Kerry Balks at Supplying MH-17 Data

Exclusive: The father of a young American killed aboard Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 in 2014 says Secretary of State Kerry balks at turning over U.S. data that Kerry cited three days after the tragedy in eastern Ukraine, writes Robert Parry.

By Robert Parry

Secretary of State John Kerry has rebuffed a request from the father of the only American citizen killed aboard Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 for Kerry to disclose the radar and other data that he cited in 2014 in claiming to know the precise location of the missile launch that allegedly downed the airliner over eastern Ukraine killing 298 people.

In a letter to Kerry dated Jan. 5, 2016, Thomas Schansman, the father of American-Dutch citizen Quinn Schansman, asked Kerry to turn over that data to aid the investigation seeking to identify who was responsible for shooting down the plane on July 17, 2014. In a letter dated March 7, 2016, but just delivered to Thomas Schansman on Thursday, Kerry expressed his condolences and repeated his claim to know where the missile launch originated, but did not provide new details.

Quinn Schansman, a dual U.S.-Dutch citizen killed aboard Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 on July 17, 2014. (Photo from Facebook)

Quinn Schansman, a dual U.S.-Dutch citizen killed aboard Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 on July 17, 2014. (Photo from Facebook)

Kerry wrote, “The assessment I provided to the media three days following the shoot down remains unchanged, and is corroborated by the findings of the Dutch Safety Board [DSB]. Flight 17 was shot down by a BUK surface-to-air missile fired from separatist-controlled territory in eastern Ukraine.”

But Kerry’s assertion is not entirely correct. Despite Kerry’s claim on July 20, 2014 – three days after the shoot-down – to know the location of the missile launch, the Dutch Safety Board reported last October that it could only place the likely launch site within a 320-square-kilometer area that included territory under both government and rebel control. (The safety board did not seek to identify which side fired the fateful missile.)

Why the U.S. government has dragged its heels about supplying the evidence that Kerry claimed to possess just days after the tragedy has become a secondary mystery to the allegations and counter-allegations about whodunit. That Kerry would not even elaborate on that information in response to the father of the lone American victim is even more striking.

In an email to me with Kerry’s letter attached, Thomas Schansman wrote, “the message is clear: no answer on my request to hand over satellite and/or radar data to DSB or public.”

Plus, Kerry’s credibility has come under a darkening cloud because of recent disclosures undermining his repeated claims on Aug. 30, 2013, that “we know” that Syrian government forces were responsible for the Aug. 21, 2013 sarin gas attack outside Damascus. Despite Kerry’s assertions of certainty in that case, he presented no verifiable evidence and it has since been confirmed that the U.S. intelligence community lacked “slam dunk” proof.

Nearly a year after his “we know” performance regarding the Syria-sarin case, Kerry staged a reprise expressing similar certainty about the MH-17 case – again dumping the blame on the target of an intensive U.S. propaganda campaign, this time Russia, which was backing the rebels in eastern Ukraine. Kerry again failed to supply supporting evidence (beyond some dubious references to “social media”).

Cracks in the Story

Also, some of Kerry’s MH-17 assertions have shown cracks as more information has become available. For instance, despite Kerry’s putting the blame on the ethnic Russian rebels and their supporters in Moscow, Western intelligence now says the only functioning Buk anti-aircraft missiles in the area were under the control of the Ukrainian military.

According to Dutch intelligence – and implicitly corroborated by U.S. intelligence – Ukraine’s Buk batteries were the only anti-aircraft missiles in the area capable of hitting a commercial airliner flying at 33,000 feet. That information was contained in a little-noticed Dutch intelligence report last October citing information from the Netherlands’ Military Intelligence and Security Service (MIVD).

MIVD made its assessment in the context of explaining why commercial aircraft continued to fly over the eastern Ukrainian battle zone in summer 2014. MIVD said that based on “state secret” information, it was known that Ukraine possessed some older but “powerful anti-aircraft systems” and “a number of these systems were located in the eastern part of the country.”

MIVD added that the rebels lacked that capacity, having only short-range anti-aircraft missiles and a few inoperable Buk missiles that had been captured from a Ukrainian military base. “During the course of July, several reliable sources indicated that the systems that were at the military base were not operational,” MIVD said. “Therefore, they could not be used by the Separatists.”

U.S. intelligence, which had eastern Ukraine under intensive overhead surveillance in summer 2014, implicitly corroborated MIVD’s conclusion in a U.S. “Government Assessment” released by the Director of National Intelligence on July 22, 2014. It listed weapons systems that Russia had provided the rebels but made no mention of a Buk missile battery.

In other words, based on satellite imagery and other intelligence reviewed both before and after the shoot-down, U.S. and other Western intelligence services could find no proof that Russia had ever given a Buk system to the rebels or introduced one into the area. If Russia had provided a Buk battery – four 16-foot-long missiles hauled around by trucks – it would have been hard to miss.

There was also logic to support the notion that a Ukrainian team may have been responsible for the MH-17 shoot-down. At the time, the Ukrainian military was mounting an offensive against the rebels, who had resisted a U.S.-backed coup on Feb. 22, 2014, which ousted elected President Viktor Yanukovych, who had strong support among Ukraine’s ethnic Russian minority in the east.

As the Ukrainian offensive claimed territory that the rebels had held, the Ukrainian military moved several Buk anti-aircraft missile batteries toward the front, presumably out of concern that Russia might directly intervene to save the rebels from annihilation.

Plus, on July 16, 2014, a Ukrainian warplane was shot down apparently by an air-to-air missile believed fired by a Russian jet, giving reason for the Ukrainian anti-aircraft batteries to be on edge the next day, looking for Russian aircraft intruding into Ukraine’s airspace.

(Another possible scenario, reportedly examined by U.S. intelligence analysts, was that a rogue Ukrainian team working with a hardline oligarch hoped to shoot down Russian President Vladimir Putin’s plane returning from a South American trip at about the same time and with similar markings as MH-17.)

But the evidence – that the only operational Buk batteries were under control of the Ukrainian military – did not fit the U.S. propaganda needs of blaming Russia and the rebels. Any indication that the post-coup Ukrainian government was responsible would instead put the U.S.-backed Kiev regime in a negative light.

So, it makes sense in a “strategic communications” kind of way for Kerry and other U.S. officials to leave the conventional wisdom – blaming Putin and Russia for the 298 deaths – in place for as long as possible. Kerry told Thomas Schansman that he and the other families of victims should expect a long wait before the perpetrators are brought to justice.

Expressing Condolences

In the letter to Thomas Schansman, Secretary Kerry wrote, “As a father myself, I can only begin to imagine the pain and loss you have endured with your son’s tragic passing. My heart goes out to you and your family.”

Secretary of State John Kerry denounces Russia's RT network as a "propaganda bullhorn" during remarks on April 24, 2014.

Secretary of State John Kerry denounces Russia’s RT network as a “propaganda bullhorn” during remarks on April 24, 2014.

Kerry then added, “This investigative work is not easy, and bringing those responsible to justice will not be a quick process. However, Quinn, your family, and the families of all the others who died that day deserve such justice, and we will continue to do everything possible to achieve it.”

But the “everything” doesn’t apparently include releasing the data that Kerry claimed to have just days after the crash.

On July 20, 2014, Kerry appeared on NBC’s “Meet the Press” and declared, “we picked up the imagery of this launch. We know the trajectory. We know where it came from. We know the timing. And it was exactly at the time that this aircraft disappeared from the radar.”

In the letter asking Kerry to release that data, Thomas Schansman noted Kerry’s similar comments to a news conference on Aug. 12, 2014, when the Secretary of State said about the Buk anti-aircraft missile suspected of downing the plane: “We saw the take-off. We saw the trajectory. We saw the hit. We saw this aeroplane disappear from the radar screens. So there is really no mystery about where it came from and where these weapons have come from.”

Yet where the missile launch occurred has remained a point of mystery to the Dutch-led investigation. Last October, the Dutch Safety Board put the missile launch in a 320-square-kilometer area. Almaz-Antey, the Russian arms manufacturer of the Buk systems, conducted its own experiments to determine the likely firing location and placed it in a much smaller area near the village of Zaroshchenskoye, about 20 kilometers west of the DSB’s zone and in an area under Ukrainian government control.

Earlier this month, Fred Westerbeke, the head of the Dutch-led Joint Investigation Team, told the families of the victims that the inquiry had yet to pin down the missile launch site, saying “In the second half of the year we expect exact results.” In other words, on the second anniversary of the shoot-down, the investigators looking into the MH-17 tragedy still might not know what Kerry claimed to know three days afterwards.

[For more on this topic, see Consortiumnews.com’s “Flight 17 Shoot-Down Scenario Shifts”; “The Danger of an MH-17 Cold Case”; and “The Ever-Curiouser MH-17 Case.”]

Investigative reporter Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories for The Associated Press and Newsweek in the 1980s. You can buy his latest book, America’s Stolen Narrative, either in print here or as an e-book (from Amazon and barnesandnoble.com.

image_pdfimage_print

34 comments for “Kerry Balks at Supplying MH-17 Data

  1. ALBERT CHAMPION
    March 25, 2016 at 8:56 pm

    well, john kohn[or is that cohn, cohen] continues to waffle. a technique adopte by all the previous members of the skull and bones secret society.

    for me, knowing about the satellite coverage of that area conducted by the NRO, the reality is very plain. the ukrainean putschists, with the connivance of the usa, shot down this airliner.

    in a scheme to indict putin. without any real evidence.

    it is another chapter in the rockefeller, rothschild great game. to bring down russia so it sbecomes subjected to rockefeller, rothschild thievery.

    • Okasis
      March 27, 2016 at 2:58 am

      No problems with your rational!

  2. March 25, 2016 at 9:18 pm

    It was clear to me from his behavior and from my attempts to engage him back in 1968–when he was President of Vietnam Veterans Against the War– that he was a liar and a fraud..

    It was also illegal for him to address Congress in his military uniform after he had been discharged– in his “Last man to die” speech the way he did–a clearly staged event setting him up for later leadership.

    So he is a man of peace now,….. yes?

    2LT Dennis Morrisseau USArmy [armor – Vietnam era] ANTI-WAR retired.
    POB 177 W Pawlet, VT 05775
    802 645 9727 dmorso1@netzero.net

    • Fred Farklestone
      March 26, 2016 at 5:52 pm

      How could Kerry been president of the VVAW in 1968, as he was on active duty at the time!
      I noticed you used the term “Vietnam Era” instead of “Vietnam veteranI”
      You know what that tells me, you never at least part of 1 day in Vietnam, unlike the 997 men mentioned below! another missing from your handle is thayt you didn’t mention the unit, units that you served with in Vietnam!

      “997 soldiers were killed on their first day in Vietnam.”
      https://crockettlives.wordpress.com/vietnam-page-of-honor/statistics-about-the-vietnam-war/

  3. Sherwood Ross
    March 25, 2016 at 9:47 pm

    Recall also the families who lost loved ones in the 9/11 horror had to fight tooth and claw to get the U.S. government to conduct an investigation. Why was that? So the refusal of Secretary Kerry not to disclose everything he knows raises the suspicion that the U.S. is somehow complicit in this foul deed. The failure of Mr. Kerry to comply suggests that he has gone over to the Dark Side. — Sherwood Ross

  4. Joe Tedesky
    March 25, 2016 at 10:00 pm

    What Mr. Thomas Schansman needs is some quality press time on CNN, or one of the other cable networks, who seem to be thrilled talking to the Brussels terror victims families to no end. I will say this, that it is a good thing that Robert Parry doesn’t seem to want to let ago of this planes fateful demise, and that makes me all the more a fan of his site here. My heart goes out to the Schansman family, along with the other 297 victims families, and this is all the more reason why something has got to change with how our country conducts itself within our competitive world. To think there was a time when John Kerry represented what seemed to be the side of wisdom, when he protested against the Vietnam war. Now, as like so many others of America’s political class, he has gone over to the deep dark side. In the end will these leaders of ours be able to say, that by backing a Nazi regime takeover of a democratically elected government in Eastern Europe, that this support wasn’t in keeping with our so called American values, and how by throwing our country’s morales away into the wind, that this might all be worth it?

  5. Joseph
    March 25, 2016 at 10:12 pm

    Thanks for maintaining the pressure for truth in this area and many others. This withholding of evidence means that it contradicts the admin line, or at least does not support it, because the admin could always claim a protected source if it were so. A protected deep cover source could have fled the country by now, and a single source seeking benefits for information might not be reliable anyway. The result of a secret technology could be made to look as though it came from another technology or more traditional source.

  6. Jaime
    March 25, 2016 at 11:14 pm

    False flags here…false flags there. They’re easier to spot when they’re so improbable, illogical, and counter-intuitive to the “blamed party.” Trying to imagine that the Assad forces would release an attack on a suburb of Damascus on the same day that UN investigators arrive in Damascus to assess the Assad promise to give up his chemical stash….is best explained by a false flag attack. What’s mind numbing is the numbers of civilians killed in false flag attacks by governments….ours and our allies, in the name of the escalating chess game that’s gradually becoming Cold War II.

  7. Randal Marlin
    March 25, 2016 at 11:42 pm

    Good work, Robert! Keep up the pressure on Kerry.
    I would not want to have to rely on Trump or Clinton to tell the full truth.

  8. Alec
    March 26, 2016 at 2:53 am

    Elsewhere I have read that the reason Kerry won’t release ‘the evidence’ is because it would reveal satellite spying capability … like so much of zionist controlled US foreign policy lying has been taken to new heights where ‘they’ think we are so stupid as to believe whatever we are told by an official on the television which unfortunately is the case with the majority.

  9. Willem
    March 26, 2016 at 5:46 am

    Here is a good (but long) quote from Mark Twain, which kind of sais it all. The only way of proving that Mark Twain is wrong is by showing that “a few fair men” will not surpress themselves. Good work from mr. Parry and mr Schansman on this one. But sure, not enough if we want to proof that Mark Twain is wrong…

    “Look at you in war—what mutton you are, and how ridiculous!”
    “In war? How?”
    “There has never been a just one, never an honorable one—on the part of the instigator of the war. I can see a million years ahead, and this rule will never change in so many as half a dozen instances. The loud little handful—as usual—will shout for the war. The pulpit will—warily and cautiously—object—at first; the great, big, dull bulk of the nation will rub its sleepy eyes and try to make out why there should be a war, and will say, earnestly and indignantly, “It is unjust and dishonorable, and there is no necessity for it.” Then the handful will shout louder. A few fair men on the other side will argue and reason against the war with speech and pen, and at first will have a hearing and be applauded; but it will not last long; those others will outshout them, and presently the anti-war audiences will thin out and lose popularity. Before long you will see this curious thing: the speakers stoned from the platform, and free speech strangled by hordes of furious men who in their secret hearts are still at one with those stoned speakers—as earlier—but do not dare to say so. And now the whole nation—pulpit and all—will take up the war-cry, and shout itself hoarse, and mob any honest man who ventures to open his mouth; and presently such mouths will cease to open. Next the statesmen will invent cheap lies, putting the blame upon the nation that is attacked, and every man will be glad of those conscience-soothing falsities, and will diligently study them, and refuse to examine any refutations of them; and thus he will by and by convince himself that the war is just, and will thank God for the better sleep he enjoys after this process of grotesque self-deception.”

    • Bob Van Noy
      March 26, 2016 at 10:39 am

      Simply brilliant, from Robert Parry through the commentary, to your summary Willem. Thanks to all…

  10. A P
    March 26, 2016 at 11:32 am

    Come ON! The BUK manufacturer analysis of the holes in MH-17 the Dutch report claimed matched BUK shrapnel, said they could not have come from the series of BUK rockets the Kiev-junta military had. Which is why the attempt to shift the blame to Russia supplying newer BUK series to the “rebels”.

    And what about the massive number of 30mm armour-piercing/explosive-ordinance-sized holes in the pilot seat/cockpit area? Why was the pilot’s body/autopsy never released?

    Because MH-17 was downed by a specially equipped with air-air ordinance Kiev-junta SU-25 (known to be owned by the Ukraine gov’t before the junta takeover) flying above the “recommended ceiling”. This has been demonstrated as easily done for short periods if the pilot uses breathing apparatus.

    So time to shift off the “permissible dissent” line that SOME BUK rocket shot down MH-17. It was not a BUK missile, which is why the US cannot release AWACS plots which would show the SU-25, just like the Russian data released shortly after the downing.

    And what a coincidence that the Dutch repatriated a couple dozen tonnes of WW2 “safekeeping” gold from the US Reserves shortly after the “report” was issued…. but not the original WW2 gold as it should have been, recently remelted gold… perhaps some of the 40-ish tonnes stolen from the Ukraine central bank by US black-ops under cover of the Maidan violence?

    Not a “conspiracy theory” when it really IS a conspiracy.

    • Jerry
      March 26, 2016 at 8:13 pm

      Thank you for mentioning “conspiracy theory”. Federal and state governments have criminal laws against conspiracies. People are charged with, prosecuted for, and convicted of conspiracies every year, maybe every month. If there are no real conspiracies, how do people explain the laws and the convictions?

      Remember Watergate? Cointelpro? etc.

  11. bfearn
    March 26, 2016 at 12:32 pm

    No mystery here when you consider that lying is part of the job description for any senior administration spokesperson.

  12. David Smith
    March 26, 2016 at 1:05 pm

    AWACS has all signals intelligence. AWACS knows Ukraine is guilty. Ukraine is being blackmailed by the United States: do what we say or we will release the AWACS data. But why waste a good thing, when it is time to collapse the Ukrainian government, the truth will suddenly emerge.

    • Daniel Guyot
      March 27, 2016 at 4:59 am

      “The truth will suddenly emerge …”

      Truth is all I want. I would like to know the truth, whoever is responsible for the tragedy of MH-17.

      • David Smith
        March 28, 2016 at 1:12 pm

        You don’t know? Hint: starts with “U”. If the incompetent Ukrainians fail to invade DPR Donesk/Lugansk this summer, like they failed to in 2015; it will be revealed that hothead Ukrainian neo Nazis on the army did it and Ukrainian government is covering it up( but that is only a cover story, already generated by discrete CIA leaks). The Poroshenko government will collapse, and a pack of real Rat Bastid Neo Nazis will take over. 2017 will be very, very ugly.

        • AndJusticeForAll
          March 31, 2016 at 9:04 am

          Daniel was asking about the truth and you feed him with hardcore biased opinion based on leaks from a CIA magic ball that did not even lie close to a shadow of the truth. chill down.

  13. BO terror victim
    March 26, 2016 at 1:19 pm

    POST all TAXPAYER FUNDED warrantless SPIED data ONLINE NOW!!!
    The NSA needs to share everything
    not just with domestic law enforcement agencies
    but with EVERYONE INTERESTED in the DATA.
    I want to know Bush’s and Perle’s and Clapper’s collected data details
    just for kicks!
    Private Banks Banker’s need to be exposed….apple,zuckerberg,BiBi
    Etc. Etc……..it is too late to stop the privacy invasions so GO TOTAL
    INFORMATION AWARENESS 24/7……ON THE WAR FREAKS
    The NSA needs to be merged into The Library of Congress!!!!
    The combined agency data should be available on the internet
    in order to stop State Terror and Mafia control of Government Officials
    and to invert the control paradigm

  14. Abe
    March 26, 2016 at 2:24 pm

    As Ray McGovern pointed out in “Propaganda, Intelligence and MH-17” on Consortium News (August 17, 2015):

    “The key difference between the traditional ‘Intelligence Assessment’ and this relatively new creation, a ‘Government Assessment’ is that the latter genre is put together by senior White House bureaucrats or other political appointees, not senior intelligence analysts. Another significant difference is that an ‘Intelligence Assessment’ often includes alternative views, either in the text or in footnotes, detailing disagreements among intelligence analysts, thus revealing where the case may be weak or in dispute.

    “The absence of an ‘Intelligence Assessment’ suggested that honest intelligence analysts were resisting a knee-jerk indictment of Russia, just as they did after the first time Kerry pulled this ‘Government Assessment’ arrow out of his quiver trying to stick the blame for an Aug. 21, 2013 sarin gas attack outside Damascus on the Syrian government.”

    The primary source in both “Government Assessment” episodes, both the 2013 chemical attack in Syria and the 2014 crash of MH-17 in Ukraine, the one person in common who generated the “pseudo-intelligence product, which contained not a single verifiable fact”, was British blogger and media darling Eliot Higgins.

    In March 2012, using the pseudonym “Brown Moses” Higgins purportedly began “investigative” blogging on the armed conflict taking place in Syria, claiming this to be a “hobby” in his “spare time” .

    Higgins’ “arm chair analytics” have been continuously promoted by the UK Guardian and New York Times, as well as corporate sponsors like Google.

    Despite the fact that his accusations have repeatedly been disproven, Higgins continues to be frequently cited, often without proper source attribution, by media, organizations and governments.

    Higgins and the Bellingcat site serve as deception “conduits” as defined by the Department of Defense Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms (Joint Publication 1-02), a compendium of approved terminology used by the U.S. military.

    Within military deception, “conduits” are information or intelligence gateways to the “deception target”, defined as the “adversary decision maker with the authority to make the decision that will achieve the deception objective.”

    The primary “deception targets” of US and NATO propaganda are key “policy makers” and the civilian populations of the United States and Europe Union.

    The Internet offers a ubiquitous, inexpensive and anonymous method for “open source” deception and rapid propaganda dissemination.

    With no credible evidence of direct Russian military involvement in eastern Ukraine, and faced with the prevailing distrust of the Pentagon or Western intelligence agencies, Washington advanced the Propaganda 3.0 strategy that had proven so effective in instigating the February 2014 coup d’etat in Kiev.

    The Pentagon and Western intelligence agencies now disseminate propaganda by making it “publicly available” via numerous channels, for example:

    — Russian anti-Putin oligarch-owned mainstream and social media
    — fake “reporters on the ground”
    — Ukrainian state media and privately-owned media
    — information released through US/NATO allies like Poland
    — fake “analysis” of satellite imagery, videos and photos posted on social media sites
    — most importantly, “investigations” conducted by fake “citizen journalists” like Higgins and Bellingcat

    The actual purpose of these fake “citizen journalist” deception operatives is to provide a channel for Western propaganda to more effectively reach the public and be perceived as truthful.

    Higgins promoted this deception strategy in his article, “Social media and conflict zones: the new evidence base for policymaking” https://blogs.kcl.ac.uk/policywonkers/social-media-and-conflict-zones-the-new-evidence-base-for-policymaking/

    Citing “Bellingcat’s MH17 investigation”, Higgins declared that” a relatively small team of analysts is able to derive a rich picture of a conflict zone” using online information and social media.

    Higgins extolled the virtues of this “new evidence base” of “open source” information”, and entirely sidestepped the countless opportunities for deceptive information to be planted in these media from not-so-open sources.

    The “overarching point” concluded Higgins, is that “there is a real opportunity for open source intelligence analysis to provide the kind of evidence base that can underpin effective and successful foreign and security policymaking. It is an opportunity that policymakers should seize.”

    Secretary of State John Kerry definitely seized the opportunity.

    • Kiza
      March 26, 2016 at 6:11 pm

      One has to understand the situation in which the USrael regime finds itself. The resistance by the intelligence community to cook up intelligence after they obeyed and then got castigated for the “Iraqi WMD” is forcing the regime to open new propaganda channels: Government Assessment, citizen-information-warriors and so on. It is all quite transparent propaganda to those who want to see, but most do not. Most “citizens” prefer to be lied to because this gives them the feeling of security: things are under control, we are protected, they know the best what is good for us. It is sad that most people do not want to know the truth.

  15. Liam
    March 26, 2016 at 3:42 pm

    Links to numerous videos that proves that the Ukrainian storyline on MH17 is a fabrication, including the BBC’s own deleted video report of eyewitness testimony. http://d-ist.com/101441877

    Rare video of MH17 shows what appears to be “chaff” coming down from the sky. “Chaff” is released by fighter jets when attempting to avoid incoming missiles. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WY5YD36NuqI

    This info and link is to CyberBerkut who have now shed some light on the downing of MH-17. Cyberberkut is reporting they hacked Kolomoiskys assistants Facebook account and have produced evidence it was he along with Ukrainian Minister of Defense Anatoliy Gritsenko who orchestrated the shoot down of MH-17. They have the screenshots to prove it. Full transcript at the link: http://en.voicesevas.ru/news/analytics/2793-kolomoyskiy-assistants-facebook-account-hacked-the-boeing-downed-by-junta.html

    • Kiza
      March 26, 2016 at 6:31 pm

      Yes, the Kolomoyski/Gritsenko organised shotdown on behalf of USraeli putsch creators and for the introduction of economic sanctions on the state of Russia is the best possible explanation. I remind everyone that until MH17 shotdown the Western sanctions on Russia were against the individuals in the Russian Government and connected enterprises. It was not easy to introduce broad economic sanctions on Russia because even the one-way sanctions by the West on Russia only (even without the reciprocate sanctions by Russia on the West) hurt the Westen businesses invested in Russia. Therefore, a most vile act by Russia was needed to push the sanctions through (outrage manufacturing).

      We have the motive and we have the most likely murderers? Now reverse this and ask what would the Russians or rebels win by a shoot-down? An error? By someone who had no means to make such error! Why is the BUK placed in the hands of rebels who had to get it all the way from Russia, when there were a dozen of working BUKs already in the hands of the putschists?

      Personally, I still believe that MH17 was shotdown by a military jet, but this is being drawn away from simply because Russia could not be accused of supplying planes to the rebels.

  16. RogerT
    March 27, 2016 at 7:07 am

    The USA is under the yoke of a warmongering, conniving, lying bunch of plutocrats controlled by dual national Zionist/American Israel-firsters. How on earth can the peace loving people of the World rid itself of these criminals aided and abetted as they are by most of subservient western governments? If the Clinton bitch of a woman gets to be president, we shall see more death and destruction throughout the World. God help Planet Earth. We need a Western ‘spring’ to overthrow our evil governments.

    As for Kerry, he has lost all credibility. The Syrians have not withstood an American/Israeli incited rebellion for so many years in support of their government to accept demands for Assad to be ousted.

  17. SFOMARCO
    March 28, 2016 at 4:44 am

    The father of American-Dutch citizen Quinn Schansman realized John Kerry arrogantly blew him off. I hope he will pressure the Dutch Safety Board to demand that Kerry supply the MH-17 data. Thus far, the DSB seems resigned to perform a circular work-around the crucial data.

  18. GeorgyOrwell
    March 28, 2016 at 12:58 pm

    Gee, I wonder why?

  19. March 28, 2016 at 6:55 pm

    This plane crash was a flash point step on the path to war with Russia.

  20. German John
    March 28, 2016 at 10:39 pm

    This is for Fred Farkle Stone. I am a combat veteran of Vietnam. I served from Dec. ’67-Dec. ’68. I served with the 9 ID with the 2/47 Infantry, Bravo Company, 1st Platoon. I have read where 80% of the people who say they are ‘Nam vets are not and the closest these clowns came to going overseas was when they were on the Staten Island Ferry. I despise them but what can you do?

  21. Olivia
    March 28, 2016 at 11:47 pm

    The other night, the Science Channel featured a story on the MH-17 disaster. They “analyzed” the satellite info the Russians provided to the US of the SU-25’s shoot down of the passenger jet. Various issues were raised in their proof that Russia’s satellite info was fake, including the supposition that the ground detail did not match the coordinates of some satellite images. Truly, the lies and propagandizing of our media is stunning!

    • AndJusticeForAll
      March 29, 2016 at 7:11 am

      Olivia, Ms Parry is convincing us that Ukrainian Buk shot down MH-17 (based on his interpretation of capabilities from the Dutch report) and many here including you support theory of SU-25 (ground attack aircraft) doing the job. On a “russian satellite” image there is something that looks like Mig-29. Who is wrong?

      • David Smith
        March 29, 2016 at 7:23 pm

        Who is wrong? You are wrong AJFA if you assert anyone but Ukraine shot down MH17. Are you suggesting a Russian Mig-29 shot down MH17? I have to ask, as your combination of arrogant certainty and garbled thoughts is always laughably perplexing.

        • AndJusticeForAll
          March 30, 2016 at 6:56 am

          i hoped you would chime in and clear contradictions in two theories. But instead you threw in even crazier version. Just explain simple contradictions why the russian image does not support the claim that it was Su-25. Why is Mr Parry using obviously wrong interpretation of the preliminary old report and does not reference latest Dutch findings? Which of two theories is wrong?

Comments are closed.