Miroslav Antić


Archive for jul 2014

Senior Kosovo figures face prosecution for crimes against humanity

leave a comment »

Senior Kosovo figures face prosecution for crimes against humanity

  • , Tuesday 29 July 2014 09.42 BST

The Kosovo Liberation Army fought an insurgency against the Serbian regime of Slobodan Milosevic. Photograph: Alban Bujari/EPA

Leading political figures in Kosovo face indictment by a special EU court for crimes against humanity, including killings, abductions, sexual violence and other abuses of Serb and Roma minorities, according to the chief prosecutor leading a three-year special investigation (pdf).

The threat of indictments comes in a progress report published on Tuesday morning in Brussels by Clint Williamson, an American prosecutor appointed by the EU in 2011 to investigate ethnic cleansing committed in Kosovo since the 1999 Nato intervention brought an end to the conflict there.

Williamson does not name the suspects but describes them as "senior officials of the former Kosovo Liberation Army" (KLA), which fought an insurgency against the Serbian regime of Slobodan Milosevic. Many former KLA commanders went on to leadership positions after Kosovo declared independence in 2008. It is believed at least some of the indictments prepared by the EU special investigative task force (SITF) are against top figures still actively involved in politics.

Williamson’s investigation confirmed earlier allegations that in a "handful" of cases, organs taken from executed prisoners were trafficked for profit, but 15 years after the crimes, the SITF has not been able to gather enough concrete evidence to mount a viable prosecution.

The indictments for wholesale human rights violations are likely to have a far-ranging impact on Kosovo’s future and will be embarrassing for the US and western European governments, which provided enthusiastic backing for the KLA leadership during and after the war.

The indictments cannot be issued until a special court to try the cases is established, almost certainly in the Netherlands. But its creation has been held up by bureaucratic delays over funding in the European commission and political turmoil in Kosovo. Williamson said he hoped the court would be set up by early next year, but the cases will be tried by a new chief prosecutor. He will step down after a three-year term next month.

Williamson said he was leaving for personal reasons, to rejoin his family in the US, rather than professional factors.

"There have been press reports that I was leaving because the investigation is collapsing. That is completely untrue. I think we have had a very solid investigation with very good results," he told the Guardian.

In his report, Williamson said the investigation had been rendered far more difficult by pervasive intimidation of witnesses, describing it as "a dark cloud over the country".

"We have taken steps to counter the impact of the witness intimidation and we will continue to do so. We will actively investigate these activities and will prosecute any individuals found to have been involved," Williamson says in his report.

"There is probably no single thing that poses more of a threat to rule of law in Kosovo and of its progress toward a European future than this pervasive practice."

Ten thousand people died in the 1998-99 Kosovo conflict, many of them Kosovan civilians killed in a brutal Serbian counterinsurgency. War crimes committed by both Serbian forces and the KLA have been tried in the international criminal court for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY), but that did not examine abuses since 1999.

The EU investigation covered abuse of Kosovo Serbs and other minorities at the hands of the victorious KLA commanders.

The crimes include "unlawful killings, abductions, enforced disappearances, illegal detentions in camps in Kosovo and Albania, sexual violence, other forms of inhumane treatment, forced displacements of individuals from their homes and communities, and desecration and destruction of churches and other religious sites".

"This effectively resulted in the ethnic cleansing of large portions of the Serb and Roma populations from those areas in Kosovo south of the Ibar river, with the exception of a few scattered minority enclaves," the SITF report says.

"We believe that the evidence is compelling that these crimes were not the acts of rogue individuals acting on their own accord, but rather that they were conducted in an organised fashion and were sanctioned by certain individuals in the top levels of the KLA leadership. The widespread or systematic nature of these crimes in the period after the war ended in June 1999 justifies a prosecution for crimes against humanity."

The SITF investigation largely confirms the findings of an earlier Council of Europe enquiry led by a Swiss politician, Dick Marty, in 2010.

It upholds the Marty report’s finding that a "handful" of prisoners had been murdered so that organs could be taken and sold. But Williamson said that "to prosecute such offences … it requires a level of evidence that we have not yet secured."

"Fifteen years down the line, we have solid information that these things happened, but no physical evidence. There are no bodies, no names of victims," Williamson told the Guardian.

"The likely reaction of a defence counsel in a murder case would be: there’s not enough information to know what I am defending against, and a judge would probably agree. That said, it’s certainly not beyond the realm of possibility that additional evidence will emerge in the next few months, and we will continue pursuing it."

The creation of a special European court would require a change in the Kosovo constitution and therefore a two-thirds majority in parliament. In theory, the suspects themselves could use their political power to obstruct it, but Williamson said that there would face substantial opposition inside Kosovo and beyond.

"I think it would be difficult for them politically if they attempted to block this. If the EU approach doesn’t work, the most likely alternative is something set up through the UN security council and most Kosovars oppose that," Williamson said.

"So, it would be a hard sell to say that they were acting for the interests of Kosovo as opposed to just trying to save their own skins. There is a lot of pressure out there to make this work though and people across the political spectrum have been publicly supportive of it, so I am optimistic it will stay on track."



Written by Mika

29. jula 2014. at 10:51

Objavljeno u Uncategorized

America Needs a Real Russia Policy

leave a comment »

The National Interest

July 25, 2014

America Needs a Real Russia Policy

"We need to ask hard questions about what we want to achieve, how we want to achieve it and the consequences of our actions."

By Thomas E. Graham

Thomas Graham is a managing director at Kissinger Associates, Inc., where he focuses on Russian and Eurasian affairs. He was Special Assistant to the President and Senior Director for Russia on the National Security Council staff from 2004 to 2007 and Director for Russian Affairs on that staff from 2002 to 2004.


The outrage at Russia is more than sufficient. What Washington needs is a policy. Particularly in the aftermath of the MH17 tragedy, the drive to punish Russia, to raise the costs of its aggression against Ukraine by levying harsher sanctions and seeking to isolate it internationally, is understandable; it might also meet a profound psychological need to demonstrate that we are not indifferent to the loss of nearly 300 innocent lives. But punishing Russia falls short of a credible policy.

We need to ask hard questions about what we want to achieve, how we want to achieve it and the consequences of our actions. Today’s turbulent world offers no easy answers or moral clarity. To protect and advance our interests, we will be compelled to make trade-offs that are less than fully morally satisfying. That is an inevitable part of statecraft.

Amidst the passions and calls for action against Russia, what do we need to consider?

First, sanctions. Whatever their effect in the long run, in the short run, they have only served to bolster Putin at home and energize ultranationalist forces, particularly prominent in the military and security forces. Although they may alter his tactics, they have not deterred Putin from pursuing what he sees as a vital Russian interest, securely anchoring Ukraine in Russia’s sphere of influence. Despite international censure, Russia continues to send heavy equipment to the separatists in eastern Ukraine; fighting on the ground has intensified. If Putin yields to domestic pressure to send the troops across the border, what is the West prepared to do to defend Ukraine, especially since we have ruled out the use of force? Simply more sanctions?

Second, Ukraine. We want to encourage Ukraine to take a Western path, while defending its sovereignty and territorial integrity. But Ukraine is broken, politically and economically. Russian aggression has not created, but has highlighted the domestic fissures between East and West, between the elites and the rest of society, and among oligarchic clans that have bedeviled Ukraine since its independence. Even if the separatists are defeated, Ukraine will need a generation-and billions of dollars-to build a component state and repair the economy. Does the West have the patience and resources for such a task, given its own profound socioeconomic problems? The recent trials in agreeing on rescue packages for profligate European Union members would suggest that it does not. Moreover, how does the West plan to repair without Russian help an economy that is-and will long remain-dependent on Russia for energy and needs Russia as a market for its manufactured goods, which will not soon meet the EU’s stringent standards?

Third, the Transatlantic Community. While everyone is mesmerized by Asia, it remains true that America’s closest and best partner is Europe. We should be devoting considerable time and effort to restoring ties, especially with Germany, that have frayed because of neglect and more recently NSA-leaker Snowden’s revelations. Concluding negotiations on the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) should be a priority. But our rush to sanctions, our desire to lead the West, has only exposed further rifts between the United States and Europe and within Europe itself. Even after the MH17 tragedy, key European states are reluctant to adopt more stringent sanctions, because their deep commercial ties to Russia leave them much more vulnerable than the United States is to Russian retaliation at a time when they have not fully recovered from the global economic crisis of 2008-09. Europeans are not closing ranks under U.S. leadership.

In addition to sanctions, we are also pressing for revitalizing NATO against a resurgent Russia. To be sure, there is an urgent need to reassure the most vulnerable allies about our commitment to collective defense. But the Russian challenge is not so much a conventional military one (NATO has the superior forces) as a socioeconomic one, as its actions in Ukraine demonstrate. And NATO allies should not be focused so much on building up their capacity for conventional warfare or acquiring new capabilities as on tending to the internal problems that Russia might exploit, including the Baltic states’ treatment of their ethnic Russian minorities, as well as the growing prominence of populist, anti-EU forces.

Fourth, China. One immediate consequence of our effort to isolate Russia has been Moscow’s redoubled effort to enhance its ties with China. Putin made a huge show of his trip to China in May to celebrate, as the joint statement put it,"a new stage of comprehensive partnership and strategic cooperation." He made a special point of heralding progress toward the formation of a "Sino-Russian energy alliance," which he said would be a critical element of energy security throughout the Asia-Pacific region. The showpiece was the thirty-year, $400-billion gas deal. But Russia is no longer negotiating from a position of strength, and the current troubles with the West will only further weaken it. The Chinese will have no qualms about taking advantage of the Russians, even as they talk of partnership. As a result, in punishing Russia, which does not pose a strategic threat, we are easing the strategic calculus of China, our greatest strategic challenge.

Fifth, global economic governance. Economic sanctions appear to be a powerful instrument with which to check our opponents, while avoiding the risks of the use of military force. Whether or not that is indeed the case, we need to think about the long-term consequences of resorting to sanctions against a major economy for the global economic system we created after the Second World War and which has been a foundation of our prosperity and power ever since. Inevitably, other states will look for ways to defend themselves. The BRICS’ recent decision to build alternatives to the IMF and World Bank and to clear more of their trade in their own currencies is a harbinger of things to come; even theirs looks like an uncertain enterprise at the moment.

Sixth, Russia. This is the most complicated piece in the strategic puzzle. While we want to contain Russian aggression in Europe, Russia could still prove to be a partner in managing the turmoil in the Middle East, resolving the Iranian nuclear issue, and containing instability in Afghanistan as U.S. forces withdraw. In the long run, it could serve as a useful hedge against China’s rise. But treating Russia as an adversary and levying harsher sanctions threaten to excessively weaken a country that could be an important player in building and maintaining a global balance that advances American interests.

In the end, as much as many might prefer it to be otherwise, we will have to accommodate Russia to some extent, as we did the Soviet Union during the Cold War, for our own strategic purposes. We should be debating the nature and extent of that accommodation, not simply how we can punish Russia more severely. To that end, we need to establish our global priorities, be honest about the limits of our still formidable powers, and weigh the costs and benefits of possible trade-offs with Moscow. Moral outrage does not absolve us of the responsibility to think critically about the consequences of our actions and, with regard to Russia, develop an effective and sustainable policy.


Written by Mika

27. jula 2014. at 19:33

Objavljeno u Uncategorized

Paul Craig Roberts: Does Russia (And Humanity) Have A Future?

leave a comment »

Paul Craig Roberts: Does Russia (And Humanity) Have A Future?

Filed under: Uncategorized — grypa666 @ 18:23

…Washington is accustomed to its free pass, granted by the world, to murder and to lie, and now is using it against Russia.

Does Russia (And Humanity) Have A Future?

July 25, 2014

Does Russia (And Humanity) Have A Future? Europe is complicit in its own demise

The Russian government has finally realized that it has no Western “partners,” and is complaining bitterly about the propagandistic lies and disinformation issued without any evidence whatsoever against the Russian government by Washington, its European vassals, and presstitute media.

Perhaps the Russian government thought that only Iraq, Libya, Syria, China, and Edward Snowden would be subjected to Washington’s lies and demonization.

It was obvious enough that Russia would be next.

The Russian government and Europe need to look beyond Washington’s propaganda, because the reality is much worst.

NATO commander General Breedlove and Senate Bill 2277 clearly indicate that Washington is organizing itself and Europe for war against Russia (see my previously posted column).

Europe is reluctant to agree with Washington to put Ukraine in NATO. Europeans understand that if Washington or its stooges in Kiev cause a war with Russia Europe will be the first casualty. Washington finds its vassals’ noncompliance tiresome. Remember Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland’s “fuck the EU.” And that is just what Washington is about [TRY] to do.

The US Senate’s Russian Aggression Prevention Act [SIC], about which I reported in my previous column, does even more mischief than I reported. If the bill passes, which it likely will, Washington becomes empowered to bypass NATO and to grant the status of “allied nation” to Ukraine independently of NATO membership. By so doing, Washington can send troops to Ukraine and thereby commit NATO to a war with Russia.

Notice how quickly Washington escalated the orchestrated Ukrainian “crisis” without any evidence into “Russian aggression.” Overnight we have the NATO commander and US senators taking actions against “Russian aggression” of which no one has seen any evidence.

With Iraq, Libya, and Syria, Washington learned that Washington could act on the basis of bald-faced lies. No one, not Great Britain, not France, not Germany, not Italy, not the Netherlands, not Canada, not Australia, not Mexico, not New Zealand, not Israel, nor Japan, nor S. Korea, nor Taiwan, nor (substitute your selection) stepped forward to hold Washington accountable for its blatant lies and war crimes. The UN even accepted the package of blatant and obviously transparent lies that Colin Powell delivered to the UN. Everything Powell said had already been refuted by the UN’s own weapons inspectors. Yet the UN pussies gave the go-ahead for a devastating war. [Demanded by The City’s Moneychangers]

The only conclusion is that all the whores were paid off. The whores can always count on Washington paying them off. For money the whores are selling out civilization to Washington’s war, which likely will be nuclear and terminate life on Earth. The whores’ money will incinerate with them.

It is hardly surprising that Washington now targets Russia. The world has given Washington carte blanche to do as it pleases. We have now had three administrations of US war criminals welcomed and honored wherever the war criminals go. The other governments in the world continue to desire invitations to the White House as indications of their worth. To be received by war criminals has become the highest honor.

Even the president of China comes to Washington to receive acceptance by the Evil Empire.

The world did not notice Washington’s war crimes against Serbia and didn’t puke when Washington then put the Serbian president, who had tried to prevent his country from being torn apart by Washington, on trial as a war criminal.

The world has made no effort to hold Washington responsible for its destruction of Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, and now Syria and Gaza. The world has not demanded that Washington stop murdering people in Pakistan and Yemen, countries with which Washington is not at war. The world looks the other way as Washington creates the US Africa Command. The world looks the other way as Washington sends deadly weapons to Israel with which to murder women and children in the Gaza Ghetto. Washington passes Senate and House Resolutions cheering on the Israeli murder of Palestinians.

Washington is accustomed to its free pass, granted by the world, to murder and to lie, and now is using it against Russia.

Russian President Putin’s bet that by responding to Washington’s aggression in Ukraine in a unprovocative and reasonable manner would demonstrate to Europe that Russia was not the source of the problem has not paid off. European countries are captive nations. They are incapable of thinking and acting for themselves. They bend to Washington’s will. Essentially, Europe is a nonentity that follows Washington’s orders.

If the Russian government hopes to prevent war with Washington, which is likely to be the final war for life on Earth, the Russian government needs to act now and end the problem in Ukraine by accepting the separatist provinces’ request to be reunited with Russia. Once S. 2277 passes, Russia cannot retrieve the situation without confronting militarily the US, because Ukraine will have been declared an American ally.

Putin’s bet was reasonable and responsible, but Europe has failed him. If Putin does not use Russian power to bring an end to the problem with which Washington has presented him in Ukraine while he still can, Washington’s next step will be to unleash its hundreds of NGOs inside Russia to denounce Putin as a traitor for abandoning the Russian populations in the former Russian provinces that Soviet leaders thoughtlessly attached to Ukraine.

The problem with being a leader is that you inherit festering problems left by previous leaders. Putin has the problems bequeathed by Yeltsin. Yeltsin was a disaster for Russia. Yeltsin was Washington’s puppet. It is not certain that Russia will survive Yeltsin’s mistakes.

If Washington has its way, Russia will survive only as an American puppet state.

In a previous column I described the article in Foreign Affairs, the journal of the Washington foreign policy community, that makes a case that the US has such strategic advantage over Russia at this time that a “window of opportunity” exists for the US to remove Russia as a restraint on US hegemony with a preemptive nuclear attack.

It is almost certain that Obama is being told that President John F. Kennedy had this window of opportunity and did not use it, and that Obama must not let the opportunity pass a second time.

As Stephen Starr explained in a guest column, there are no winners of nuclear war. Even if the US escapes retaliatory strikes, everyone will die regardless.

The view in Washington of the neoconservatives, who control the Obama regime, is that nuclear war is winnable. No expert opinion supports their assumption, but the neocons, not the experts, are in power.

The American people are out to lunch. They have no comprehension of their likely fate. Americans are an uninformed people distracted by their mounting personal and financial problems. If Europeans are aware, they have decided to live for the moment on Washington’s money.

What life is faced with is a drive for hegemony on the part of Washington and ignorant unconcern on the part of the rest of the world.

Americans, worked into a lather about Washington’s unfunded liabilities and the viability of their future Social Security pension, won’t be alive to collect it.
Dr. Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy and associate editor of the Wall Street Journal. He was columnist for Business Week, Scripps Howard News Service, and Creators Syndicate. He has had many university appointments. His internet columns have attracted a worldwide following. Roberts’ latest books are The Failure of Laissez Faire Capitalism and Economic Dissolution of the West and How America Was Lost.


Written by Mika

27. jula 2014. at 10:23

Objavljeno u Uncategorized

HRW blames Kiev army for indiscriminately killing civilians with missiles

leave a comment »

HRW blames Kiev army for indiscriminately killing civilians with missiles

Published time: July 25, 2014 08:35
Edited time: July 25, 2014 10:46

Get short URL

Viktor Stepanenko (69 years) by his house in the township of Snezhnoye that was destroyed by a Ukrainian rocket. (RIA Novosti)



Ukraine turmoil


Conflict, Crime, Human rights, Military, Ukraine

The Ukrainian army is using indiscriminate Grad missiles to attack densely populated areas in Donetsk, which violates international humanitarian law, Human Rights Watch alleged. It also blamed militia for taking cover in those areas.

The rights organization confirmed four rocket attacks by the Ukrainian military, or Kiev-allied paramilitary, on residential areas in or near Donetsk, which resulted in at least 16 civilian deaths and many more wounded. The attacks were carried out with Grad multiple rocket weapon systems, highly indiscriminate weapons that cannot be used against populated areas.

“Although Ukrainian government officials and the press service of the National Guard have denied using Grad rockets in Donetsk, a Human Rights Watch investigation on the ground strongly indicates that Ukrainian government forces were responsible for the attacks that occurred between July 12 and 21,” the group said on Friday.

The interior of an apartment in a residential building destroyed in an artillery attack by the Ukrainian army in the village of Peski in the Donetsk region. (RIA Novosti / Mikhail Voskresenskiy)

Kiev routinely denies causing civilian deaths in its conflict with armed militias in the east of the country and put the blames for such deaths on the militias themselves. But the attack sites investigated by HRW clearly point to the Ukrainian military.

“The attacks’ proximity to the front line also makes it unlikely, and in some cases impossible, that insurgent forces were responsible for the attacks. In two of the attacks, rockets hit on or near insurgent bases and checkpoints at the same time as they hit residential areas, indicating government forces were responsible,” the report said.

HRW didn’t report any evidence that militias were responsible for any Grad attacks on civilian-populated areas, but warned that they should avoid operating in those areas. The group also blamed them for failing to keep civilians out of harm’s way.

“Insurgent forces have failed to take all feasible precautions to avoid deploying in densely populated areas, thereby endangering civilians in violation of the laws of war,” it said. “In one case, separatist forces moved their base closer to the center of the town when Grad rockets struck their base and a nearby residential area. Violations of the laws of war by one side to the conflict do not justify violations by the other side.”

A dweller of an apartment building damaged during an artillery attack by the Ukrainian Security Forces in Donetsk suburb, inside his destroyed apartment. (RIA Novosti / Mikhail Voskresenskiy)

Belligerent parties in Ukraine must keep in mind that they are responsible for keeping their hostilities within international humanitarian law, HRW warned.

“Ukrainian authorities should order all their forces, including volunteer forces, to immediately stop using Grads in or near populated areas, and insurgent forces should avoid deploying in densely populated areas,” said Ole Solvang, senior emergencies researcher at Human Rights Watch.

“Commanding officers on all sides should recognize that one day they could face legal consequences for their actions.”

Earlier the International Red Cross officially declared the hostilities in eastern Ukraine a civil war, which opened the way for prosecuting atrocities committed there in international courts.

Residents of a multi-storey building damaged by the artillery shelling of Donetsk by the Ukrainian army. (RIA Novosti / Mikhail Voskresenskiy)

Grad is a Russian-made rocket launcher used by the Ukrainian military, which fires volleys of unguided missiles from multiple tubes mounted on a rack. The weapon is meant to cause massive damage to enemy positions, with individual rocket capable of killing unprotected soldiers in a radius of up to 28 meters from impact.

Kiev troops are continuing their attacks on cities held by militia forces, using their aviation and heavy artillery to barrage defense forces. The outgunned militias try to compensate by maneuvering and taking cover among city buildings. The army is hesitant to advance into hostile urban areas, where their superiority in armor and heavy weapons would be irrelevant.


Written by Mika

25. jula 2014. at 15:24

Objavljeno u Uncategorized

James Bissett – Globe and Mail – letters to the editor – July 22, 2014

leave a comment »


Doug Saunders would have us believe that Russia is solely responsible for the chaos that has erupted in Ukraine (‘The World Has Not Acted Fast Enough To Curtail Russia’s Manufacture Of Chaos’ – July 19). He goes so far as to suggest that had harsher sanctions been imposed on Russia, the downing of the Malaysian jetliner might not have happened.

He tells us there is “considerable empirical evidence” to demonstrate that the only villain in this conflict is Russian President Vladimir Putin. This surely is nonsense.

It was the United States that stoked the fires resulting in the carnage now taking place in Ukraine. Since the collapse of the USSR, the United States, using NATO as an instrument of its foreign policy, has showed nothing but aggression toward Russia and has encircled it with new NATO members. Mr. Saunders may assume that NATO is purely a defensive organization but the Serbs and several other countries might think differently.

James Bissett, Ottawa

Written by Mika

22. jula 2014. at 22:32

Objavljeno u Uncategorized

The Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity : What the Medi a Won’t Report About Malaysian Airlines Flight MH17

leave a comment »


What the Media Won’t Report About Malaysian Airlines Flight MH17

Ronpaul Tst

Just days after the tragic crash of a Malaysian Airlines flight over eastern Ukraine, Western politicians and media joined together to gain the maximum propaganda value from the disaster. It had to be Russia; it had to be Putin, they said. President Obama held a press conference to claim – even before an investigation – that it was pro-Russian rebels in the region who were responsible. His ambassador to the UN, Samantha Power, did the same at the UN Security Council – just one day after the crash!

While western media outlets rush to repeat government propaganda on the event, there are a few things they will not report.

They will not report that the crisis in Ukraine started late last year, when EU and US-supported protesters plotted the overthrow of the elected Ukrainian president, Viktor Yanukovych. Without US-sponsored “regime change,” it is unlikely that hundreds would have been killed in the unrest that followed. Nor would the Malaysian Airlines crash have happened.

The media has reported that the plane must have been shot down by Russian forces or Russian-backed separatists, because the missile that reportedly brought down the plane was Russian made. But they will not report that the Ukrainian government also uses the exact same Russian-made weapons.

They will not report that the post-coup government in Kiev has, according to OSCE monitors, killed 250 people in the breakaway Lugansk region since June, including 20 killed as government forces bombed the city center the day after the plane crash! Most of these are civilians and together they roughly equal the number killed in the plane crash. By contrast, Russia has killed no one in Ukraine, and the separatists have struck largely military, not civilian, targets.

They will not report that the US has strongly backed the Ukrainian government in these attacks on civilians, which a State Department spokeswoman called “measured and moderate.”

They will not report that neither Russia nor the separatists in eastern Ukraine have anything to gain but everything to lose by shooting down a passenger liner full of civilians.

They will not report that the Ukrainian government has much to gain by pinning the attack on Russia, and that the Ukrainian prime minister has already expressed his pleasure that Russia is being blamed for the attack.

They will not report that the missile that apparently shot down the plane was from a sophisticated surface-to-air missile system that requires a good deal of training that the separatists do not have.

They will not report that the separatists in eastern Ukraine have inflicted considerable losses on the Ukrainian government in the week before the plane was downed.

They will not report how similar this is to last summer’s US claim that the Assad government in Syria had used poison gas against civilians in Ghouta. Assad was also gaining the upper hand in his struggle with US-backed rebels and the US claimed that the attack came from Syrian government positions. Then, US claims led us to the brink of another war in the Middle East. At the last minute public opposition forced Obama to back down – and we have learned since then that US claims about the gas attack were false.

Of course it is entirely possible that the Obama administration and the US media has it right this time, and Russia or the separatists in eastern Ukraine either purposely or inadvertently shot down this aircraft. The real point is, it’s very difficult to get accurate information so everybody engages in propaganda. At this point it would be unwise to say the Russians did it, the Ukrainian government did it, or the rebels did it. Is it so hard to simply demand a real investigation?

Written by Mika

21. jula 2014. at 16:15

Objavljeno u Uncategorized

Guilt By Insinuation — Paul Craig Roberts

leave a comment »

PaulCraigRoberts.org – http://www.paulcraigroberts.org

Posted By pcr3 On July 21, 2014 @ 2:13 pm In Articles & Columns

Written by Mika

21. jula 2014. at 16:13

Objavljeno u Uncategorized