Ukraine to blame for MH17
Alex Romanoff writes: Re. “Crikey says: war doing wonders for Abbott’s ratings ” (yesterday). What about this as a counter-proposal? Russia had nothing to do with the shooting down of MH17. It was most likely shot down by a jet fighter of the US-installed fascist-dominated coup regime in Kiev in a premeditated false-flag operation that included the immediate explosion of anti-Russia hysteria in the Western media. What is really behind Abbott’s anti-Putin, anti-Russia histrionics?
ABC must be transparent
Glen Frost writes: Re. “ABC’s flagships could be sacrificed to fund online future, warns Scott” (yesterday). Mark Scott may well huff and puff about government funding, but the fact is that he must demonstrate value to the people of Australia as well as the minister, and to do that, Scott must be very clear about what it costs the ABC to make and buy programs, and what it costs to deliver them. The delivery cost should be split between the cities and the country, so we can all discuss why we are paying tens of millions of dollars to deliver TV and radio to a very, very small number of people.
Telstra did this — it is called the USO, the Universal Service Obligation, and it changed the debate from one about government funding to what bits we want to subsidise, and why. Surely the managing director of a publicly owned asset, and one in the business of communicating information, can use a better comms strategy than his predecessors?
Doggone wrong
Drew Baker writes: Re. “No notes at airports” (yesterday). Your story yesterday was just plain wrong. The explosives test is undertaken at most domestic airports and often by contracted security guards, usually at the security screening point entering the secure area of the terminal. That has nothing to do with Customs and Border Protection, whose detector dog program is generally focused on narcotics or other prohibited substances at the border — in other words inbound travellers at international terminals. Just saying …
Alex R: Basing an unsubstantiated hypothesis entirely on conjecture about a single incident, no matter how large or small, is not the same as considering all of the available evidence.
Where in your scenario does the continuing aggression shown to many neighbours of Russia appear? Perhaps you think that the same Ukrainian air force is responsible for challenges to the air space of Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and other neighbours of Russia on a regular basis for the past many months?
Combine this with miscellaneous sabre-rattling and public pronouncements from Russia, including by arch-populist Putin about the desirability of reconstructing the greater Russian empire and a theme emerges.
Consider also the land and naval campaigns by actual Russians and pretend-locals, including actual territory grabs in The Ukraine and other lands during Putin’s megalomaniacal reign and the emerging theme is confirmed.
Yep, Russia is a far larger threat to peace and stability in Northern Europe, Eastern Europe and Western Asia than the Ukrainians could ever dream of becoming.
I suggest that you hold your comments until the crash investigation reports are finalised, but not to be surprised if one conclusion is that it is technically impossible for Ukrainian involvement in the manner you describe to have been the cause and that either Russian or Russian-supported malevolence brought about the crash of MH17.
That is just bullsh+t, JohnB. You need to do a bit more research. For example, have a look at the huge number of reports on MH17 at globalresearch.ca, a Canadian website. The Canadians are hardly a bunch of raging conspiracy theorists, and this site contains a huge amount of technical data from all over the world.
Are you aware that the Russians released all their relevant satellite data to the world about ten days after the incident? The Americans have refused to release ANY to this day!!!
The consensus seems to be that MH17 was NOT brought down by a surface to air missile, but by shots from a MILITARY AIRCRAFT. All the evidence now says that the only such aircraft in the air on that day, at that time, was from the Ukrainian Airforce. The so-called Russian-backed rebels don’t even have any military aircraft.
The whole incident is a beat-up to discredit Russia, arch enemies of that fasc+st lot in Kiev, who were ‘installed’ by the yanks. Our lunatic PM will have a large amount of egg-on-face when all this scenario becomes official.
And all those countries you mention, who have been the victims of Russian ‘aggression’? America wants to encircle Russia with missiles in at least some of those countries (and also in Ukraine), and Russia is not about to let that happen. Probably just giving them all a ‘friendly’ reminder about that!!
Make no mistake, The Ukraine is a total puppet of the great and glorious USofA. No doubt you have heard the tape of that State Dept. personage, Victoria Nuland, discussing all this without realising she was being recorded!!!!! Anyone who believes otherwise, is a fool!
CML has branded me a bullsh1tt1ng fool, but I remain convinced that he is jumping the gun.
I know of what I speak, having flown that precise route across the Ukraine less than 2 weeks pre-incident, on my way home from a lengthy visit to the Baltics, especially to a nation that was being subjected up to 4 times per day to aggressive harassment from the Russian airforce.
My whole trip was done in the shadow of many reports, from all directions, regarding the Russian war games. This was while the Crimea issue was hot and Russian involvement in the Ukraine was being documented and publicised.
One opinion from an anonymous Canadian is insufficient data to justify rejection of literally dozens of published reports from dozens of sources, including direct quotes from Putin himself.
Further, I met and discussed the situation off the record with American and NATO officers, both naval and air service who had little reason to, in CML’s terminology, bullsh1t me regarding the purpose of Europe’s many very visible hasty preparations for the worst while hoping for the best. Now is not the place to disclose what I saw and heard in any detail, but it is known by and visible to many in the affected countries.
CML is welcome to his opinion, but seems to forget that bullsh1t is freely available these days and that there is a courteous way of expressing opinions, no matter how ill-researched, without resorting to silly name-calling.
If only the government would wait for the investigation, but it isn’t the case right now. The counter proposal, while a very extreme worst case scenario, raises a good point. What if we were wrong and we get involved in yet another civil war?
“The delivery cost should be split between the cities and the country, so we can all discuss why we are paying tens of millions of dollars to deliver TV and radio to a very, very small number of people.”
because you can only take our tv and radio from our cold dead hands.