force when no threat exists.        I thought that was restricted to American cops who shot down unarmed black men with their hands in the air. It seems Erdogan has aligned himself with them.                                 In 2012                                                                                                                                                  when a Turkish plane was shot down by Syria.                                                              Erdogan,’ A short-term border violation can never be a pretext for an attack . . . even if the plane was in their (Syrian) airspace for a few seconds that is no excuse to attack. It was clear that the plane was not an aggressive plane. Still it was shot down.’                                     UK Foreign Secretary Hague  expressed his outrage.                                                  Today                                                                                                                                                  Erdogan, ‘The F16 shot down the Russian plane in line with Turkey’s rules of engagement.’                                                                                                                                         All UK Foreign Secretary Hammond could find to say was that ‘Turkey was an important ally.’

20/11/15                                                                                                                                            A nice little earner                                                                                                                       In the US of A, that land of the not-so-free, the police enjoy the freedom of the Civil Forfeiture legislation to seize property or cash from any individual on the mere suspicion that it was acquired illegally.                                                                                                           From 1989 to 2010 seizures amounted to $12.6 bn,                                                                   and like Topsy it’s growing: $ in 2o14                                                                                   It can be done without court order, charge or even arrest and anywhere, even at a stop by the side of the road. So if you happen to be planning a touring holiday over there just make sure you have receipts on hand for all those attractive little electronic goodies and cash you might be carrying with you.                                                                                                                 Listen to Ken Burton Missouri Chief of Police in an astonishing outburst of frankness at:                                                              Basically if we fancy it we take it, if you can’t prove it was acquired legally.

15/11/15     The Independent                                                                                                     Today the Indi recovered its senses with a piece by Robert Fisk who can speak of the Middle East with authority.                                                                                                             ‘We are blindfolded about Isis says one who should know.’                                       The ‘one who should know’ being interviewed by Fisk was Brian Keenan ‘who was kept blindfolded by Islamist kidnappers for four-and-a-half years.’

14/11/15    The Independent                                                                                                             In Amol Rajan’s letter from the Editor today he writes of ‘Jihadi John’ killed by a US airstrike:                                                                                                                                               ‘He may have been only one, virtually worthless life, but his death deprives Isis of its chief propagandist, and by extension, reduces in the short term its capacity to spread terror.’                                                                                                                                               Two pages of triumphalism followed, by ‘the best journalists in the world on this subject’ with charts and diagrams explaining the wonders of the Reaper drone targeting system and the skill involved in tracking him down.

The Paris atrocities had already taken place, but after the paper went to press.

‘Of that of which we are ignorant we should be silent.’ It twists the quote a little to my purpose, but it remains true.

5/11/15                                                                                                                                               Paid Patriotism – Only in the US of A: Home of Hypocrisy                                   ‘At least 50 teams were paid by the Department of Defense for patriotic displays’         

Noted in passing.                                                                                                                                  “I do believe that the heaviest blow ever dealt at Liberty’s head will be dealt by this nation and the ultimate failure of its example to the earth. See what is passing now.”                       Charles Dickens “ American Notes”

6/11/15                                                                                                                                             A couple of Stocking Fillers                                                                                            Two Statements on Iraq made less than two years before it was suddenly ‘discovered’ that Saddam Hussein had all those naughty weapons of mass destruction.                                 Colin Powell 24 Feb 2001                                                                                                                   ‘He has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction. He is unable to project conventional power against his neighbours.’                   Condeleeza Rice July 2001                                                                                                               ‘We are able to keep arms from him. His military forces have not been rebuilt’                                                                       Both truths were conveniently forgotten by the western media at large after 9/11/ 2001 when Bush and Blair decided to attack Iraq.                                                                             Just for Laughs                                                                                                                           Obama 16/9/2015 at Business Roundtable                                                                                   ‘As a large country with a powerful military you can’t go round pushing your little neighbours around just because you’re bigger’                                                                                                                                                                   John Kerry 3/3/2014                                                                                                                            ‘You don’t invade a country on completely phony pretexts just to assert your own interests.’                                                                                                                                                               Bush 28/1/2003                                                                                                                                  ‘As we are doing in Afghanistan we will bring to the Iraqi people, food and medicines and supplies . . . and freedom’                                                                                                                  They’re still waiting.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                14/10/15 The Independent                                                                                                  Simon Calder/Howard Amos on MH17 Report      (The printed page from the Independent seems not to be available online. This is the same article as it appeared in IOL News.)                                                                                                   It really is quite difficult to know where to begin with any Russia related article that Amos has had his hands on. (See also Post J under ‘Odessa Massacre – A Retrospective)               On this  occasion I’ll confine myself to his sheer mendacity.                                                      ‘To the sound of throbbing music et seq’  this paragraph appears towards the end and opens with a lie.                                                                                                                                  The full conference is there for all to see and hear, with English translation, on YouTube. There is no “throbbing music.” It’s a quiet, highly technical affair given to a substantial international audience who have been invited and not “summoned” and seem prepared to give the presentation rather more weight and attention than Amos.                                                                  For those who wish to opt out of the full 2hrs 35 min the test explosions run from 1.01 to 1.03.

13/10/15 MH17    The Two Reports  Yes there were two although that may not have been obvious from the media coverage.                                                                                          Brief notes together with a link to the two complex technical reports are shown below.##     Both proceed on the basis that the immediate cause was a BUK missile, but disagree on two fundamental points: the type of warhead and probably firing point.                                In brief as far as responsibility goes they get us nowhere.

Without getting into the technicalities, which like the peace of God passeth all understanding, one is inevitably driven to ask why did the Dutch decide not to take any questions from their large international audience whose presence without the opportunity for questions was rather pointless – it could all have been done online.         The investigation had been going on for over a year. Why the secrecy?                              Questions that immediately suggest themselves:                                                          1.  Where is the real forensic evidence; the aerial photography, the satellite imagery?   2. Why has none of the evidence that the USA holds not been included? They have asked for full cooperation with the enquiry and have told us that they have such evidence.       See 9/7/15 below                                                                                                                      3. On 30 June 2015 General Breedlove warned that Russia had been providing air defence training to Russian separatists that focused on “vehicle-borne” surface-to-air missiles.                                                                                                        If they knew this they must surely have been watching the situation closely so why no photographic evidence of the missile being launched?                                                              4. Why did the Dutch report ignore the damage to the port engine and wing? See:

So what can be said at this juncture?                                                                                  If West pursues criminal investigation against separatists claiming that they have evidence that they shot it down with Russian involvement then we will know that they have to have some kind of evidence and they will have to produce it.                                        If however there is silence and it is left on the basis that we don’t know who did it, then (in view of Kerry’s comments) we have to conclude that it was the Ukrainians who shot it down.

How long then must we wait for the JIT’s criminal investigation to be concluded and for the USA to put up its evidence?                                                                                                        Or is it the case that the USA has no interest in giving any further information because it’s a wonderful political football to keep kicking around.

## MH17 Reports                                                                                                                   Two reports presented – In neither was there any intention or attempt to assign responsibility.                                                                                                                         1. That of the Dutch Safety Board (DSB) of which everyone will have heard at length and in detail.                                                                                                                                                       2. That of Almaz-Antey (AA) of which few will have heard at all and almost no one at length and in detail. AA are the manufacturers of the BUK missile system.                                                                    This report covered in more detail and with practical experiments an earlier report of 3/6/2014                                                                                          

The DSB presentation ran for 26 minutes with explanations of mathematical modelling and computer simulations together with an animation reflecting conclusions of investigation and supplemented by detailed PDF running to 279 pages.                              Supplementary material was also produced:                                                                            About the Investigation                                            and a brochure synopsis of the reports findings.                                                                                                      Scenarios other than BUK missile were considered, analysed and excluded on the basis of the evidence available.                                                                                                                            No questions were accepted from the accredited media representatives present at the presentation.

Final conclusion:                                                                                                                       Flight MH17 was downed by a ‘9N314M warhead carried on the 9M38-series of missiles as installed on the BUK surface to air system.’                                                                                 ‘The breakup resulted in a wreckage area* of 50 square kilometres’ as shown in chart in PDF, but another investigation will be necessary to establish the precise location of launch. * Such an area would put the firing point as near Snezhnoye in ‘rebel’ held territory.

The AA presentation ran for 2hrs 20 including 1 hr of Q & A when questions were invited in particular from the English speaking media. In the event some 20+ questions were dealt with from an international audience including BBC, Thailand, France, Wall Street Journal.                                                                                                                                     The AA tests had involved only consideration of the BUK theory (which was in effect accepted) and not any of the alternative scenarios.                                                                    The presentation was detailed and complex including explanations of damage analysis, missile fragment analysis, mathematical modelling and computer simulations.                       A slide-show of the data and material used in the course of the presentation is available at

The data from the tests conducted in June had been transferred to the DSB in August but as they were not taken into account AA decided to run the second bigger whole-scale tests including practical live tests on a full scale fuselage using a live warhead.                               A series of video presentations showed the results of the live tests.

Final conclusion:                                                                                                                   That MH17 had been shot down by a BUK SA11 missile system that could only have been a 9M38 missile deploying a 9M38 warhead: a warhead that had been decommissioned by the Russians many years earlier.                                                                                                     That from AA’s tests and calculations they were able to define the area of the firing point as being near Zaroshchenskoye.**                                                                                                       ** Which was in Kiev held territory.

12/10/15 Howard Amos Independent – Syria                                                                  4th & 3rd paras from bottom and photos are simply cuts and pastes from Reuters at                                                          Do reporters do anything more nowadays than take in each other’s washing?                          And once again the thoroughly discredited Syrian Observatory for Human Rights is quoted.

Use by Media of ‘Expert’ sources that do little more than relay social media chatter that is unverified and unverifiable                                                              Syrian Observatory for Human Rights(SOHR)                                                      The SOHR was founded in May 2006 as an information office allegedly documenting human rights abuses in the Syrian Civil War. It has been cited by virtually every western news outlet since the beginning of the uprising, and is frequently quoted by major newsmedia, such as Voice of America, Reuters, BBC, CNN and National Public Radio about daily numbers of ISIL/ISIS fighters and civilians killed in airstrikes in Syria.

The UK-based SOHR is in fact run out of a two-bedroom terraced home in Coventry by one person, Rami Abdulrahman, a Syrian Sunni Muslim who also runs a clothes shop. After three spells in prison in Syria, Abdulrahman came to Britain in 2000 and has not been back since. The New York Times in April 2013 describes him being on the phone all day every day with contacts in Syria and checking all information himself.#                 Mr. Abdulrahman’s website is at and (in Arabic) and (in English).                                                                                                                 In a December 2011 interview with Reuters, Abdulrahman said the observatory had a network of 200 people. He reports on events in the Syrian uprising, including the deaths of civilians, rebels and army defectors (whom he calls “martyrs”) and government soldiers.          # One can only speculate on how he manages to do this from a house in Coventry when he has a network of 200 people, and still have time for his clothing shop.                                 None of the intrepid ‘reporters’ of the MSM seem to have made any attempt to satisfy themselves that he is doing anything more than recycling social media chatter.

3/10/15 BBC Pro-American Bias – Today programme                                                   This is John Humphries speaking to Bart Janssens, Director of Operations for MSF immediately following news reports that the MSF clinic in Kuduz had suffered a sustained air attack by the US in which 3 of its staff and many patients were killed and the premises severely damaged.                                                                                                                             One might have expected some initial interest, possibly even concern for the wellbeing and plight of the MSF staff and patients, and the impact of the attack on the operations of MSF in the future.                                                                                                                                   Instead the whole thrust of the opening questions seems to be nothing more than a desperate attempt to get the Americans off the hook.                                                                     After only ‘Good morning’ Humphries 1st question is:                                                                   ‘What evidence do you have that these bombs were dropped by the Americans?’               The reply is scarcely relevant. What evidence might Janssens, a medical man, be expected to have in Switzerland at 8am in the morning within a few hours of the attack. The question is a disgrace.                                                                                                         Humphries continues:                                                                                                                     ‘And there’s no doubt that they were bombs dropped by an aeroplane or aeroplanes, and it wasn’t shelling of some sort or some other form of attack. They were bombs dropped from the air.’                                                                                                                                               Understandably BJ can offer no meaningful comment on this.                                              The interview continues:                                                                                                                   JH ‘people would have been in no doubt that this was a hospital. There’s no doubt about that.                                                                                                                                                             BJ ‘Absolutely’                                                                                                                                         JH ‘And you’ve never been threatened in the past by the Taliban or any other forces in any way’                                                                                                                                                           BJ makes it clear that the hospital has functioned without interference until this incident   JH then speaks to Emal Pasarly in Kunduz who talks of the fighting that has been raging for control of the city.                                                                                                                         JH ‘So it is possible that the building was caught up in exchanges of fire, we can’t be certain at this stage that it was aerial bombardment’                                                                       He is told that local people are saying that the hospital was hit by air.                                         This is the celebrated BBC ‘balance,’ leaning over backwards, as it invariably does, to try to avoid any embarrassment to the Americans.

An appropriate point perhaps to include a quote from Harold Pinter’s Nobel acceptance speech 2005   regarding                                                                                       The western media’s curious amnesia regarding the manifest crimes and atrocities of the United States of America – Fully documented in Post A               American in Foreign Affairs                                                                                                          “Everyone knows what happened in the Soviet Union and throughout Eastern Europe during the post-war period: the systematic brutality, the widespread atrocities, the ruthless suppression of independent thought. All this has been fully documented and verified.                                                                                                                                                 But my contention here is that the US crimes in the same period have only been superficially recorded, let alone documented, let alone acknowledged, let alone recognized as crimes at all.                                                                                                                                       It never happened. Nothing ever happened. Even while it was happening it wasn’t happening. It didn’t matter. It was of no interest. The crimes of the United States have been systematic, constant, vicious, remorseless, but very few people have actually talked about them. You have to hand it to America. It has exercised a quite clinical manipulation of power worldwide while masquerading as a force for universal good. It’s a brilliant, even witty, highly successful act of hypnosis.”

You still won’t hear of them from the mainstream media, but with the internet there’s no longer any reason for people to remain in ignorance.                                                                       It’s all there fully documented and evidenced as disclosed by insiders, whistleblowers and ex-CIA men either disgusted at what has been done or at times so triumphant at their achievements that they boast about them.                                                                               “That’s just tough . . . we’ll intervene whenever it’s in our national security interests to intervene and if you don’t like it, lump it. Get used to it world, we’re not going to put up with any nonsense.” Duane Clarridge CIA Chief in Chile 1981 to 1984

A clutch of earlier examples culled from the balanced and impartial mainstream media                                                                                                                17/4/15 State Department Leans on media outlets                                                          The State Department confirms that it had been working to convince major media and entertainment companies to help to counter propaganda being issued by Russia and others.                                                                                                        Use ‘Find’ function to get to the relevant passages.       Also                                                      30/7/14 BBC Newsnight                                                                                                          Mark Urban gave five reasons why middle east was in turmoil: none included the historic or contemporary role of the British Government.                                                                       The Cameron Govt’s despatch of £8 bn of arms and military equipment to Israel was airbrushed                                                                                                                                               UK’s massive arms shipments of Saudi Arabia was airbrushed                                                     UK’s role in the destruction of Libya was airbrushed                                                               UK’s support for the tyranny in Egypt was airbrushed                                                                    As for the British invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq – they didn’t happen either               The only ‘expert witness’ on the programme was Toby Dodge from LSE. What viewers were not told was that Dodge had been a special advisor to David Petraeus, the US general largely responsible for the disasters in Iraq and Afghanistan.                                                                                                          28/1/2011 State Department Plants Questions in Media Programmes               US flagship media programme 60 Minutes accepts “questions and concerns . . . planted with them” by the State Department during the course of the interview with Julian Assange – see PDF at                                                     and                                                                                                                                                                                                               16/9/15                                                                                                                                          Poroshenko signed a decree on Wednesday, banning or introducing sanctions against hundreds of individuals and legal entities. The list includes dozens of journalists, among them employees of the BBC, El Pais, Die Zeit and RT’s Ruptly.                                      This evoked a storm of protests that western journalist should be banned (Google “Poroshenko  banned journalist”) and the ban was promptly revoked.                                                                                                                       Pity the western MSM couldn’t summon up the same response regarding  the murder, abuse and restrictions imposed on pro-Russian journalist.                                                      See 16/4/15 & 26/2/15 below

14/9/15                                                                                                                                          JIT has found no evidence of BUK missile shrapnel in bodies of victims – confirmed by Australian coroners who have examined bodies – JIT now looking for evidence on the ground.                                                                                                                                               Question why more than a year after the event and to what extent can such evidence now be accepted as authentic?                                                                                                                     Part 1                                                                                                                              Part 2

13/9/15                                                                                                                                      With Ukraine dropping out of the mainstream news of late, mainly because there’s absolutely nothing good that can be said about developments there, another update on the state of play seems appropriate. See also 12 month retrospective at 20/2/15 below – things haven’t improved.                                                                                                                            Political Stability                                                                                                                          Public support for the administration is falling like a rock                                                             Prime Minister Yatsenyuk’s party now has approval ratings below five percent.                 Poroshenko’s ratings are down to 23%                                                                                            At the beginning of September Oleg Lyashko and his far right Radical Party left the ruling coalition taking the vice Prime Minister with him. He criticised Poroshenko as no better than Yanukovich.                                                                                                                                  So weak is the regime that Svoboda, whose ultra-nationalist neo-Nazis were responsible for the recent rioting and deaths of three policeman on Maidan, has not been touched.        Economy                                                                                                                                          Kiev is faced with possible default on $3 billion Eurobond debt to Russia.                                 The west is dominating the Ukraine through the IMF, which unbelievably recently gave it a clean bill of health. Lagarde praised Kiev for what it has achieved in such a short time and Poroshenko for giving hope to the people of Ukraine.                                                             Odessa’s new Governor is not so optimistic describing Ukraine as the poorest# country in Europe and forecasting no return to pre-Maidan GDP for another twenty years.                  # Not only the poorest, but the most corrupt according to the Guardian.                               Thanks to what has been described as the virtual annexation of Ukraine by the IMF (expertly analysed by economics Prof M Hudson of the University of Missouri – see link below) the country, unable to pay off its debts, is going to have to privatise , that is, sell off what of the nation’s assets it has left.                                                                                                   $1.8 billion transferred from IMF to the National Bank of Ukraine to be disbursed to large Ukrainian banks has disappeared. It has gone to the two largest banks in Ukraine: Privat Bank owned by the oligarch Kolomoisky, (previously governor of Dnipropetrovsk Oblast ),and Pinchuk who owns Credit Dnepr. From these banks the money was transferred to off-shore accounts and from there it disappeared. All quite acceptable to Washington (which is effectively the IMF) as part of the cost of its geopolitical game.            Conflict                                                                                                                                      Muslim extremists are now fighting alongside Kiev forces in Ukraine. See link below or simply Google “sheikh al mansour battalion Ukraine”                                                                 Links for the above follow:                                                                                                                                                                 –direktor-rozporyadnik-mvf-lagard-pislya-zustrichi-z-prezidentom                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             

9/9/15                                                                                                                                              Fox News: Russia and China plotted migrant invasion of Europe.                                                                        Question and answer transcripts follow:                                                                                          Q. ‘How much of this is Russia and China trying to shlop?? off these refugees on Europe and everybody else . . . and playing with these human lives to try and gain political and global capital?’                                                                                                                                   A. ‘Russia is sending military equipment . . . to try to prop up the Assad government to continue the fighting . . .’                                                                                                               Q. ‘Continue the fighting and continue the refugee crisis?’                                                           A. ‘Oh sure, exactly.’                                                                                                                          Q. ‘We know how much Putin loves Europe in terms of being able to give Europe a problem to deal with in the refugees.’                                                                                             A. ‘But the worry becomes, are they going to gang up, the Chinese and the Russians, going to gang up against the United States and our interests throughout the world, and I think you are going to see more of that.’

Did you get that?  . . . . Russia and China are going to gang up against the poor, little old US of A . . . All together now: Aaaahhhh.                                                                                       That would be the US of A whose global criminal activities over the course of a century are documeneted in detail in Post B.                                                                                                     God knows who the reporter Caitlin McFarland is. She seems to keep a pretty low profile as far as her reporting credentials go.                                                                                               Pity the poor Americans who get a 24/7 diet of this fiction from their mainstream media.

3/9/15                                                                                                                                              A useful summary and comments on the propaganda media onslaught that followed the anniversary of the tragedy at:                                              

31/8/15  The Independent                                                                                                Interesting to see that the Indi’s Assistant Editor and Media Editor takes exception to an RT reference to “Nazis in Ukraine with nuclear ambitions.”                                                   Perhaps he should have a look at the published programme of the Svoboda Party* which at clause VII (9) calls for the restoration of Ukraine as a tactical missile and nuclear arsenal state and at clause VII (8) appeals to the UN to evaluate the possibility of pre-emptive nuclear strikes without declaring war: no prizes for guessing against whom.                          If Svoboda and its leader Tyahnybok are not Nazis/neo-Nazis, they certainly have an inordinate affection for their Nazi hero Bandera, the Nazi salute, torchlight marches, the Wolfsangel and other insignia and trappings of their Nazi idols. The internet is awash with images.                                                                                  *

30/8/15                                                                                                                                            “After annexing Crimea last year, Mr Putin raised the stakes by launching a conflict in the Donbass”                                                                                 So it was Putin who launched the military conflict?                                                                   Cannot the Guardian get even the basic facts correct and consistent with its own earlier reporting?                                                                                                                                                It was Turchynov and Yatsenyuk in Kiev not Putin who launched the Ukrainian military into action against their own people in the Donbass.                                                                       See Post E 13/4/2014 and Guardian                                                                                                   10.4.14                                                                                                                  16/4/14                                                                                                                    24/4/14                                                                                                                                      And when the Guardian isn’t faking the facts it can run snide little pieces by Shaun Walker

28/8/15 The Independent                                                                                                      Inside rebel-held Ukraine, where a small pocket of nationalists hope of a life without Russian interference.”                       A page-and-a-half devoted to a scurrilous, near-hysterical anti-Russian rant that is so outrageously paranoid as to be risible. What on earth can be the journalistic justification for running a piece in which the location is not identified, the interviewees are anonymised, and which is posted by a ‘reporter’  (identified variously as Mikhail or Mihail Nikanorov) of whom the paper itself can provide no further information, who has no journalistic credentials and who defies all attempts to trace him on Google . . . It’s nothing more than gossip that could have been sourced from any one of a hundred or more internet sites.

25/8/15 – Anti-Russian Propaganda Bites the Dust                                                     On 25/8/15 Forbes magazine claimed a scoop with                                                            “Russia Inadvertently Posts Its Casualties In Ukraine: 2,000 Deaths, 3,200 Disabled”                                                             Ever ready to run any anti-Russian material the Independent’s intrepid reporter followed up on 26/8/15 with “Russia ‘accidentally reveals’ number of its soldiers killed in eastern Ukraine“                                                                                                                                                                      NBC just as eagerly followed suit                                                                                                                     As did the  International Business Times                                                                                                                                                          None of them attempted any effective check of sources of course. That isn’t the way with modern cut-and-paste journalism (See also Independent 28/8/15 above)              Unfortunately for them it was all a scam originating in a Kiev based hack of a Russian magazine site.                                              Start to 6 mins in.  The story was allowed to die, but no correction was made.

BBC 18/8/15                                                                                                                              The Independent: ‘BBC showed propaganda films but didn’t tell its viewers.’   

14/8/15                                                                                                                                      BBC Bias and the Israeli Propaganda machine.                                                        The news that Mark Regev is to be next Israeli ambassador to UK adds a certain piquancy to the old saw that an ambassador is a man sent to lie abroad for his country. In Regev, who for many years has fronted the Israeli propaganda assault on the news media of the world, Israel has a man who is surely over-qualified.                                                                  He will no doubt be warmly welcomed by the BBC with whom the Israeli propaganda machine has had a cosy relationship exemplified on many occasions over the years, the slaughter on the M.V. Mavi Marmara being but one.

On 31/5/2010 Israeli forces attacked an aid flotilla headed for Gaza while it was still in international waters. In the course of the operation they murdered nine people on theMavi Marmara and injured many more, and  in the days that followed Israeli propaganda set out to manipulate the news agenda around the world.                                                       This they did with some success on the BBC News of 1/6/2010 which:                                 ran selective video footage provided by the Israelis## all helpfully subtitled, butwhich edited out the initial lethal attack from the helicopters,                                         and included Mark Regev blandly asserting, ‘Our planning for yesterday’s interception was for a peaceful police operation. Our sailors on the job were told you are to use minimum force and maximum restraint.’                                                  From 1 hour 08 minutes in.            ##despite the fact that graphic independent video was available on the internet on the night of the attack.

The Israeli perspective throughout was that the violence was initiated by the people on theMavi Marmara who were attacking the men of the IDF trying to land on the ship.In that perspective propaganda dominated, and was never seriously challenged.                              On 16/8/2010 this was followed up by an equally un-critical, pro-Israeli Panorama.               It was left to Jon Snow of Channel 4 to offer the only serious challenge to the Regev propaganda push.                                                                      

On 27/09/2010, four months after the incident, the UN published a report on the incident which can be read in full at:   On the issue of who started the violence it concluded ‘that no weapons were brought on board the ship’ by the passengers, and ‘that live ammunition was used from the helicopter onto the top deck prior to the descent of the soldiers.’                                                                It accused the IDF of using ‘totally unnecessary and incredible violence’ and of ‘an unacceptable level of brutality.’                                                                                                          It referred to people shot ‘at point blank range.’                                                                            It concluded that there was ‘clear evidence to support prosecutions of the following crimes within the terms of article 147 of the Fourth Geneva Convention:                                            Wilful killing//Torture or inhuman treatment//Wilfully causing great suffering of serious injury to body or health.’

The findings of the investigation which ran completely counter to the thrust of the Israeli propaganda reported by the media were reported only in a 12 second item on ITV news, and were completely ignored on the three main BBC TV bulletins, being seen only on News 24.

5/8/15                                                                                                                                              What a difference a year makes.                                                                                                 Independent Editorial 18/7/14 – one day after crash before any evidence adduced      “Malaysia Airlines MH17 crash: No more games, Mr Putin. Though he cannot have wished it, the Russian President is responsible for this massacre. He must restrain his dogs of war.”                                                                                                                                             Independent Editorial 5/8/2015                                                                                              “Don’t rush to judgement                                                                                                                 The allegations against Edward Heath are profoundly serious. But so is the need to follow the evidence.’

4/8/15                                                                                                                                              More useful thoughts on the proposed UN ‘special tribunal’ re MH17  

2/8/15                                                                                                                                        MH17 Tribunal – the trap Russia avoided.                                                                        By an international criminal and human rights lawyer with ‘coal-face’ personal experience of these rituals              

9/7/15                                                                                                     Another scurrilous Russophobic piece by the Guardian almost as culpable as their ‘anniversary’ piece on the Odessa Massacre (Post J ‘The Odessa Massacre – a retrospective).                                                                                                                                     The headline refers to ‘mounting evidence of involvement’ of Russia and the separatists , with the sub-head adding ‘most evidence points to Ukraines separatist forces.’                                                                                                                                        The article runs to over 1800 words and it seems reasonable to expect that somewhere along the way the reader might be introduced to the new evidence (presumably new if it has been ‘mounting’) or even to any hard evidence (although the article is careful itself to say that there is ‘no conclusive proof’ of responsibility.

However strip away the emotional propaganda, the repetitions from last year’s Guardian pieces, the anecdotal reports (the internet is awash with many such that paint quite a different picture) and all that is left is something akin to the Monty Python ‘nudge, nudge . . . know what I mean . . . say no more’ sketch.

We are told that the plane had ‘apparently been shot out of the sky with a surface-to-air missile’ . . .  of ‘rumours spread of looting and interference at the scene’ . . . that a BUK missile had ‘possibly (been) brought across the border from Russia’ . . . that Alexander Khodakovsky couldn’t ‘say anything with clarity’ . . . that ‘there is some evidence# it (the BUK system) came from across the border’ . . . and that it ‘may have been manned by a Russian crew’  . . . and that ‘It was almost as though the Russians wanted to get their story straight.’                                                                                                                                          # Unspecified                                                                                                                                       We are introduced to ‘Igor “the Demon” Bezler – nothing whatever to do with evidence (I mean evidence) concerning MH17, but the name sounds real mean doesn’t it?                   We are told that ‘In Moscow, amid public denials of involvement, diplomats scrambled to establishwhat had happened.’                                                                                                           But there was absolutely no need to scramble was there? John Kerry knew, he had knock-down evidence, but for some strange reason he declines to put it in the public domain, and the mainstream media seem singularly reluctant to mention the fact that he ever said it. (See 9/7/15 Post F)                                                                                                      And finally, referring to the Dutch-led investigation, we are told, ‘The investigators are believed to have concluded that the plane was indeed shot down by a BUK missile.’      They have not in fact concluded any such thing.                                                      According to the Dutch Public Prosecution Service spokesman, Wim de Bruin on 25/8/15   “The Joint Investigation team is focusing on several scenarios. The most likely is the one in which the MH17 was downed by a ground-to-air missile. But there are still [other] scenarios that can’t be excluded. For example the air-to-air scenario.”

9/7/15 MH17 Anniversary                                                                                                  Over the last few days on the anniversary of the MH17 tragedy we have seen much coverage of those facts that are known and more of speculation and innuendo, yet not one reference to the American surveillance information and radar tracking information that should resolve all uncertainty.                                                                                                                These are verbatim transcripts of John Kerry speaking of the shoot-down on 20 July a year ago.                                                                                                                                                      In a morning interview on CNN:                                                                                                        “We observed it by imagery . . . we detected a launch . . . our trajectory shows that it went to the aircraft.’                                                                                                                                         In an interview on CBS Face the Nation.                                                                                            “We know from our own imagery. We see that an SA11 which is what we have assessed this to be . . .”                                                                                                                           Apparently knock-down evidence of responsibility and yet since then it appears to have been entirely ignored: an internet search reveals scarcely one further reference to Kerry’s statements since he made them.                                                                                                         A few days ago in a White House Press Statement release Kerry wrote regarding the Dutch investigation: “We urge full cooperation by all in assisting their effort to uncover the full truth.”

Isn’t it surprising that not one voice has been raised in the mainstream media, that there isn’t relentless pressure on the US to do what it urges others to do? To relieve the anxiety of the victims’ families and resolve all uncertainty by putting its relevant surveillance information and radar tracking information in the public domain, as the Russians have done, or at least confirm that they have made it available to the Dutch JIT.                           Or if Kerry too was deceiving his American public and the world as others have done in the past shouldn’t we be receiving something by way of an apology                          

Inpost – Index to Main Posts   

                              Introduction – It’s A Mad, Mad World My Masters                      

Its sophistry and insidious techniques apart, propaganda succeeds because the vast majority of people simply do not have the time to search beyond the headline and perhaps read the article, watch the TV newscast or listen to the views of the ‘experts.’ They’re more than fully occupied earning a living, raising a family and getting by in an increasingly demanding and unjust world.                                                                                                                            Of the few that are fortunate enough to have both the time required (considerable) and the inclination to do the digging that is necessary, the results can be a revelation. It is hoped that the posts that follow will be just that: a revealing peep behind the facade of all that we are offered as ‘news’ by the mainstream media on a daily basis.                                                  You’ll find that the posts give you what the mainstream media never, well hardly ever, provide: links to the sources used, to the raw footage where any is available and access to the alternative voices that are otherwise denied to the public at large.

For more than eighteen months, as its schemes for the Ukraine and the Middle East have gone from bad to worse, the White House has engaged in a relentless barrage of misinformation, half-truths, lies and black propaganda that is all dutifully relayed to the American people as gospel truth by a subservient mainstream media that is now no more than an arm of the American corporate state.                                                                                                 There was a time when something a little better might have been hoped for on this side of the Atlantic, but since the politicians and mainstream media outlets of Europe are now almost without exception content simply to accept and regurgitate whatever propaganda emanates from Washington, and even to offer a few inventions of their own, the following posts are offered as at least a partial corrective to the White House narrative that otherwise seems to go unchallenged.                                                                                                      A sort of Queensbury Rules to restore some sort of balance to the reporting of matters relating to the American-dominated West and Russia, and to cast a little light into the dark and dirty recesses of the American and European political psyche and the ‘journalists’ who serve its purpose.                                                                                                                  To read the posts themselves will not take long. To follow up on the links will take longer, but it will certainly introduce you to some interesting alternative voices.

Post J.  The Odessa Massacre                                                                                                  Post H.  Russian ‘Invasions’ Of Ukraine – You Couldn’t Make It Up                        (A brief survey of the best creative fiction of the crisis.)                                                           Post G.   Media Bias, Lies, Black Propaganda and Sins of Omission                     Post F.   Flight MH17 – Washington Takes The Fifth                                                       Post E.   Dirty Tricks in Ukraine – Play It Again Uncle Sam                                     Post D.   Ukraine Atrocities – The West Looks The Other Way                                   Post C.   Cold War Mark II – Putin Bashing and Russophobia                                   Post B.  The USA – The World’s Sally Army?                                                                     Post A.   Goodbye To  All That – A Jeremiad


About theshropshiresage

An Octogenarian Ranter
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s