Saturday 22 September 2018

Putin, Israel and the downed Il-20



Putin, Israel and the downed Il-20
SEPTEMBER 21, 2018

Putin, Israel and the downed Il-20

[This column has been written for the Unz Review]
Yesterday (Sept 19th), I tried to post a short commentary suggesting that before we jump to conclusions about anything, we ought to wait for the fact to come out. But to no avail. The chorus of “Putin is a doormat!!”, “bomb Israel!!” and similar inanities is carrying on, louder than ever. Reading that crazy nonsense, I wanted to toss in a slogan, something like “Jew-haters and Putin-haters – unite!”. But then I realized that it would be futile because they have already united…
My friend Andrei Martyanov has tried to bring some logic and sanity into this pandemonium which I posted here (in spite of not normally doing reposts). Well, at the risk of being called a “gatekeeper” or a “cryto-Zionist”, I have decided to also try once more to bring this discussion into the realm of sanity, facts and logic.
First, let me start by a very simple and primitive question:
Why in the world has nobody considered that the Israelis might have truly screwed-up?
Seriously, I mean it. Unless you belong to the type of folks who believe that the Israelis are exceptionally crafty, smart and quasi infallible (there are such folks amongst both Jew-lovers and, more surprisingly, Jew-haters), this is a legitimate question, no?
What do we know for sure as of right now (Sept 20th)? We know that the Israelis did not give enough warning time to the Russians, which is in direct violation of an agreement between Israel and Russia. Do we know that they did it deliberately? No, we don’t. We really don’t.
Anybody with any military experience will tell you that what is known in the USA as FUBAR, SNAFU and “cluster****” is something all militaries do on a daily basis. Furthermore, the Israelis have had terrible screw-ups many, many times. Just a summary of all the screw-ups of the famous (and much over-rated) Mossad would take pages and include many outright embarrassing incidents (for a good laugh, just look at the inept Israeli attempt at assassinating Khaled Meshal!). So why is everybody assuming that the Israelis carefully planned the whole thing?
Next, let’s assume that this is simply the typical case of Israeli arrogance (not a myth!) and that they decided to inform the Russians as late as possible. Does that at all entail that the maneuver of the Israeli F-16s pilots to seek cover from the S-200 missile was something they had planned in advance? Does anybody bother to look at the actual (as opposed to Hollywood) record of the Israeli Air Force during past wars when they were actually challenged by a reasonably capable air defense? There is a detailed discussion (in Russian) about this here which can be summarized like this: as soon as the Israelis start losing aircraft their martial prowess rapidly vanishes. Now please recall this: the Israelis have had recent losses, some admitted, some denied, but there is no doubt that they are tense and very concerned. Bottom line: I would fully expect the Israeli pilots to freak out and seek cover as soon as they are told by their warning system that they are being painted by a radar in tracking mode (the S-200 has a semi-active radar homing guidance system). If that is the case, and I am not saying that this is the only possibility, then the fault is of the Israeli pilots, not of their commanders or the Israeli state as a whole. Yes, the command responsibility is the one of the state, but not the guilt for having engaged in such an evasive maneuver (besides, knowing the price placed by Israeli on goyim lives, this would be just so typical, would it not…)
At this point, I need to ask another question: what would the Israelis gain from shooting down the Il-20? They sure ain’t gonna frighten the Russians (Russian military don’t scare easy) and the Il-20 will be replaced. Scaring the Iranians or Hezbollah? Forget it – not happening. Maybe there was a real lucrative target that they destroyed? Yes, maybe, be so far we don’t know anything about this. So what would be the point?
Then the “sister question”: what would the Israelis risk by deliberately shooting down a Russian EW aircraft? Well, in theory, they would risk having their aircraft shot down and their airbases engaged with Russian missiles. That is highly unlikely, I will admit, and the Israelis probably understand the Russians very well (many of them being from Russia). But could they be sure that the local commanders would not order an immediate retaliation (as their current rules of engagement do authorize them to!)? Let me remind everybody that this Spring, the USA was not so sure at all, and following the words of the Russian ambassador that “not only missiles but their launchers would be destroyed” the USN and Air Force decided to shoot as little as possible and from as far as possible. As for the British sub, its captain decided to cancel the planned missile strike entirely (they were being shadowed by two Russian subs). Seems to me that the potential risks of that kind of operation would be pretty high, while the potential rewards rather unclear.
Those who insist that this was a deliberate Israeli act need to come up with a halfway credible explanation not only for how this was done, but also why this was done.
Now, like many others, I despise the Israeli racist, genocidal rogue state with all my heart. But that does not prevent me from being capable of imagining a scenario in which the Israelis simply screwed-up. Believe it or not, but my disgust for Zionist ideology does not at all entail a boundless belief in some Israeli infallibility.
Finally, let look at this: today (Sept 20th) an IDF delegation led by Air Force Commander Maj.-Gen. Amikam Norkin is in Moscow. Also participating in the trip are the Head of the Foreign Relations Division, Brig.-Gen. Erez Meisel and other officers from the Intelligence, Air Force and Operations Divisions. Does anybody believe that all these officers went to Moscow just to thumb their noses at the Russians? Or maybe they all traveled to Moscow to present some totally non-credible excuses which will only infuriate the Russians further?
My guess is that they have something exculpatory (at least in part) to show.
Putin-haters and Jew-haters (united, of course!) will immediately declare that the Israelis went to Moscow to pressure Putin into not giving in into the (very real) public outrage and calls for retaliatory measures. To this I will very simply reply: rest assured that there is a very powerful pro-Zionist 5th column in Russia which is already putting the maximal amount of pressure on the Kremlin and there is no need at all to send top IDF officials to do that (especially on Yom Kippur!).
This is probably due to my messy writing style, but very often when I say “A” some folks clearly hear “B” (or even “non-A”!), so with them in mind, I will be very very clear and spell it out: I am not saying that the Israelis did not deliberately shoot down the Il-20 and I am not saying that the Israelis are not responsible for the resulting loss of life and equipment.
What I am saying is that Putin, in contrast to the hordes of self-appointed armchair strategists, does have to look at all the possible options before deciding what to do next. Because even if we assume that the Israelis are irresponsible, arrogant, evil and reckless (which they are), this is not a reason for the Russians to emulate them or start a war.
If the Russians conclude that the Israelis did it deliberately, I will support a strike on Israeli air bases. If the Russians conclude that the Israelis cannot be trusted to abide by any agreements (which I think is indisputable), then I think that the Russians should declare an air exclusion zone over the Russian forces (a 100km radius or so). I also think that it is high time to keep a pair MiG-31BMs on 24/7 combat air patrol high over Syria (they can come quite close to replacing a much more expensive and vulnerable A-50U AWACS).
At this time (Sept 20th 20:37 GMT) all they have announced is that ““both sides emphasized the importance of the states’ interests and the continued implementation of the deconfliction system”. If that is all that the Russians decide, then I will find it wholly inadequate and I will predict a further surge in frustration against not only the government, but against Putin himself. But, for the time being, we need to wait and see what the Russian investigation will reveal. Only then can we begin cheering Putin or calling him names.
There is also this possibility: the Russians would decide on an air exclusion zone and tell the Israelis, but both sides would decide to keep this secret in order for Israel to save face (because if the Russians declare an air exclusion zone, this will create a safe heaven for Hezbollah and all the other militias which would be a political disaster for Bibi Netanyahu). So we might never find out.
Finally, I want to add one more thing which is rarely, if ever, mentioned.
The S-200 is a pretty old air defense system. We also know that it does not have a Russian IFF. However, the Russians have declared several times that the Russian air defense network and the Syrian one were integrated. This is what best explains, at least in part, the very high number of US cruise missiles intercepted in April. The problem is that the way the S-200 (and most modern air defense systems) works is that the S-200 is fully integrated into a larger air defense network administered by automated air defense management systems which is operated by a higher echelon air defense command. This means that the Syrian air defense crew did not simply detect the incoming missiles and fire off one of their own. At the very least, this decision was taken by a higher echelon Syrian air defense command. Now we know that the time was extremely short and, hence, the Russian air defense personnel might not have had the time to take protective action, especially not when dealing with a large, slow and vulnerable moving EW aircraft (the fact that this aircraft flew un-escorted is definitely a Russian mistake!). Still, we know that the Russians have many early warning capabilities which the Syrians do not have (AWACS, space based, shipborne radars, over-the-horizon radars, etc.) and there is a pretty decent chance that somebody could have done something to prevent what happened. True, since the Israelis and Russians had an agreement, the Russians therefore classified the Israelis as “non-threat”, but it does not take a genius to understand that four Israeli F-16 flying towards the Latakia Governorate are up to no good and that this warrants immediately going on full alert.
So this might be the reason why Putin spoke of “tragic circumstances”: there might be more blame to pass around than just piling it all up on the just the Israelis. By the way, even if true, none of this would in any way exculpate the Israelis for the very simple reason that had the Israelis warned the Russians on time this entire tragedy might have been avoided even if the prime culprits are cowardly Israeli pilots, less than competent Syrian air defense crews or too trusting Russians. By “warning” the Russians just 1 minute before the attack the Israelis created an environment in which such a tragedy simply had to happen. This is why I think that no matter what the Russian investigation find, anything short of an air exclusion zone over the Russian forces would constitute an inadequate response: the fundamental Israeli responsibility is already established. But what is still missing are the (important) details.
One more thing in conclusion: the last time the Russians made a deal with the Israelis, it worked remarkably well, let’s not forget that. The Syrian forces re-took control of their southern border without the Israelis doing anything meaningful to stop them. Let also remember that at the beginning of this war the usual chorus of Putin-haters was already screaming that “Putin disarmed and betrayed Syria!!” when the Russians removed the (useless) chemical weapons from Syria (thereby stopping an imminent US attack). When the Russians then proceeded to single-handedly save Syria from the “good” and “bad” terrorists, those who were screaming about betrayal remained silent and never admitted that they were wrong.
The truth is that no matter what Putin does, we can expect the chorus of Putin-haters to bellow at the top of their lungs “Putin betrayed X” (replace “X” with whatever you want). Yes, they are stupid and tedious, and nothing will stop them (I also suspect that a lot of that nonsense is machine generated, at least judging by the kind of repetitive crap the moderators constantly intercept on my blog). But for the rest of us, we need to remain critical of both Putin and Russian policies, but we need to do so by logically processing well-established facts, not by just waiting for whatever pretext to resume the usual mantra.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!

Reflecting on Zionism during Ashura


Zionists have always been controlling the politics of European strongholds through both, economy and terror. Where the first fails to twist arms, the second ensures success. They are, by far, the masters of this pair of dark practices.
The manipulation of key economic factors in a country can bring it to its knees; depending on how they (the Zionists) assault the system, they can have the general population indulge in bloody revolutions or become so preoccupied with making ends meet that citizens ignore politics and the wrongdoings of their government – bread is more precious than gold when your children cry of hunger.
When the government is the target, the highest official is assaulted in such a grotesque fashion that he ends up serving as an example to any other leader who dares contemplate, even remotely, challenging the will of Zionists.
The royal children of Tsar Nicholas II were shot and stabbed to death before mutilating their bodies when it would have been enough to just hang him alone. This was a strong and clear message to all the other royals who weren’t under the control of the Rothschilds, telling them that safeguarding their children and dynasty meant adhering to the politics of the deep “state of Zion”.
Zionists are ruthless. There is no known ethical philosophy that they follow. As individuals, they are born into different religions but are sworn to uphold the best interest of their organization – in their doctrine, religious teachings may and shall not restrict murder where deemed necessary to further the cause of global domination. Murder has been deemed necessary by them for centuries and in some instances, murder was on a mass scale. World War II is an example of that. 50 to 80 million humans perished directly and indirectly during that war. The reader can answer the question of how do we know it was the Zionists who orchestrated that war by researching which banks and mega-financial establishments had funded it and which excessively rich European royalty lent money to the Third Reich. A good starting point of the research would be looking into the historical financial ledgers of the United States’ Federal Reserve bank; the amount of transactions in favor of Nazi Germany is stunning. There is, however, a debate among historians as to which financial institution had funded Adolf Hitler more, some say The Bank of England was the bigger investor in the Third Reich’s agenda.
Contrary to the general belief that the most powerful mafia in the US is the Italian one, the real mafia muscle is the Jewish one. The film industry in Hollywood, being yet another powerful device of Zionism, brainwashed people into thinking that the Italians made up the mafia with movies like The God Father and shows like the Sopranos introducing iconic Italian mafia figures to the world.
The Jewish mafia is the one and only superpower within the United States. It is a multi-billion dollar operation that yields trillions for the Zionist movement. It is what President Kennedy was scheming to bring down. The fathers of the American mafia, the likes of Meyer Lansky and Gurrah Shapiro were not Sicilian; they were Jewish born Zionists who employed men with Italian names to be a front for their crimes so as to divert attention from them. They were the predecessors of those who killed JFK and ran the government by means of, again, economy and terror. They threatened those they could not bribe. Bankers, CEOs, Pentagon officials, judges, police chiefs, and even presidents are among the people under the Jewish mafia umbrella.
So, who is the father of Zionism? It is thought to be Theodor Herzl. They would like for the world to think so. They chose a well versed, highly educated, and charismatic young man to bring the centuries-old terrorist movement to light. Very few know that his speeches were inspired by the words of his masters during his preparation and that one of them was actually present in the first congress held in Basle in the year 1897 to give him the necessary confidence. His masters were the Rothschilds.
The father of Zionism has always been a Rothschild; at least during the past two centuries. They own the Jewish mafia and the thrones of many kings and queens. They own the generals of the armies of many countries. They own the secret societies that recruit future Zionist leaders. They own a Christian sect of over 300 million worshippers being programmed to bring down the Vatican from within.
They have systematically hijacked the message of Moses, battled the message of Jesus, and defamed the message of Mohamed. They used the star of David on warplanes that kill children, they spread slanderous stories about Mary of Nazareth, and they picture Islam to look like the opposite of what it really is.
Theodor Herzl was nothing but a spokesman for the Rothschilds. He was a higher-level member of their terrorist secret society on whose shoulders fell the responsibility of unifying and mobilizing their European lodges (the choice of the word LODGE was chosen very carefully here.)
Theodor Herzl spoke a lot and he meant what he said. He prophesized events that had been planned for at least two decades before the first World Zionist Congress took place in 1897. That very first congress was where the declaration of the rollout of their plan was made. They wanted a country of their own so as to, finally, operate under their own institutions. It was time for Zion to become a nation out in the open. Their movement had the chance to incubate within the Jewish society and so, most of the Zionists were Jews. It should be kept in mind though, as mentioned earlier, they don’t really believe in any religion. Should Moses and David come back to defy them, they would have them beheaded.
One should stop and think for a second. If those claiming Palestine to be the one true land of the Jews were so biblically set on it, why did they try to turn Uganda into their promised land? The truth is plain and simple. They occupied Palestine as a second and perhaps a third option. And, here comes the rarely spoken of revelation.
The Arab Jews, the ones who are originally Jewish in identity and belief were aware of the Zionist plans. As in any other religious group, they have the good and the bad. Some went ahead with the demonic plans in exchange for financial gains and promises of higher positions. Others remained true to their country and religion even though they had suffered for decades at the hands of the Ottomans. Those Jews comprehended the fact that if they allowed the Zionists to hijack the Jewish faith, that their religion would lose its authenticity. Those Jews were taken care of, one way or another.
Many of them were forced to flee the land of their ancestors. They traveled mostly to Europe and some to the United States. Those who stayed and resisted were killed without remorse. In their place, Zionist families began immigrating to Palestine under the pretense of making Aliyah. So as to give their gradual theft of Palestine some kind of credibility.
The Jews of Palestine were the victims of the Zionist terror just as much as the Muslims. It was all hinted in Herzl’s speeches. He said it clearly several times; namely that those Jews not going along with the Zionist plan will be made to do so. Just as he prophesized the Holocaust decades before it occurred. Herzl stressed the importance of such a catastrophic event so as to ensure and haste the plan of creating a Zionist country. He praised Anti-Semitism publicly and repeatedly because it was the catalyst for the creation of the terror nation that Zionists needed in order to formally house their gangs. They succeeded – the Mossad became the name of the union of their gangs.
It is obvious that, had the primary Zionist supporting superpower at the time not invaded Palestine, the Zionists would have created “Israel” in another geographical location. If Uganda was the first option, then any other spot on Earth would have been the second option. It just happened that Palestine was an easier bite to swallow. They would have misinterpreted the bible they hijacked again and perhaps even modified every copy to give them the false authenticity they needed to occupy the land they could put their hands on.
The ethnic cleansing of Jews in Europe and Palestine earlier in the previous century was done exclusively by Zionists. The ethnic cleansing of Palestinians now is also done exclusively by them. They are the terrorists of our planet.
The so-called state/entity of “Israel” is not the home of the Jews, it is the home of the Zionist global movement. Zionists are thugs. Human life is worth nothing to them. They feed on human misery.
In a world where it is becoming increasingly difficult to own a house and feed your family, they offer free houses and secured job opportunities to those who would agree to leave their countries on the expense of Palestinians. The lie has become so old that some Jews actually believe that Palestine is the “Promised Land”. They believe that Palestinian children are “goyim” and that killing one of them is equal to slaying a chicken for lunch.
For those readers who doubt that European Jews were actually killed by Zionists, they can look up the names of Oppenheimer and Warberg. For those who doubt that America was and still is run by the Zionist Jewish mob, dig into the history of George Bush the father who is a known Zionist and his mafia accomplices who, by the way, were the real assassins of President Kennedy. To centralize the research though, just read the transcripts of Herzl’s speeches.
Lenin, who gave the order to stab the royal children of the Russian Tsar and then shoot them right before cutting them to pieces, made his Bolshevik revolution declaration only five days after the Belfour one. Lenin had Jewish roots. A coincidence? The manner of the killing of the Romanov’s was done in a very similar way to the current killings done by ISIS who were created by Zionists. A bigger coincidence?
There is no defeating Zionism as a macro counter movement because it is what they have prepared themselves for. The wars of ‘48, ‘67, and ‘73 prove that. The only way to end their terror is by organizing micro resistance movements that rely on values unfathomable to Zionists and hence, values they cannot prepare against. Those values would become the essence of the defense strategy.
It is no secret that the Zionist organizational body comprises highly educated terrorists – they hold doctorate degrees in one thing or another from the most prestigious and exclusive universities. After all, terror includes, but is not limited to, physical violence. They have always studied others and have succeeded, to a great extent, in developing a system of intelligently guessing reactions. They have a whole science dedicated to forecasting human character patterns. This shows through their historical skill of reeling in target victims into situations where the outcome of the fight is ensured.
Hezbollah did to “Israel” what a coalition of huge armies failed to do on several occasions. The humble Lebanese resistance depended on being small in size and more importantly, depended on the kind of love that Zionist textbooks don’t teach and, hence, can’t possibly counter – the love of the grandson of the Prophet Mohamed. The grandson who knew that he would be martyred in his campaign against corruption and immorality but still pressed ahead. Imam Hussein understood that the future of humanity needed powerful examples of selfless sacrifice. The men of the Lebanese resistance recognize Imam Hussein’s victory over the earlier version of Zionism; they walked in his steps and turned the “Israeli” army’s infamous might into a joke.
Doubting Imam Hussein’s victory or arguing against it is a sign of Zionist mental conditioning. Imam Hussein’s legacy lives to our day and his message, written with his blood almost fourteen centuries ago, is still read and memorized by those fighting global Zionism. Victory is not living in shame; it is dying with pride in defense of righteousness: a concept keeping the successors of the masters of Herzl from global domination.
The martyrdom of Imam Hussein made him live in the hearts of hundreds of millions and with him, live the desire to stand up against all forms of injustice and terrorist organizations like Zionism.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!

Here’s How The Latakia Tragedy – Nay, Conspiracy! – Might Have Played Out

Well-intentioned guesswork (a.k.a. “conspiracy theorizing”) argued on a rational basis could present a plausible explanation for a seemingly inexplicable event whose official narrative doesn’t seem to add up amidst an ever-increasing number of inconsistencies. 
There are a plethora of theories about what happened on the fateful night of 17 September when a Syrian-launched S-200 missile mistakenly downed a Russian spy plane after the “Israelis” apparently used it as cover when carrying out their bombing mission, and this post is admittedly one of them which seeks to account for several of the most gaping inconsistencies in the official narrative. To bring the reader up to speed about the author’s work on this matter, here are his previously published pieces to skim at one’s leisure: 
What follows doesn’t claim to be the author’s final interpretation of what happened, nor to be the only one that reasonably explains the course of events that led to this tragedy, but is simply a well-intentioned exercise in guesswork that strives to present an alternative understanding of what might have occurred on as rational of a basis as possible. The point in doing so is to propose possible answers to some of the most obvious inconsistencies that allow one to thenceforth form a more comprehensive explanation of what might have transpired. 
A Regular Bombing Run Gone Bad 
To begin, it’s uncontested that four “Israeli” jets participated in the bombing of Latakia, but what’s not addressed is how the Russian military apparently didn’t see them coming and had no idea that they were on their way to the battlespace until receiving a phone call from their counterparts one minute prior. That’s unbelievable because it would mean that Russia doesn’t have any assets in Syria capable of tracking aircraft outside of the Arab Republic’s borders. The next question that arises is why Russia wouldn’t have scrambled fighter jets to protect its spy plane, as is the standard procedure for any military anywhere in the world whenever they detect unknown air units streaming towards their area of responsibility. Russia, which has one of the world’s most professional armed forces, didn’t do this, so it should be taken to mean that it had reason to believe that the four jets headed towards Syria were “Israeli”, and therefore had no intention of engaging any Russian units in this theater. 
The reason for this assumption is that “Israel” recently admitted to carrying out over 200 strikes in Syria during the past 18 months alone, which wouldn’t have been possible had Russia not passively facilitated them through the so-called “deconfliction mechanism” by refusing to engage its jets and missiles. Moscow made this decision over and over again because Russia is actually “balancing” Iran in the Mideast despite how “politically incorrect” this observation is for most commentators – let alone all official voices – to publicly say. As such, despite apparently not receiving an official confirmation from their counterparts until less than a minute beforehand that this was yet another one of those same missions, Russia had no reason to think that this was anything different that what’s literally happened hundreds of times before, which is why it didn’t’ scramble its fighter jets to protect the spy plane.  Accordingly, it looks like this was a regular bombing run that all of a sudden went bad. 
Peek-A-Boo? 
The next major inconsistency that needs to be addressed is the curious accusation that the “Israeli” jet recklessly hid behind the much larger Russian spy plane and therefore (deliberately?) diverted the Syrian S-200 away from its original target and towards the friendly one. The Russian Ministry of Defense already debunked the false reporting earlier in the week that his country transferred “Friend/Foe Identification” (FFI) to Syria that would have supposedly made such a mistake impossible to pull off, so its original claim that one of the “Israeli” jets carried out this dangerous maneuver that led to the tragedy is theoretically consistent with what’s been made public thus far. For that to have happened, however, the two planes must have obviously been flying in very close proximity to one another, which leads to the next two points that deserve to be pondered. 
The first is a reiteration of what was talked about in the previous section concerning why Russia didn’t scramble any of its fighter jets to protect the spy plane if such dangerous maneuvers were indeed occurring. It can’t be known for sure why this didn’t happen, but one possible explanation might be that it wasn’t unprecedented for “Israeli” jets to fly very close to Russian planes when carrying out their bombing missions in Syria. There’s no suggestion being made that Russia has been “escorting” Israeli jets through Syrian airspace during their 200+ bombing missions, but just that this apparently wasn’t out of the ordinary enough for Russia to immediately deem it to be so dangerous that it either had to enter into radio communication with the “Israeli” pilot and order him to back off (which to the best of the public’s knowledge didn’t happen) or even dispatch a few of its own jets to ward off the foreign one. 
The second point is that the Syrian S-200 operator must have seen the much larger Russian spy plane if he also saw the comparatively smaller “Israeli” jet, which raises the natural question of why he decided to fire his non-FFI anti-air weapon if there was a very real chance that it could accidentally hit the allied aircraft instead of the enemy one. Again, it needs to be reinforced that no official source has questioned the Russian Ministry of Defense’s claims that there were only four “Israeli” jets that took part in this bombing run, meaning that it’s not exactly like the sky was so full of missiles and warplanes for an entire hour that the S-200 operator couldn’t have seen the humungous Russian spy plane that the tinier “Israeli” jet that he targeted was supposedly hiding behind. Thus, “operator error” seems to be just as responsible for what happened as was the “Israeli” jet’s irresponsible “peek-a-boo” maneuver, which is probably why President Putin ordered an investigation into what many thought was otherwise an open-and-shut case. 
Multisided “Balancing”
There are a few more inconsistencies that need to be accounted for prior to arriving at the conclusion of this well-intended “conspiracy theory”. Some people have trouble understanding why President Putin’s response was much milder compared to the military’s, but this should have been self-evident because the armed forces lost some of their men and therefore felt compelled to protect their national dignity with the strongest statements possible. Furthermore, another factor could have been at play, too, and it’s that the military is more representative of the “traditionalist” faction of Russia’s “deep state” that’s in a rivalry with the “progressive” one headed by its diplomats. The Russian leader’s duty is to “balance” these two parties, just like he’s currently “balancing” “Israel” and Iran in Syria, so his response shouldn’t have been surprising to those who are aware of these “deep state” dynamics. 
It’s not only President Putin who’s engaged in a very delicate “balancing” act, but also his Syrian counterpart who’s attempting to do this between Russia and Iran. To simplify a very complex strategy, Damascus doesn’t want to be solely dependent on Moscow because it fears that this will lead to it having to “compromise” on “unacceptable” political issues pertaining to “decentralization” and the like, whereas “balancing” with Tehran could buy it some valuable time and “breathing space” to avoid having to undertake measures such as that one. Syria is also a constitutionally anti-Zionist state and therefore shares the same ideology as Iran, whereas Russia – and especially President Putin personally – is on excellent terms with their sworn enemy. As it may have happened, this could have played a role in the Syrian S-200 operator’s deadly decision to fire on the “Israeli” jet despite seeing that it was playing “peek-a-boo” behind the Russian spy plane. 
Reading Between The Lines 
To explain what’s meant by this, it’s enough to observe just how upset the Syrians are over the Russian-Turkish Idlib deal after preparing for months to liberate the province and spreading stories all throughout the media about the purportedly imminent commencement of this operation. Officially speaking, “everything’s perfect”, but those with a keen ability to “read between the lines” after familiarizing themselves for years with the Syrian mentality and narrative messaging strategies could see that Damascus isn’t too happy with what happened. It might not actually be a coincidence that the tragedy transpired on the same night as the Idlib deal was made because emotions would have been running high all throughout the Syrian Arab Army (SAA), possibly leading an angry S-200 operator to irresponsibly take the decision to shoot at the “Israeli” jet even though there was a clear chance that it could have accidentally hit the larger Russian spy plane instead. 
To be perfectly clear, it is not being suggested that the downing of the Russian spy plane was done on purpose, but just that the Syrian S-200 operator’s recklessness in taking the shot anyways despite the obvious risks involved could have been influenced by that individual’s anger over the Idlib deal that clouded his sense of judgement and led to that regrettable action. Moreover, as the author wrote in two of his aforementioned pieces, it can’t be discounted that Iranian “advisors” were present at the scene of what Russia officially regards as a crime, especially since the Islamic Republic has its own S-200s and is more than capable of “advising” its Syrian counterparts with these weapons. While it’s admittedly a stretch, this plausible possibility might explain why it strangely took President Assad a full two days to express his condolences to President Putin, and even then, he only did so through a cable and not a phone call. 
Russian presidential spokesman Dmitry Peskov confirmedearlier that day that Presidents Putin and Assad hadn’t spoken since the tragedy, which seemed bizarre to many because it contradicted conventional thinking on how national leaders normally react whenever these sorts of tragedies transpire. Additionally, it’s worth pointing out that President Assad’s message also said that “We are confident that such painful acts would not affect you and us to continue fighting terrorism”, which appears out of place because one would normally take that for granted. If, however, the Syrian S-200 operator really was at fault (possibly under Iran’s “advisory” influence), which would explain why President Putin ordered an investigation instead of automatically accusing “Israel” and subsequently committed to continuing the “deconfliction system” with it that’s already passively facilitated over 200 strikes in Syria, then it would make sense why President Assad took two days to make a statement and then felt obligated to include that curious sentence in his cable. 
The “Conspiracy” Comes Together 
Putting together the pieces of the puzzle that were elaborated on throughout this well-intentioned exercise of guesswork, the following “conspiracy theory” begins to take shape. 
Russia Wasn’t Surprised By The “Israeli” Strike Or Even The Close Fly-By Of One Of Its Jets: 
“Israel” dispatched four jets to carry out yet another one of its over 200 bombing missions in Syria in response to Iran imminently preparing to transfer weapons to Hezbollah on the Arab Republic’s territory, which is why Russia didn’t perceive the incoming aerial units as a threat despite identifying them prior to being officially notified of their presence by its “Israeli” counterparts one minute before the commencement of actual hostilities. “Israeli” jets apparently fly close to Russian planes on a regular enough basis that the latter’s military didn’t consider this threatening enough of a maneuver in and of itself to radio the pilot to back off or dispatch a few of its own jets to get this point across like it always does whenever the Americans do something like this. 
The Syrian S-200 Operator Acted Recklessly Because He Was Upset About The Idlib Deal: 
The Syrian S-200 operator, incensed by what he might have felt to be Russia’s “betrayal” of Syria through the Idlib deal with Turkey and possibly even influenced by an Iranian “advisor”, took the professionally irresponsible risk of shooting at the “Israeli” jet despite the high likelihood that his non-FFI weapon might inadvertently hit the much larger Russian spy plane instead of the tinier enemy one. Once that happened, the Syrian authorities panicked because the realized the implications of what occurred, especially if any trace of Iranian involvement could be found. Should that be established to any extent, then it would conceivably be exploited by “Israel” to no end to drive a further wedge between Russia & Iran and consequently get Moscow to “lean on” Damascus to distance itself from Tehran.  
Damascus’ Delay In Officially Responding Suggests Some Level Of Guilt Over What Happened: 
Therefore, President Assad waited a full two days to officially respond until the crime scene was scrubbed of as much evidence as possible. Importantly, and this is a point that shouldn’t be overlooked, he didn’t say anything about cooperating with the Russian investigation into the matter, possibly hoping that his country could make it go away just by ignoring it. That was really weird because Damascus called for transparent international investigations immediately after false flag chemical weapons attacks were committed against it, yet thus far has no official stance towards the Russian-initiated international investigation into the tragic downing of its spy plane by friendly fire earlier this week. President Putin sensed that something was wrong right away, which explains why he reacted the way that he did. 
Russia Saw Through The Syrian Charade, Ordered An Investigation, And Strengthened Ties With “Israel”:
Not only did the Russian leader refuse to blame “Israel” for what happened, but he also ordered an investigation to get down to the bottom of everything. When the “Israelis” promptly dispatched their Air Force chief and other high-ranking members of the military and intelligence establishments to Moscow to heed his call for cooperation, President Putin committed to reinforcing his country’s military ties with “Israel” instead of downgrading them like many expected. This contrasted to the much more reticent Syrian response that strangely took two days for President Assad to convey, and he did so indirectly via cable instead of through a phone call like most people would have expected under these very sensitive circumstances. Not only that, but he felt it important enough to state what should have otherwise been taken for granted when it comes to continuing their military cooperation.  
By Andrew Korybko
Source
Comment: 
Only time will tell how accurate this “conspiracy theory” is in explaining Monday night’s tragedy and the most glaring inconsistencies in the official narrative, but it’s nevertheless a model to monitor.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!

New Satellite Images Reveal Aftermath Of Israeli Strikes On Syria; Putin Accepts Offer to Probe Downed Jet

An Israeli satellite imaging company has released satellite photographs that reveal the extent of Monday night’s attack on multiple locations inside Syria.
ImageSat International released them as part of an intelligence report on a series of Israeli air strikes which lasted for over an hour and resulted in Syrian missile defense accidentally downing a Russian surveillance plane that had 15 personnel on board.
The images reveal the extent of destruction on one location struck early in attack in the port city of Latakia, as well as the aftermath of a prior strike on Damascus International Airport. On Tuesday Israel owned up to carrying out the attack in a rare admission.
Israel Syria sat1
Syrian official SANA news agency reported ten people injured in the attacks carried out of military targets near three major cities in Syria’s north.
The Times of Israel, which first reported the release of the new satellite images, underscores the rarity of Israeli strikes happening that far north and along the coast, dangerously near Russian positions:
The attack near Latakia was especially unusual because the port city is located near a Russian military base, the Khmeimim Air Force base. The base is home to Russian jet planes and an S-400 aerial defense system. According to Arab media reports, Israel has rarely struck that area since the Russians arrived there.
The Russian S-400 system was reportedly active during the attack, but it’s difficult to confirm or assess the extent to which Russian missiles responded during the strikes.
Three of the released satellite images show what’s described as an “ammunition warehouse” that appears to have been completely destroyed.
Ammunition warehouse Syria sat.jpg
The IDF has stated their airstrikes targeted a Syrian army facility “from which weapons-manufacturing systems were supposed to be transferred to Iran and Hezbollah.” This statement came after the IDF expressed “sorrow” for the deaths of Russian airmen, but also said responsibility lies with the “Assad regime.”
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu also phoned Russian President Vladimir Putin to express regret over the incident while offering to send his air force chief to Russia with a detailed report — something which Putin agreed to.
According to Russia’s RT News, “Major-General Amikam Norkin will arrive in Moscow on Thursday, and will present the situation report on the incident, including the findings of the IDF inquiry regarding the event and the pre-mission information the Israeli military was so reluctant to share in advance.”
Airport Syria sat.png
Russia’s Defense Ministry condemned the “provocative actions by Israel as hostile” and said Russia reserves “the right to an adequate response” while Putin has described the downing of the Il-20 recon plane as likely the result of a “chain of tragic accidental circumstances” and downplayed the idea of a deliberate provocation, in contradiction of the initial statement issued by his own defense ministry.
Pro-government Syrians have reportedly expressed frustration this week that Russia hasn’t done more to respond militarily to Israeli aggression; however, it appears Putin may be sidestepping yet another trap as it’s looking increasingly likely that Israel’s aims are precisely geared toward provoking a response in order to allow its western allies to join a broader attack on Damascus that could result in regime change.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!

Russian ‘Agents’ Accused of Salisbury Poisonings: Just Tourists, or Framed?

british media russophobia putin
England vs Russia on Russian soil in the football World Cup this summer would have been more entertaining than the dreary, farcical charade the two countries have been playing out since March. The Skripal Saga – The Salisbury Poisonings – Putin’s personal chemical warfare attack on the UK… The only thing really worth saying about it is that it’s just more sound and fury, signifying nothing. Be that as it may, the mainstream anglophone media has capitalized on this mendacity because it’s a useful distraction from the major geopolitical changes underway, as well as the socio-economic and planetary upheaval resulting from, or mirroring, the chaotic world system transition we’re undergoing.
Flush with paranoid conspiracy theories and lewd speculation, what the media’s narratives about this nonsense lack – as usual – is all-important context. In 2003, the US and UK launched a reckless invasion and occupation of Iraq under the pretext that Saddam Hussein had Weapons of Mass Destruction (which, specifically, included chemical weapons) aimed at London. Russia demanded evidence of such before that war, warning that chaos would result from such a flagrant breach of international law, and was ignored.
The US and UK later launched a proxy war against neighbouring Syria by funding, arming and training an ‘internationalist brigade’ of ‘Muslim liberators’, and, once that ‘softened up’ the country, the anglo-American establishment were ‘weapons-hot’ to swoop in and ‘decapitate the regime’ in August 2013 under the pretext that Bashar Al-Assad had ‘used chemical weapons against his own people’. Russia again intervened, but this time was listened to (likely because Russia already had a military foothold in the country via its long-term air defence contracts, not because the US Congress and UK Parliament suddenly ‘saw the light’ and agreed to adhere to international law). The OPCW (Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons) certified that the Syrian state was chemical weapon-free, and the matter was apparently dropped.
Except that it wasn’t. One might expect, after such a public and internationally-applauded application of non-violent legal means to quell an international scandal which prevented the collapse of the Syrian state and further destabilization of the Middle East, that the ruse of citing ‘chemical weapons’ whenever Western countries wished to justify their use of overwhelming military firepower to ‘teach dictators lessons’ was a dead duck.
Instead, as we’ve seen in recent years, the stewards of empire have gone on to play this card about a dozen more times, and the scheme has been exposed each time by Russia’s non-aligned media and Western dissidents. Combined with Russia’s successful defence of Syria from terrorist groups like ISIS – which also exposed the Western hand behind so-called Islamic terrorism – the Western elite that grew accustomed to dominating the Middle East have acquired a strong motive to misrepresent the intentions and actions of the Russian government on the world stage.
That’s why the Ado About Nothing in Salisbury attempts to connect Russia with said chemical weapons: Russia keeps ‘foiling’ the strategy of pinning WMD use on the target (Syria) – which has the dual effect of undermining the West’s diktats abroad and seeding doubt domestically in its ‘mission civilisatrice’, thus eroding public faith in Western institutions and ‘our way of life’ – so Russia must be implicated in such WMD use itself to ‘reinflate faith in the credit of Western institutions’. And if doubts remain about Western culpability in manipulating terrorists to stage chemical attacks, then at the very least Russia will have been prevented from seizing the moral high ground.
Where better to host this ‘chemical match’ between the Anglosphere and Russia than Salisbury, Wiltshire, famous for Stonehenge, but now infamous for being home to Britain’s military WMD research laboratories, corporate weapons manufacturers (including chemical weapons – CS gas, among other notorious ‘crowd-control’ weapons, was born there), and military proving grounds, the first such dedicated ‘military-industrial complex’ when it was founded during WW1.
It’s a fitting location in one sense, but not in another. A town several miles from Porton Down is probably the last place British authorities wished to draw international attention to in a ‘chemical warfare crime’, but the perpetrators – apparently equipped with a wicked sense of humor – clearly had other ideas. That this bizarrely-concocted story of shoddy origins becomes no clearer as the story-line develops speaks to the likelihood that this operation was carried out not by British intelligence per se, but by an ‘international fifth column’. Think Litvinenko, polonium, Arafat…
Asked repeatedly by the Russian government to formally present its evidence for consideration and response, the British have opted to keep this match confined to trial-by-media, strictly avoiding legal mechanisms for dispute resolution provided under international law. Besides the vitriol launched at Russia by the global anglophone propaganda network, commentators pilloried Theresa May’s government when it sold the story of a Russian conspiracy back in March, while the Russian media lampooned its British counterparts. A deadly ‘Russian’ nerve agent, despite having no factual link with Russia other than its cartoonish name, and which doesn’t even kill upon contact? The survivors walled off from media or diplomatic contact, then disappeared into witness protection? The British government had so little evidence for its outrageous claim that ’twas Putin wot dunnit, it didn’t even have any suspects!
Or so it led everyone to assume, until recently. Fully 6 months later, they have unveiled CCTV evidence placing two Russian men in Salisbury – and close to Sergey Skripal’s home – at the time of the poisoning of him and his daughter. If you haven’t yet done so, watch the whole of RT’s interview with the suspects fingered by the British government, Alexander Petrov and Ruslan Boshirov. US and UK media pundits are crooning over this ‘late goal’, enjoying (what they no doubt believe is) the last laugh in this ‘trial’. I suppose I should add that I’m shocked by the appalling lack of journalism by Western journalists, who have done nothing to show how they arrived at their conclusions that ‘Russia did it’ other than to repeat the British government’s policy that ‘Russia did it’, but, these days, I’m almost all out of shock anyway.
Besides the gaping lack of motive for the Russian government to whack a former Russian intel officer (and now British citizen) during his Russian daughter’s visit, in broad daylight, on the territory of its ‘Great Game’ foe, on the eve of Putin’s likely re-election, and with preparations underway for Russia to host the most-watched cultural event on the planet, it’s extremely unlikely that these two guys are Russian intel operatives who were sent to kill the Skripals. If they were, neither Sergei nor Yulia Skripal would be alive today, Petrov and Borishov would not be their real names, they would not have traveled together, they would not have been seen together, they would not have entered the country on a direct flight from Moscow, and we would not be hearing them – at Putin’s public suggestion – defend themselves in a TV interview.
Nevertheless, it’s also clear – based on their movements in Salisbury, and some of their vague answers in the interview – that Petrov and Borishov were not just visiting Salisbury to ‘take in the sights’. They are not Russian military intelligence officers, but they do appear to have been led by the nose by actual intel operatives into an intrigue they knew nothing about beforehand.
As we’ve seen with Western intelligence recruitment practices in this era of the ‘War on Terror’, it’s easy to groom people to be somewhere at a specific time. Perhaps Petrov and Borishov were led to believe that ‘business opportunities’ awaited them at or near Sergei Skripal’s address, and were expecting to meet either Skripal himself or someone else entirely. They perhaps walked up to his door, or a house nearby, saw that nobody was home, failed to find their contact-person, then left to fly back to Russia, none the wiser that they thus became two hapless Russian dupes ‘caught on camera’ walking through a crime scene – ‘framed’ for ‘attempted murder-by-nerve agents’.
This third scenario is all the more likely given that they were tracked by CCTV arriving at Salisbury train station, walking about 2kms towards a residential neighbourhood, and were last seen on camera some 400 meters from Skripal’s house. When nobody was home at whichever house they called at, they then ‘took in some sights’ instead. What will be interesting to find out is what exactly the nature of their business in Russia is, and thus what motivates them to take sudden international trips to ‘research the market for sports supplements’, and in what way they anticipated enriching their business by visiting England on a bleak March weekend.
With the two Skripals recovering as they did, and with eyewitnesses describing them as appearing to be suffering from hallucinations, and with the two Amesbury victims being drug addicts, future episodes of The Skripal Saga may see the story-line evolve from ‘sports supplements’ to powerful drugs. In fact, the Russians scored a goal earlier in the match when foreign minister Sergey Lavrov revealed that Spiez Laboratory, the Swiss firm analyzing samples from Salisbury on behalf of the OPCW, had found traces of BZ (chemically, 3-Quinuclidinyl benzilate), an hallucinogenic chemical warfare agent the Pentagon has long-since tested on US soldiers.
Curiously, a carefully-timed leak to Swiss and Dutch newspapers last week revealed that two ‘Russian GRU agents’ had been detained in The Hague, Holland, where the OPCW is located, for breaking into (or remotely hacking – the report isn’t clear) the Spiez Laboratory in Switzerland, before being promptly expelled back to Russia. This all happened on the QT back in late March. Nobody said a word about it until now. A couple of weeks afterwards, Lavrov made his announcement about the BZ finding in the Salisbury sample. This revelation and counter-revelation 6 months later suggests two things:
  1. Lavrov’s information came courtesy of a successfully hacked/stolen OPCW/Spiez report that has not been published;
  2. These two hackers/thieves were actual Russian spies, as opposed to dupes in the wrong place at the wrong time, because they were dealt with in the manner that actual spies are generally dealt with – clinically, without the hysteria the media whips up for the purpose of diverting public attention.
But curiouser still is that BZ is also a powerful anticholinergic agent, which puts it in a class of chemicals that are antidotes to nerve agents like ‘Novichok’. Which means that both substances could plausibly have been used on the Skripals, perhaps in quick succession, or in some otherwise ‘safe’ combination. Which hints that both the British and the Russians could end up being technically correct, on that score anyway.
And on and on the Skripal Salisbury Saga goes…
Avatar
Niall Bradley (Profile)
A contributing writer at SOTT.net, Niall Bradley’s articles are cross-posted on his personal blog, NiallBradley.net. Niall is co-host with Joe Quinn of NewsReal, and co-author of Manufactured Terror: The Boston Marathon Bombings, Sandy Hook, Aurora Shooting and Other False-Flag Terror Attacks.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!