“Something of a tour de force of moral bankruptcy even for the team that brought you the Polonium story.” – Catte
An excerpt from the above linked-to article by Catte follows:
You see, happily for Luke and the pro-war agenda, Richard was killed on board MH17, and his parents blame Vladimir Putin…
“Amid their grief, the Maynes came to a grim conclusion: Richard had been murdered. The man whom they believe murdered him is Vladimir Putin. It was Putin, they believe, who gave orders for the Russian military to cross the border, setting in train a series of consequences, including the shooting down of MH17 and 10,000 dead in the conflict.”
Let’s be crystal clear at this point. No one can blame this family for their anger. They’re desperate and grief-stricken and need someone to be punished for the crime that took their son…
And then we get this:
“Certainly, Russia has done everything it can to cover up the crime. The Kremlin used its UN security council veto to stop an international investigation similar to that carried out following the Pan Am Lockerbie bombing.”
Getting into his stride, Luke abandons implications and guilt by juxtaposition in favour of his old standby – the outright lie. Let’s take a moment to appreciate how completely unfazed he is by the total absence of evidence anywhere that Russia covered up anything, or by the small detail that Russia did not veto an “international investigation”, at all but in fact supported UN Resolution 2166 that called for “efforts to establish a full, thorough and independent international investigation into the incident in accordance with international civil aviation guidelines”. What does Luke think the Dutch Safety Board international investigation was if not – well, an international investigation?
And so on. Read the article. It’s very good. I have followed this story myself, but it’s unfolding slowly and my attention is not focussed on it. My ‘go to’ source for info on this subject is the fantastic site maintained by Roger Annis called “The New Cold War: Ukraine And Beyond.” The above New Cold War banner is a link to site. And here’s a link to a return for a New Cold War site search of the term “MH17”: https://newcoldwar.org/?s=MH17
My response doesn’t deal with MH17, but rather it deals with Luke Harding. Apologies for being off topic, but it’s not completely off topic. The article by Catte deals with both Luke Harding and the downing of MH17. I personally have no doubt that it was the Ukrainian Nazis who did it. There’s a great deal of complexity to this story, but here’s a small sample of interesting facts that my reading around has uncovered. I don’t know how much of this is copied. I am pretty sure that I at least copied some of it, rather than simply put it into my own words. I printed it out and stuck it on the wall in front of my computer desk. There’s no quotation marks and I didn’t bother to keep track of the source, since it was information for my own personal use. Consider:
The Australian report spells out the problems of gathering and authenticating evidence in Ukraine, where there was “no forensic control”; where the international air crash guidelines issues by Interpol weren’t followed; and where there was inappropriate interim storage and body preservation.”
I was also struck by the bizarre fact that the Dutch (who wanted to join with the Australians and Americans in sending troops to Nazi Ukraine following the downing of MH17), who had nationals on board downed MH17, were eventually cut out of the investigation. Go figure! I don’t imagine that such a decision by whoever was even legal. There are all kinds of irregularities in connection with this tragedy.
My online response to the top of post linked-to article by Catte follows:
re the article
What to expect from this guy? I discovered Luke Harding through reading his poorly written, unprofessional hatchet job of a book, “Wikileaks.”
“Wikileaks – Inside Julian Assange’s War On Secrecy,” which is the last thing you want to look to Luke Harding (and David Leigh) for, is full of the ranting and twisting of facts that only someone with a “narcissistic persecution complex” could put before the public this way.
The authors, who have a hardcore hate-on for alternative media, recount the “Collateral Murder” video that helped make Wikileaks a widely known and inspiring phenomenon, which other news orgs thought to imitate (http://bit.ly/29LazzR). Quite early in the video, when all you saw was men, including the two Reuters cameramen, casually strolling down the street, One yahoo in an Apache helicopter watching the scene from a great distance, and clearly working himself up for some killing, utters “Fucking prick.” Uh huh. That’s what I think when I see some guys casually walking around, doing NOTHING! The authors are determined to put this instance of whistleblowing in the worst light they can, deriding the title Wikileaks gave for the video as “tendentious” and leaving out of their retelling the presence of two children in the video. They were in the van that happened on the scene of carnage. It figures that these killers would be surprised to see life where they are. I also found it interesting, and disturbing, that while the murderers were chomping at the bit to kill, at no point did you see any effort by the Apache crew to determine whether there were others – soldiers, civilians, anyone – in the area who these supposed fighters, strolling quite casually, were going to engage. You don’t see anyone else and you hear NO ONE ask the question, “Where is the enemy or target or targets that these fighters are engaging?” I’m just glad that these guys fighting for my values and freedom are professionals. Not!
The murderous Apache crew are soon looking at dead bodies from a great distance and there’s no mention of any possible targets of the supposed fighters, because all they have on their minds is killing, which I guess means a job well done and approval and acceptance. And a paying job. “Oh ya, Look at those dead bastards,” says one murderer. Another responds with “Nice.” Then more congratulations follow, as well as expressions of glee when they think they might get to fire some more. You hear someone wishing out loud for one of the later to arrive Iraqis, from the van, to pick up a gun. They are amused by one victim crawling around, unable to stand, and wish out loud for him to pick up a gun. I kid you not. And they get a real chuckle out of the apparent running over of a dead body by the Bradley armored vehicle that arrives about 8 minutes after the real fun.
The authors like this killing too and clearly worry about public perception of the easy to understand video, because they try to shift the cruelty on display from the murderers on the scene to their far away bosses, hoping that the readers will not notice that the cruel murderers on the scene are in sync with their cruel murderous bosses elsewhere. Indeed, Anyone can be a soldier. “The cruel decision to treat the Baghdad streets as a battle-space on which all were fair game was made not by individual sadists or war criminals, but by the US military at a much higher level.” As noted, a van appeared and the courageous driver and other passengers who tried to tend to any wounded ended up dead for their trouble. The Apache that fired on the two Reuters employees and their Iraqi companions also fired on the these later arrivals when they exited the van and on the van they arrived in, wounding two children who were inside. The treating soldier who arrived in the Bradley minutes after the shooting had stopped, found two wounded children in the van and in what one ‘might’ say was the sole act of human compassion in all of this, he decided to send the children to the nearby US base called Rustamiyah. But, out of concern for the well being of these young victims of war, who were a big part of the reason the Americans were in Iraq afterall, higher command ordered that the children instead be handed over to Iraqi police (IPs in the video) who would presumably take them to an Iraqi hospital and, due to circumstances, a lower standard of care. We hear the dogs talking about it: “Well it’s their fault for bringing their kids into a battle,” says one dog. Then another responds with “That’s right!” I think if Iraqis (Pakistanis, Yemenis, Syrians) knew where ‘battles’ were going to break out, they wouldn’t be driving around in the area with their kids. But maybe that’s just my unprofessional opinion.
Wikileaks revealed this (one) instance of the US military’s operation of liberating Iraq. For that, Luke Harding and his co-author, boosters of imperialism and their imperial bosses, can only say “This was surely what free speech was meant to be all about. In many people’s eyes, Assange deserved to be seen as a hero.” They know that they can’t get us to believe that it’s wrong to know this, but they might succeed in getting us to join them in criminalizing Julian Assange. The “many people’s eyes” clearly don’t include those of the authors.
Collateral Murder: http://bit.ly/29Y3al2