A recent article in the Moscow Times has led to a veritable cascade of interconnected propaganda fronts, a renewal of the “black propaganda” of the Cold War era. Saying these “organizations” or better termed “fronts” support terrorism and genocide is not a stretch of the imagination.
All of these groups are “run” for lack of a better word out of the Hoover Institution whose operational heads are Condoleezza Rice and Donald Rumsfeld, architects of America’s unilateralist belligerency policies under George W. Bush. These and dozens of media outlets, all more “independent” than the last are the rebirth of the Voice of America and Radio Free Europe, the CIA’s psychological warfare program from the darkest days of the Cold War.
The methodologies are simple, “big lie,” blackmail and smear and, of course, the old Cold War favorite, “divide and conquer.” We will look at a couple of instances and review only a few heads of the “hydra” and their “pet projects.”
On July 17, 2014, a Malaysian Airlines Boeing 777 crashed in Ukraine with all aboard. Any reasonable examination of the facts available, and all certainly are except those purposefully withheld, comes to the same conclusion.
During the past few days, using standard analytical methodology for intelligence and psychological warfare, an unusual publication, The Moscow Times, has virtually confessed to the MH 17 terror attack on behalf of not only Kiev but likely Israel as well. We will get into how we assessed this later but first some background on the Moscow Times itself.
One might almost think the Moscow Times exists only to obscure all reporting and analysis of the downing of MH 17. Their methodologies are clearly “big lie” which they do unilaterally or through Novaya Gazeta, both performing as assets of intelligence agencies, feeding “seeded material” into the narrative, “black propaganda” used to provide “sockpuppet” sourcing for briefing material given to western political leaders like President Obama or Prime Minister Cameron, people too inexperienced to know when they are ingesting toxic material.
Not a Newspaper At ALL, Not Hardly
The Moscow Times, presented in America as a major Russian newspaper with official standing and broad acceptance, is “everything but.” In actuality, it has the circulation of a small town shopping guide. It is owned by Sanoma Corporation, a shadowy media company run by Arthur Hoffman, a former employee of Booz Allen Hamilton, a CIA intelligence contracting firm. Before that he worked for Arthur Andersen, the now defunct “Big Five” accounting firm tied to CIA money laundering and “off the books” debt scams. In 2001, Andersen as a corporation was convicted of broad criminality and full complicity in the Enron scandal. This was the largest fraud in America’s history with 20,000 employees losing their jobs and pensions and investors losing up to $400 billion dollars.
Enron CEO, Kenneth Lay was the perhaps the closest friend of George W. Bush and his largest financial backer. Lay died weeks before beginning a prison sentence that would have extended decades beyond his life expectancy.
This strange “heritage” for the Moscow Times is far from simple “dot connecting.” Call it an assumption, but anyone moving from Andersen to a CIA front to a CIA front might well be working for the CIA or worse and there are things worse than the CIA, believe it or not.
“MH 17, Who Dun It?”
The Kiev government, aided by security services specializing in “radar spoofing,” most likely Israeli, attacked and downed this passenger aircraft as part of a series of terror and false flag attacks.
Intercepted communications released by Russia had exposed US involvement in staging terror attacks across Ukraine intended to be blamed on Russia. Repeatedly doctored photos of tank columns, years old satellite imagery and unreliable “witness” accounts were discredited and forgotten. This process continues on a daily basis.
The Odessa massacre and one or more tactical nuclear missile attacks on Donetsk set the tone for one of the dirtiest conflicts in history. Downing an airliner filled with terrified and quite innocent passengers requires no stretch of the imagination when the Kiev junta is involved.
Suffice it to say that unchallenged and comprehensive examination of wreckage indicates that MH 17 was shot down by one or more aircraft.
As the United States had both high resolution satellite coverage over Ukraine and two active AEGIS radars on station, one brought to the region from the US and land based in Romania to surveil the entire Black Sea/Belarus/Caucuses region, and could present no evidence of any kind, it is reasonable to assume that such evidence would not support Russia as culpable.
It isn’t like the United States wouldn’t trump up evidence and run to the United Nations Security Council. General Colin Powell can tell us about that one.
We turn to the issue of the Moscow Times because the downing of MH 17 can be traced to a source most easily by the “deception and cover” operations used to mislead the public and supply official “investigators,” in this case a Dutch “commission,” with foregone conclusions.
The largest single controversy over MH 17 involves radar tracking of one or more combat aircraft seen intersecting with MH 17 when it was downed. All combat aircraft in the area are admitted to be Kiev junta based. Kiev admitted they had two SU25 attack aircraft near MH 17 but said these planes could only fly 20,000 feet and could not be responsible.
This left two issues:
- Can an SU25 fly over 20,000 feet and
- Why believe Kiev about the type of plane they claim they used to shadow MH 17?
The review of this issue brought forward two supported conclusion:
- An SU25 can fly up to 52,000 feet with several pilots coming forward who have operated the plane at over 45,000 feet.
- It was documented that Israeli radar spoofing equipment can not only alter the type of plane “seen” by radar but its altitude, speed and even location as well.
The Imaginary Report
The Moscow Times was exposed, to the intelligence community on the whole anyway, when they claimed to have accessed a secret Russian report citing a BUK missile, fired by Kiev backed militants, as being the cause for the downing of MH 17.
To the uninitiated, this story would kill any far better supported and reality based hypothesis involving Kiev backed aircraft, based on the source of the story being Russia, the nation that has pressed the “plane to plane” shootdown, which is supported by radar and forensic evidence.
Of course, proving Kiev used a BUK missile is impossible? Why is that? Because they used one or more planes. Then why the Russian report?
What Russian report? Novaya Gazeta, the Moscow Times, Radio Liberty and, ultimately, the Hoover Institution made it all up.
Let’s have some “Spy Training 101” like out of the American TV series Burn Notice:
- No one saw a BUK missile head skyward in the middle of the day though it would have been seen by up to 50,000 people
- “Information” excluding Kiev backed planes based on performance envelopes and forensic evidence is baseless and totally fabricated, easily disproven
- Information including Novorussian use of BUK missiles is unfounded.
This leaves one functioning hypothesis: Kiev, noting their own planes at much lower altitude were shot down in the region, directed MH 17 over a disputed area, closely trailed by fighter interceptors who shot the airliner down over pro-Russian territory. They then immediately introduced a story about a missile shootdown.
If you look at the Wikipedia entry on MH 17, it is clear that Israel’s intelligence services were fully complicit. An almost insanely biased Wikipedia page with accompanying “discussion” dialog traces a cover up to Tel Aviv based Wiki editors closely tied to other Israeli projects, like white washing the genocide in Gaza in 2014.
Propaganda originates in blogs like Novaya Gazeta, then migrate to the Moscow Times, and then are used as sources by the Wall Street Journal and New York Times, and provide “rock solid” approved media backing for Wikipedia, all pulled out of thin air.
The Moscow Times regularly reports on another English language blog called Novaya Gazeta. Recently Gazeta was forced by the government to physically remove a story about a Russian who had been in Ukraine, a young Russian with severe burns named Dorzhi Batomunkuyev.
Reading the Novaya account of Dorzhi’s fearful plight leaves nothing to the imagination. Russia simply invaded Ukraine, why they didn’t take Kiev and fill their bayonets with the hapless bodies of the brave, though rather fascistic city defenders, we know not.
Remember the altered photographs of Russian tank units crossing into Ukraine and the satellite images presented in the Western media, the most embarrassing of which depicted joint Russian/Ukrainian military exercises as a “Russian invasion?”
Well, Novaya Gazeta, interviewed the heavily burned 20 year old, an interview loaded with highly agenda driven leading questions, an interview intended to prove that the defeat of Ukrainian forces was brought about by a full-scale assault into Ukraine by Russian armor units, a charge that came out of Kiev on a thrice daily basis prior to the Minsk agreements being penned.
What we see are the same names, the same faces, the same stories, the same games, from the old Cold War to the new improved version of today. What we also see is “connectivity,” the wars of old are the wars of today, war in Ukraine is war in Turkey or Syria or Iran or Afghanistan, perhaps even Kenya or further afield.
Gordon Duff is a Marine combat veteran of the Vietnam War that has worked on veterans and POW issues for decades and consulted with governments challenged by security issues. He’s a senior editor and chairman of the board of Veterans Today, especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.
Tue, May 19th, 2015
Fake Evidence Blaming Russia For MH-17? – Robert Parry
Exclusive: Pointing the finger of blame at Russian President Putin for the Malaysia Airlines shoot-down last July, an Australian news show claims to have found the spot where the Russian BUK missile battery made its getaway, but the images don’t match, raising questions of journalistic fakery, writes Robert Parry.