Archives du mot-clé Global Research

The ICC is OUTDATE. Jacob Zuma has saved Africa from dishonor and disgrace.

Praise The Lord, Sudanese president, Al-Bahir is back home. It will have been a catastrophic outcome if President Bashir were to be handled over to the ICC.

Zuma has done the right thing. It wasn’t either legal or fair for the ICC to behave this terroristic way. Justice is something Great to disguise using hijacking methods.

HR groups are comics here. Ask yourself who is paying their actions and you’ll agree they are disqualified for siding with their funders and pretending to be referee at the same time.

Nevertheless, it was up to president Jacob Zuma to decide, at last resort, not the HRs. defending their meat and meal. We all know the game of the NGO’s looking for a job above all. So don’t tell us about HR’s NGOs. Those are either larbins, negros or spies, much of the time. Exit.

Now, the ICC is the baby of the Security Council, late president Gaddafi told us in his legacy sounding since as a last will : the security council was a terror council. Naturally, its baby, the ICC, is leading a terroristic Justice.

There are two mains problems here :

The biggest one is America, the Head of the World, is not even a member of the ICC. In the meantime, this is the nation leading the World and the UN.

Second, of the people chosing their leaders nationally or the ICC, who decided the ICC can crush down the people choice and vote inside a sovereign nation ? A sitting president is automatically immune from any warrant arrest, by his own people’s election. By the way, if Mr. Bashir was that criminal, Sudaneses would have elected somebody else.

Look how lybian people, lied upon on Gaddafi criminality, are now crying calling his name.

When it comes to criminality, each president has some blood in his hands. And there is no exception. That is why Benghazi and Lybia will be an important issue during the US presidential race. The World needs to know the truth, only the truth, but the whole truth to move forward.

In other words, Gaddafi is going to come back in 2016 to ask for Justice. His blood is still flooding on Lybian soil waiting for that 2016 open field Justice to coagulate.

We are entering a New Age. Bodies like the ICC are behind us. They came too late in the process. In fact, they reflect the Ancien post WWII Infamous Order. So are the UN in great need of transformation to meet the 21st century new – some unknown today – challenges.

For instance,

Global Research is issuing this news :

Why the Bear is Back: Russian Military Presence in Vietnam

Russia-Vietnam ties that seemed to be cooling after the end of the Cold War are warming up all over again. More than 20 years after Moscow abandoned its largest foreign base, Russian military aircraft are once again welcome visitors at Cam Ranh Bay.

Of those post WWII bodies, the IMF is the most prepared to face the New Age of Humanity.

China is showing the way through. The country has agreed Chinese workers can travel to Israel only if they don’t participate in building colonialist settlements. All the more so, China is on top of the fight against corruption inside the party and for big businesses. Big Boss are charged and jailed. That is to say, international Justice is no longer necessary, as long as leaders – the case of China – are performing well and keeping high moral standards.

Justice is a national duty not an international affair. Diplomacy is there for international cooperation, assistance and help. By the way, we wish Secretary Kerry a quick recovery.

Poor ICC obliged to touch down, for full post-colonialist ruling.

COLONIALISM AND SLAVERY ARE BOTH OVER.

————————————————————————–

Post-mortem democratic times

The security council and the post-Benghazi World

Benghazi, the cursed city.

President Obama’s “overt” support to Syria’s Al Qaeda rebels “opens up a can of worms” : ISIS !

In our latest post, we underlined that Obama is a Clinton or a Bush or a Carter or a Reagan, or a Nixon. See below how things match to perfection.

Yesterday, we were told that « Airstrikes alone are insufficient to deal a final blow to Isis ».

Was The defense Secretary (US) preparing the opinion to a scenario where al-qaeda will fight Isis ? Is that Al-Qaeda the « indigeneous figure » needed on the ground to stop Isis definitely ? The temptation to answer Yes at those two questions is strong.

Supporting one Terrorism (al-Qaeda) to fight another terrorism (ISIS). Where does the game stop ? Where, When and How ? It looks like an Impasse.

Below are some tracks of answers  brought by Prof. Chossudovsky.

Before reading them, some facts of the day :

1. Germany, France and the UK are drafting a resolution at the UN for a cease fire in Gaza. What are the chances of this resolution to be adopted ? What about the US vetoing it? And how are they going to implement it, assuming the resolution passed ? Is it a move for another smokescreen ? We will not prejudge at this stage.

2. By the way, Melbourne is the best place in the World to live in. Australia, Canada, Finlande, New Zeland harbor the best cities in the World. Africa got the Worst of them. Douala (Cameroon), Lagos (Nigeria), Abidjan (Ivory Coast) and Alger are worst places in the World to live in, inside Africa. Tripoli and Syria are undergoing wars. Their ranking is not that important.

Interesting, no city from the Imperialistic World is on the top 10.

World’s most liveable city 2014 is …(CNN)

3. Hamas has eliminated some insider traitors who have been informing Israel, making it easy for this criminal state (Israel) to locate the Heads of Hamas. Any Palestinian embarked on spying for Israel to derail and endanger a right cause such as the Fight For Freedom is a demon.

Israel presents itself as too Big to talk with the little boys of Hamas. How is it they got that low and coward to adopt the poor method of infiltrating the commandment of Hamas for firsthand and secret information ? Their so-called « strong intelligence » is all about smallnesses ? Is this the Great Israel fearing the little Hamas to the point of going rampant ? Disappointing. On one hand, America is helping along with the entire European World. On the other, « collaborators » inside Hamas are also helping to so-called « strong military nation » : Israel. Too mean, for the « strongest military nation of the World ». Left alone, Israel is a small state in the region. This is what the death of those 3 Hamas’ commanders stand for.

4. Gen. Dempsey: ISIS Cannot be Defeated Without Going Into Syria. Road to destroy Isis runs through Syria (Newsmax). So how to do that without the Syrian Gov authorisation or a clear violation of the Syrian territory ?  Yesterday an enemy, today… ? This is what you got with irresponsible and erratic diplomacy.

James Foley would have been saved with the sollicitation of Assad’s legal forces’ help, during the rescued mission that failed.

BBC is mentioning the price of any rapprochement of Assad by the previous enemy (US and its allies) is to stop the narrative asking « Assad to go ». Isn’t it ironical ? History works as a Doomsday. Here we are.

5. Russian humanitarian convoy is in Ukraine. After a week of Ukrainian authorities’ and customs’ checking tergiversations, it was wide past time to move forward. At this stage, any turning back was simply out of question.

Don’t forget that the US/EU coup led in Kiev is now translating into an humanitarian crisis for Russia to fund and take care. Many Ukrainians have crossed the border to find safety in Russia. For this reason, Russia has a say in Ukrainian business.

To our knowledge, the UN never condemned this horrible treacherous of Democracy and is not assisting the Displaced Ukrainians in Russia.

6. Ferguson. a) Look at this for a laugh. Conservatives literally make stuff up to smear Michael Brown A right-wing blogger used a generic CT scan found online and claimed it was a scan of Darren Wilson. The Daily Kos.

b) CNN reports « Broken Eye Socket » didn’t happen.

————————————–

 Fighting Al Qaeda by Supporting Al Qaeda in Syria: The Obama Administration is a “State Sponsor of Terrorism”

 By Prof Michel Chossudovsky

Global Research, August 22, 2014
First published by GR on June 19, 2013

A major transition in US counter-terrorism doctrine is unfolding.

While Barack Obama, following in the footsteps of George W. Bush, remains firmly committed to waging a “Global War on Terrorism” (GWOT), his administration is now openly supporting selected rebel units in Syria which are part of the Al Qaeda network.

Known and documented, Al Qaeda is a creation of the CIA, which has covertly supported the “Islamic Terror Network” since the heyday of the Soviet Afghan war.

While Al Qaeda is a US sponsored “intelligence asset”, a “New Normal” has been established.

An Al Qaeda affiliated organization, namely Syria’s Al Nusrah, is being supported “overtly” by the US President, rather than “covertly” by the CIA.

The support of Al Nusrah, an affiliate of al Qaeda in Iraq (AQI), is no longer channeled in secrecy as part of a CIA-MI6 covert operation, it is now being supported –in a semi-official fashion– as part of a US foreign policy agenda. The latter is also part of America’s diplomatic discourse, implemented in consultation with Britain, Canada, Germany and France. Although Al Nusrah was not mentioned explicitly, “support to the Syrian rebels” was the main topic of debate at the June 2013 G-8 meetings in Northern Ireland.

While intelligence covert ops continue to perform an important role, Washington’s support to Al Qaeda in Syria is now “out in the open”, within the public domain. It is no longer part of a secret undertaking. It is part of the mainstay of US foreign policy, carried out under the helm of Secretary of State John Kerry.

“Support to the rebels” is also debated in the US Congress. It is the object of a bill which has already been adopted by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Senator Corker who co-sponsored the bill stated that:

“The future for Syria is uncertain, but the U.S. has a vested interest in trying to prevent an extremist takeover, which poses a very real risk for us and the region,” (emphasis added)

In a twisted logic, the bill purports to prevent “an extremist takeover” by supporting an Al Qaeda terrorist formation.

The Senate Committee on Foreign Relations voted 15-3 in favor of the proposed bill.

Ironically, the pro-Israeli lobby was also actively involved in lobbying in favor of aid to jihadist rebels.

Israel has supported Al Nusrah militarily in areas adjacent to the occupied territories of the Golan Heights.

Senator Rand Paul from Kentucky (left) voted against the bill, warning:

You will be funding today the allies of al Qaeda” (quoted by RT)

Al Qaeda, Osama and “The Blowback”

Everybody knows that Al Qaeda is now directly supported by the US government.

The implications are far-reaching. Obama’s decision not only undermines the legitimacy of the “Global War on Terrorism” (GWOT), it also casts doubt on the “blowback” thesis.

Moreover, it begs the embarrassing question: Why is the US president supporting Al Nusrah, which is on the US State Department list of terrorist organizations?

The CIA refers to the so-called “blowback” thesis whereby an “intelligence asset”, (i.e. the Islamic jihad) is said to “have gone against its sponsors”; ”

The sophisticated methods taught to the Mujahideen, and the thousands of tons of arms supplied to them by the US – and Britain – are now tormenting the West in the phenomenon known as `blowback’, whereby a policy strategy rebounds on its own devisers. (The Guardian, London, September 15, 2001).

“What we’ve created blows back in our face.” The US government and the CIA are portrayed as the ill-fated victims. The CIA had been tricked by a deceitful Osama. It’s like “a son going against his father”.

While the CIA acknowledges that the late Osama bin Laden, leader of Al Qaeda, was an “intelligence asset” during the Cold War, the relationship is said to “go way back”. In the wake of 9/11, news reports would invariably dismiss these Osama-CIA links as part of the “bygone era” of the Soviet-Afghan war. They are invariably described as “irrelevant” to an understanding of the post-9/11 era:

Bin Laden recruited 4,000 volunteers from his own country and developed close relations with the most radical mujahideen leaders. He also worked closely with the CIA, … Since September 11, [2001] CIA officials have been claiming they had no direct link to bin Laden. (Phil Gasper, International Socialist Review, November-December 2001)

Afghan Mujahideen Commanders meet with President Ronald Reagan

While the “blowback” thesis is an obvious fabrication, it has nonetheless served to provide legitimacy to the “Global War on Terrorism”. With “overt” support channeled by the US government to an Al Qaeda affiliated organization, the blowback thesis falls flat, it is no longer credible.

The evidence amply confirms that the CIA never severed its ties to the “Islamic Militant Network”. Historically, US covert support to terrorists was a safely guarded secret, unknown to the broader public. Moreover, the CIA would never channel its support directly. It would proceed through its intelligence counterparts in Pakistan and Saudi Arabia.

Since the end of the Cold War, these covert intelligence links have not only been maintained, they have become increasingly sophisticated.

The broad political and media consensus in the wake of the 9/11 attacks was built around the blowback: Al Qaeda had attacked America.

The Global War on Terrorism (GWOT) against Al Qaeda and its affiliates had been launched. Yet the evidence amply confirms that US intelligence continues to harbor several terrorist organizations which are on the US State Department’s list.

Paradoxically, covert support to the terrorists by Western intelligence agencies (including the CIA, MI6, Germany’s BND) is an essential instrument of the “Global War on Terrorism”. Namely the war on terror to protect the Homeland is waged by using US-NATO sponsored terrorists and mercenaries as foot-soldiers of the Western military alliance.

The support provided covertly to “jihadist” terrorist organizations in a large number of countries (e.g. former Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, Yemen, Libya, Syria, Niger, Mali, Algeria, Egypt, etc.) has been used by the US-NATO alliance to destabilize sovereign states.

Obama and Al Nusrah. The “State Sponsors of Terrorism”

Al Qaeda was identified as the mastermind of the 911 attacks on the World Trade Center Trade Center and the Pentagon.

Afghanistan in the wake of 9/11 was immediately identified as a “state sponsor of terrorism” leading to the bombing and invasion of Afghanistan by US and NATO forces on October 7, 2001. In turn, a gamut of counterterrorism legislation and executive orders were put in place in the immediate wake of the 9/11 attacks.

Executive Order 13224, signed by President George W. Bush on September 23, 2001 “authorizes the seizure of assets of organizations or individuals designated by the Secretary of the Treasury to assist, sponsor, or provide material or financial support or who are otherwise associated with terrorists.” (Sept. 23, 2001).

The US Congress passed the USA PATRIOT Act 2001, signed into law by President George W. Bush on October 26, 2001. The legislation was in response to the September 11, 2001 terrorist attack on the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon, which allegedly had been perpetrated by Al Qaeda.

According to the 2001 Patriot Act, those “who pay for the bomb“, namely those who fund affiliates of Al Qaeda, are terrorists. In the words of George W. Bush on September 11, 2001, “We will make no distinction between the terrorists who committed these acts and those who harbor them.”

The Act pertains to the harboring and financing of terrorist organizations. Al Qaeda and its affiliates are defined in the PATRIOT Act as a terror network. Persons and organizations which support or abet Al Qaeda are considered as terrorists.

The forbidden question: Does the substance of Executive order 13224 and the PATRIOT legislation quoted above apply to a US president, a Secretary of State, a Member of the US Congress?

The Department of Justice “has prosecuted individuals and organizations for providing material support to the terrorist organization, while the Department of Treasury has frozen the assets of dozens of terrorist financiers and networks.” (See Council on Foreign Relations)

Similar measures, including the freezing of assets or organizations supportive of terrorism, were adopted in the European Union. “Since 2007, Britain’s Ministry of Finance has frozen the assets (PDF) of hundreds of individuals and organizations connected to al-Qaeda via its Asset Freezing Unit.” (Ibid)

National governments which provide support to Al Qaeda are categorised as “State-sponsors of terrorism”.

The designation is determined by the US State Department. In fact, the Secretary of State, namely John Kerry has the authority “to determine that the government of such country has repeatedly provided support for acts of international terrorism.” (State Department List), See also the Counterterrorism Bureau)

Barack Obama and John Kerry: Are They “Terror Suspects”?

Now let us examine in more detail the Al Nusrah Front, which constitutes the main rebel fighting force in Syria. Al Nusrah is affiliated to Al Qaeda. The leader of Al Nusra, Abu Mohammad al-Golani, has pledged his allegiance to Al-Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri, who replaced Osama bin Laden after his death.

According to the State Department Bureau of Counter-terrorism, Jabhat al Nusrah, the main rebel force in Syria is a terrorist organization, an affiliate of Al Qaeda in Iraq (AQI).

The State Department has issued a “prohibition against knowingly providing, or attempting or conspiring to provide, material support or resources to, or engaging in transactions with, al-Nusrah Front, and the freezing of all property and interests in property of the organization that are in the United States, or come within the United States or the control of U.S. persons.” (emphasis added).

It is understood that US State Department Counter-terrorism policy also applies to “state sponsors of terrorism”.

Al Nusrah is financed by Turkey, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Israel in close consultation with NATO and the Pentagon.

The Obama administration has openly confirmed its support for the Syrian rebels with most of this aid channeled to Al Nusrah.

The PATRIOT Act “prohibits knowingly harboring persons who have committed or are about to commit a variety of terrorist offenses”.

Moreover, an entire gamut of executive orders as well as the 2001 Patriot legislation prohibit “the harboring of terrorists”.

According to the US Justice Department:

The Patriot Act imposed tough new penalties on those who commit and support terrorist operations, both at home and abroad.” The terror threat emanates both from “the terrorist who pays for a bomb as by the one who pushes the button”.

According to the Patriot legislation, those “who pay for the bomb”, namely funding affiliates of Al Qaeda, constitutes a terrorist act.

In other words, the Obama administration and its allies are harboring a terror organization which is on the US State department list.

In this regard, President Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry could be held responsible for knowingly providing, or attempting or conspiring to provide, material support or resources to, or engaging in transactions with, al-Nusrah Front:

“The [PATRIOT] Act created a new offense that prohibits knowingly harboring persons who have committed or are about to commit a variety of terrorist offenses”, yet the Obama administration is openly supporting a terrorist entity, in violation of its own counter-terrorism legislation.

Media Complicity

According to CNN, quoting intelligence sources, Al Nusrah is “the best-equipped arm of the terror group” in Syria, with an estimated 10,000 forces. Where do they get their money and weapons? CNN does not provide any details as to Why Al Nusrah is the best equipped, in relation to the various so-called moderate rebels factions, which from a military standpoint are broadly inoperative.

How many of these Al Nusrah forces remain operative following the government’s counteroffensive remains to be established.

Ironically, this latest CNN report (June 18, 2013 suggests that the rebels rather than the government have chemical weapons in their possession:

“They [Al Nusrah] are making desperate attempts to get chemical weapons,” the analyst told CNN, noting that in the past few weeks, security services in Iraq and Turkey arrested [Al Nusrah] operatives who were “trying to get their hands on sarin.”

In relation to the later, Turkish Police confirmed that the arrested Al Nusrah operative was in possession of sarin gas.

CNN contradicts its own reports. The same CNN article which intimated that the rebels were “attempting to get” chemical weapons, makes the case for “arming the rebels”:

The Obama administration announced last week that it will start arming rebels because Syria crossed a “red line” by using chemical weapons — including sarin gas — against the opposition.

The development is likely to be at the center of the Group of Eight summit in Northern Ireland on Monday, setting a riveting backdrop to the meeting after Syria’s longtime ally Russia said the move supports “those who kill their enemies and eat their organs.”

…Obama has not detailed the increased military support, but Washington officials told CNN that the plan includes providing small arms, ammunition and possibly anti-tank weapons to the rebels.

The Broader Implications of Obama’s Support of Al Nusrah

The blowback thesis is now defunct. The US has never ceased to support Al Qaeda. These terrorist organizations were created by US intelligence and supported by Washington. The blowback thesis is refuted not only by Obama’s “overt support” of Al Nusrah but also with regard to the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG), an Al Qaeda affiliate, which was directly supported by NATO from the outset of the insurgency and Libya bombing campaign in 2011.

The “Global War on Terrorism” (GWOT) has become an increasingly fragile concept. Waging a “War on Terrorism” with the active participation of an Al Qaeda affiliated organization constitutes an obvious fallacy, a big lie, a non sequitur.

The propaganda and media disinformation campaign behind the “Global War on Terrorism” has also entered a dead alley. Going after the terrorists by supporting the terrorists? Will the American public support a government which funnels billions of tax dollars to a terrorist organization as a means to “combating terrorism”?

The Pentagon’s post-911 military doctrine is predicated on the “Global War on Terrorism”. It is a consensus within US military. It is used in the recruitment, training and indoctrination of US forces.

Will American servicemen and women accept to swallow the big lie and fight in what visibly constitutes a fake “war on terrorism”.

The Criminalisation of the US State

President Obama’s “overt” support to Syria’s Al Qaeda rebels “opens up a can of worms”.

How are we to categorize an American President who says he is committed to fighting Al Qaeda, while at the same time supporting Al Qaeda?

The entire Homeland Security doctrine tumbles like a deck of cards.

The US government is in blatant violation of its own counter-terrorism legislation.


Order Directly from Global Research

America’s “War on Terrorism”

Michel Chossudovsky

originalIn this new and expanded edition of Michel Chossudovskys 2002 best seller, the author blows away the smokescreen put up by the mainstream media, that 9/11 was an attack on America by Islamic terrorists. Through meticulous research, the author uncovers a military-intelligence ploy behind the September 11 attacks, and the cover-up and complicity of key members of the Bush Administration.

The expanded edition, which includes twelve new chapters focuses on the use of 9/11 as a pretext for the invasion and illegal occupation of Iraq, the militarisation of justice and law enforcement and the repeal of democracy.

According to Chossudovsky, the war on terrorism is a complete fabrication based on the illusion that one man, Osama bin Laden, outwitted the $40 billion-a-year American intelligence apparatus. The war on terrorism is a war of conquest. Globalisation is the final march to the New World Order, dominated by Wall Street and the U.S. military-industrial complex.

September 11, 2001 provides a justification for waging a war without borders. Washingtons agenda consists in extending the frontiers of the American Empire to facilitate complete U.S. corporate control, while installing within America the institutions of the Homeland Security State.

Also available other formats

For PDF format, click here

For Kindle edition, click to visit Amazon.com

Special: Americas War on Terrorism + Globalization of Poverty (Buy 2 books for 1 price!)

Copyright © 2014 Global Research

To the cherished memory of all those on MH 17 — especially the 80 children who were on board.

Malaysian Airlines MH17: Who Stands to Gain?

Because of who he is, and where his loyalties lie, that individual may have also decided to target Malaysia. Was he giving vent to his anger over our principled stand on the question of justice for the Palestinians? Was he also attempting to divert public attention from Israels ground offensive against Gaza which time-wise coincided with the downing of the Malaysian airliner?

By Dr. Chandra Muzaffar, a prominent Malaysian scholar and author, President of the International Movement for a Just World (JUST).

The Russian military has released military monitoring data which challenge allegations circulating in the media pertaining to the MH 17 crash in the Donetsk Region of Eastern Ukraine on July 17 2014. Questions have been raised about Kiev military jets tracking MH 17, Ukrainian air traffic controllers and the deployment of Buk missile systems. Kiev should also release military data on the circumstances leading to the crash. So should the Pentagon which reportedly has relevant intelligence and satellite data.

Since military data is hardcore information, Kiev and Washington should be persuaded to be transparent and accountable. The UN Secretary-General can play a role in this since there is a specialized agency within the UN, the ICAO, dedicated to international civil aviation. Military data from Moscow, Kiev and Washington should be scrutinized by the independent international panel that is supposed to probe the MH 17 catastrophe.

Such data carries much more weight than videos purportedly revealing the role of the pro-Russian rebels and the Russian government in the crash. One such video showing a Buk system being moved from Ukraine to Russia is a fabrication. The billboard in the background establishes that it was shot in a town — Krasnoarmeisk — that has been under the control of the Ukrainian military since May 11. Similarly, a You Tube video showing a Russian General and Ukrainian rebels discussing their role in mistakenly downing a civilian aircraft was, from various tell-tale signs, produced before the event.

The public should be wary of fabricated evidence of this sort, after what we have witnessed in the last so many years. Have we forgotten the monstrous lies and massive distortions that accompanied the reckless allegation that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction (WMD) which led eventually to the invasion of that country in 2003 and the death of more than a million people? Iraq continues to bleed to this day. What about the Gulf of Tonkin episode of 1964 which again was a fabrication that paved the way for wanton US aggression against Vietnam that resulted in the death of more than 3 million Vietnamese? The babies in incubators incident in Kuwait in 1990 was yet another manufactured lie that aroused the anger of the people and served to justify the US assault on Iraq. Just last year we saw how an attempt was made by some parties to pin the blame for a sarin gas attack in Ghouta, Syria upon the Assad government when subsequent investigations have revealed that it was the work of some militant rebel group.

From Tonkin to Ghouta there is a discernible pattern when it comes to the fabrication of evidence to justify some nefarious agenda or other. As soon as the event occurs before any proper investigation has begun, blame is apportioned upon the targeted party. This is done wilfully to divert attention from the real culprit whose act of evil remains concealed and camouflaged. The colluding media then begins to spin the correct version with the help of its reporters and columnists who concoct fact out of fiction. Any other explanation or interpretation of the event is discredited and dismissed derisively to ensure that the credibility of the dominant narrative remains intact. As the narrative unfolds, the target often embodied in a certain personality is demonized to such a degree that he arouses the ire of the public and becomes an object of venom.

The pattern described here is typical of what is known as a false flag operation in which blame for some dastardly deed is consciously transferred to ones adversary. It has happened right through history and many contemporary nation-states — and not just the United States — are guilty of flying false flags.

To protect ourselves from being deceived by such operations, the general public should always ask: who stands to gain from a particular episode? Cui Bono is in fact an important principle in the investigation of a crime. In the case of the MH 17 carnage, the pro-Russian rebels do not benefit in any way from downing a civilian airliner. Their goal is independence from the Kiev government which is why they are fighting Kiev through sometimes violent means including shooting down its military planes. Massacring 298 passengers in a flight from Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur does not serve their cause. Moscow which backs the rebels to an extent also gains nothing from involving itself in such a diabolical carnage.

10 days after the carnage, it is now clear who is trying to reap benefits from that terrible tragedy in the skies. The demonization of the Russian President, Vladimir Putin, orchestrated from various Western capitals, including Kiev, after Crimea voted to join the Russian Federation, thus thwarting one of the primary strategic goals of NATOs eastward expansion, has now reached its pinnacle. After MH 17, it has become a lot easier to convince people— even without an iota of evidence — that Putin is a mass murderer. The tarnishing of Putins image is crucial for those in the West who want to curb Russias political re-assertion so that the US and its allies can perpetuate their global dominance without hindrance.

MH 17 has helped the elite in Washington in yet another sense. It has strengthened its push for tougher sanctions against Russia which began after the Crimea vote. Given their extensive economic ties with Russia, many European countries such as Germany, France, Netherlands and Italy have been somewhat lukewarm about widening and deepening sanctions. But will that change now? Will an outraged European public, incensed by the MH 17 massacre, demand that their governments punish Moscow?

It is obvious that those who seek to punish Russia and the pro-Russian rebels, namely, the elite in Washington and Kiev, are poised to gain the most from the MH 17 episode. Does it imply that they would have had a role in the episode itself? Only a truly independent and impartial international inquiry would be able to provide the answer.

In this regard, we must admit that while elites in Kiev and Washington may stand to gain from MH 17, those who actually pulled the trigger may be some other group or individual with links to the powerful in the two capitals. It is quite conceivable that a certain well-heeled individual equipped with the appropriate military apparatus and with access to air-control authorities in the region may have executed the act of evil itself.

Because of who he is, and where his loyalties lie, that individual may have also decided to target Malaysia. Was he giving vent to his anger over our principled stand on the question of justice for the Palestinians? Was he also attempting to divert public attention from Israels ground offensive against Gaza which time-wise coincided with the downing of the Malaysian airliner?

As we explore MH 17 from this angle, would we be able to connect the dots between MH 17 and MH 370, between July 17 and March 8, 2014?

We should not rest till the whole truth is known and the evil behind these two colossal catastrophes punished severely.

We owe this to every soul who perished on those fateful flights.

This article is dedicated to the cherished memory of all those on MH 17 — especially the 80 children who were on board.

Copyright © 2014 Global Research

Our take. Loukos’ Hague verdict condemning Russia is that other timely coincidence falling from the sky  through a finger snap. Vengeance is not Justice. Sorry. Meantime, the bombing of Air Algeria is hidden under a simple crash camouflage. Just like that, the plane exploded over Mali, precisely, the place where French troops are fighting against some local forces. There is a total blackout on that silent war. Some coincidences are none.

Read also : Collapse of Ukraine Government: Prime Minister Yatsenyuk Resigns amidst Pressures Exerted by the IMF.

The fly forward without proofs over the MH17 accusations now translates into more restrictive sanctions against Russia. This is counterproductive and will end up into a lose-lose game with the western bloc losing the symbolic war of morality and dignity – as it was the case with Ghandi’s lead in fighting for Indians freedom against the predatory UK empire.

The NYT. U.S. and Europe Agree to Escalate Sanctions on Russia.

French, UK, Germany, Italy and the US, those are the same members of Tripoli middle-age croisade that fomented a coup through a so-called « no fly zone » – that criminal UN-NATO cover – implemented in Lybia. After killing a head of state, Kadhafi – as they did symbolically with Ianoukovitch – Lybia is descending into chaos. The US and the french have evacuated their personal from Lybian soil, backing in retreat to Tunisia.

Chaos is the next stage in Ukraine. The same fate of Lybia and for Iraq. And while we are talking about this MH17 crash and Russian sanctions, Israel killing machine is at work, day and night, destroying everything it can on Gaza soil on total impunity. Who can ever sanction Israel ? Litteraly : Nobody. Pratically, the World Community and its people can. Note right now the difference between « the international community » representing Western alliance only, mainly UK, France, Germany, Italy and the US – and the « World community ».

May be Donald Sterling (NBA) is paying the price as a collateral damage of this US and its allies cowardice. Someone has to pay for this Israeli unacceptable and intolerable Hitlerian conduct.  Donald Sterling Loses Bid to Block Sale of Clippers (NYT).

State’s terrorism and duplicity are perfect seeds for worldwide terrorism. Tomorrow, don’t cry wolves. Remember you created them. YOU THE US AND CONSORTS.

Naturally, in those exceptional circumstances, no more War treaty of any sort can stand anymore, under a clear aggression standing for a breach to the treaty.

Read more here and watch the video stating irrefutable facts.  What You’re Not Being Told About Flight MH17 (The Total collapse).