Flying over warzone Ukraine, the probable & convenient happens. July 18, 2014 (Tony Cartalucci - LD) - At no juncture during the Ukrainian crisis could the downing of Malaysian Boeing 777 flight MH17 have been more convenient for NATO and its proxy regime in Kiev. Kiev's forces were being picked apart in eastern Ukraine with several units encircled and destroyed. In the west of the country, dissent was growing by Ukrainians unwilling to march off to fight in the east. NATO's attempts to bait Russia into moving into Ukrainian territory and shift global opinion against Moscow had repeatedly failed.Originally published here:Flight MH17 Down Over Ukraine
Yet another Malaysia Boeing 777 is lost under extraordinary circumstances this year.
The final card to be played by the US was another round of sanctions that almost immediately was ridiculed as ineffective and impotent. Even US corporate-financier interests condemned the latest round of sanctions claiming they were "unilateral" in nature and thus limited US enterprise from interacting with Russia while leaving European competitors free to move into the void. An effective US policy of confronting, containing, and undermining Russia would require multilateral sanctions with almost universal support - but the impetus for such sweeping sanctions did not exist - until now.
The US FAA Declared Ukrainian Airspace Off-Limits 3 Months Ago
Indeed, the stars have aligned for NATO. While the US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) declared Ukrainian airspace off limits to all aircraft under its jurisdiction, it appears other airlines continued flying over what has been a warzone for months. The Atlantic in a report titled, "The FAA's Notice Prohibiting Airline Flights Over Ukraine," stated clearly that:
Did aviation authorities know that this was a dangerous area?
Yes, they most certainly did. Nearly three months ago, on the "Special Rules" section of its site, the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration put out an order prohibiting American pilots, airlines, charter carriers, and everyone else over whom the FAA has direct jurisdiction, from flying over parts of Ukraine.
Fighters Use Man-Portable Air Defense Systems That Can't Reach 33,000 Feet
 |
| Image: Igla man-portable air defense missiles. |
For months fighters in eastern Ukraine have been downing Ukrainian military helicopters, warplanes, and even a military transport aircraft - all using various forms of man-portable anti-air missiles - all of which are incapable of downing the Malaysian 777 which was flying at approximately 33,000 feet - well above the effective range of man-portable air defense systems.
The system cited as responsible for the downing of flight MH17, was the sophisticated Buk radar guided, tracked-vehicle mounted, anti-aircraft missile system. The New York Daily News reported in an article titled, "Malaysia Airlines plane feared shot down in Ukraine near Russian border," that:
Anton Gerashenko, an adviser to Ukraine's Interior Minister, said on Facebook that the plane was flying at an altitude of 33,000 feet when it was hit by a missile fired from a Buk launcher, reported Interfax, a Ukranian news agency.
Comments
Anonymous (not verified)
Mon, 2014-07-21 10:31
Permalink
What weapon was used to shoot down the MH 17?
Seeing as the Malaysian Air 777 was transiting from west to east, high over the border between the two rivals, may have classified the aircraft as a Ukrainian military aircraft? A friendly fire incident was quite possible if airliners continued to use routes over the troubled region.
If rebel forces were either given these surface to air missile systems from Russia, or one similar such as the more modern SA-11/17 "Buk" — it is fairly clear Russia has backed these forces — or at least initially, with material and training, then it would also implicate Russia in this tragic event.
it is quite possible that Russia's air defense apparatus along the border with Ukraine was on high-alert as it may have already shot down two Ukrainian aircraft. Ukrainian officials believe Russian separatists fired a ground-to-air BUK missile that downed the plane, but in an interview with TIME, separatists leaders claimed they had nothing to do with the incident.
What was a passenger plane doing anywhere near the area? As it turns out, aviation authorities had addressed the Ukraine situation and taken precautions. They just didn’t think non-combatant planes flying at 33,000 feet were at risk. Flight restrictions often apply only under certain altitudes. Planes are most exposed to ground-level threats when they’re taking off and landing—that’s when they’re within range of small arms and shoulder-mounted anti-aircraft missiles.
Malaysia Airlines had flown this route repeatedly over the past several weeks without incident, as had other carriers.
The SA-11 "Buk" is designed to engage military aircraft and missiles at altitudes of up to 72,000ft. It is in service with the Russian and Ukrainian armed forces, as well as other forces around the world.
Reports from Ukraine suggested a BUK had been smuggled in the dead of night into Russia soon after the plane was blasted out of the sky on Thursday last week.
It came after images were released of a launcher rumbling through Torez, held by pro-Russian separatists, just two hours before the Malaysia Airlines flight was shot down.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2699170/Is-BUK-missile-launcher-shot-MH17-smuggled-Russia-Motorist-captures-military-truck-carrying-BUK-M1-border-town.html#ixzz383f42eoF
Sheila Newman
Mon, 2014-07-21 17:36
Permalink
No gain for Russia in airline incident - article response
The Daily Mail article cited above shows a covered truck and gives a very vague story.
Even more importantly, it doesn't supply a motive.
What gain could Russia have in shooting down an airline?
There is no obvious motive (that I can see) and plenty of reasons not to. I've written an article here "Motive lacking in Russia blame for airline attack"in response to the Daily Mail allegations. I welcome ongoing discussion of the points I make at the base of that article, or here.
billie
Mon, 2014-07-21 22:58
Permalink
Korean airliner KAL 007 shot down by USSR in 1983
The Russian army is not unified and controlled as well as in other developed countries. Maybe the separatists bribed the army to get the weapons, or hijacked it. It needs investigation. Korean Air Lines flight 007 from New York to Seoul (after refueling in Alaska) flew into Russian airspace due to a navigational error and was shot down by Soviet fighter jets. All 269 passengers and crew, which included 63 Americans, were killed. There's an eerie parallel.
Editorial comment: There is much printed and on-line material to suggest that the KAL 007 incident was a staged provocation by the United States. One example is KAL 007 on what-when-how. It cites works on KAL007 including KAL 007-The Cover Up (1987), by David Pearson, which I own and much of which I have read. One outcome of the deaths of 269 people aboard KAL 007 was that public opposition to the deployment in Europe of Cruise and Pershing missiles directed against the USSR was overcome. - Ed
Anonymous (not verified)
Mon, 2014-07-28 16:29
Permalink
KAL007 faulty air path no accident
NEO – Cold Case...MH17 faint echos of KAL007 Shootdown (23/7/14) by Jim W. Dean, Managing Editor of Veterans Today
KAL007 pilot trainer David H. Adrian quoted saying the Korean pilot Capt. Chun could NOT have flown by accident into Soviet airspace in 1983.
Add comment