\tNous quittons le mode m\u00e9tahistorique auquel nous avons sacrifi\u00e9 hier 18 juillet 2014<\/a> pour le mode op\u00e9rationnel que nous avions explicitement \u00e9cart\u00e9… Alors, quelles sont les derni\u00e8res nouvelles de la trag\u00e9die du vol MH17 de Malaysia Airlines<\/em>, cette \u00e9trange compagnie qui collectionne les trag\u00e9dies suspectes ? Eh bien, d’abord ceci : Obama a parl\u00e9 et les \u00e9lites-Syst\u00e8me du bloc BAO-monde (nouvelle appellation alternative pour l’occasion) sont stup\u00e9faites, une fois de plus, de la R\u00e9v\u00e9lation venue du Messie ; car ceci compte plus que tout : qu’il ait parl\u00e9, qu’il ait r\u00e9pandu la parole-Sainte, l’onction divine de son discours-essentiel, qui sera interpr\u00e9t\u00e9 selon la sanction des oracles.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00abWe have increasing confidence that the Malaysian plane was shot down by a surface-to-air missile that was launched from rebel-controlled territory, Obama said. He also confirmed that at least one American, Quinn Lucas Shanzmen, was killed on board the plane.<\/em>\u00bb (Russia Today<\/em>, station favorite d’Obama, le 18 juillet 2014<\/a>.)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \tIl nous aurait dit, Obama : We have increasing confidence<\/em> que le vol MH17 s’est \u00e9cras\u00e9, que l’\u00e9bahissement respectueux et extasi\u00e9, tel que nous le distinguons dans le chef des plumes empress\u00e9es et diverses de la presse-Syst\u00e8me, n’aurait pas \u00e9t\u00e9 plus fort. Ce qui nous int\u00e9resse ici n’est pas tant le contenu de la d\u00e9claration, que l’on caricature pour montrer l’effet de communication de la chose et donner ainsi une mesure de sa substance, que l’effet t\u00e9tanisant par r\u00e9percussion, par cascades enferm\u00e9es dans une chambre d’\u00e9cho, de cette sorte de d\u00e9claration tenue comme Parole d’Evangile de BHO-Saint, et aussit\u00f4t comme une conclusion imparable que le monstrueux et r\u00e9pulsif ensemble s\u00e9paratistes-Russes-Poutine est coupable \u00e0 300% (100% pour chacun, pour respecter les r\u00e8gles d\u00e9mocratiques), alors que le m\u00eame Obama, redescendu sur terre comme simple pr\u00e9sident des USA avec le texte de ce qu’il a dit vraiment, en v\u00e9rit\u00e9, n’a rien dit de pareil. Plus s\u00e9rieusement, plus rationnellement, c’est dire que, pour la presse-Syst\u00e8me \u00e0 l’aune de l’esprit BAO-monde, l’enqu\u00eate internationale peut commencer puisque la culpabilit\u00e9 est \u00e9tablie.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \tPour autant, on ne cachera pas qu’en face, chez les antiSyst\u00e8me, la culpabilit\u00e9 de Kiev est une hypoth\u00e8se constante pas loin d’\u00eatre \u00e9tablie comme quasiment exclusive. Il y a \u00e9videmment une polarisation, une mont\u00e9e aux extr\u00eames<\/strong> quasi instantan\u00e9e des convictions qui constitue un ph\u00e9nom\u00e8ne remarquable, chaque fois qu’intervient un \u00e9v\u00e9nement spectaculaire et non \u00e9tabli dans le chef des responsabilit\u00e9s, et de plus en plus \u00e0 mesure que le ph\u00e9nom\u00e8ne se reproduit, jusqu’\u00e0 une sorte de perfection qu’a \u00e9tablie le cas du vol MH17… Car nous sommes persuad\u00e9s qu’il y a conviction \u00e9galement du c\u00f4t\u00e9 du bloc BAO, comme il y a conviction chez les antiSyst\u00e8me. Nous vivons sous l’empire absolu du syst\u00e8me de la communication, o\u00f9 aucune place n’est laiss\u00e9e \u00e0 l’objectivit\u00e9 en tant que telle, o\u00f9 toutes les subjectivit\u00e9s deviennent, \u00e0 force de polarisation, autant d’objectivit\u00e9s qui nourrissent la conviction devenue, par essence inattendue, pure sinc\u00e9rit\u00e9.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \tPour autant et puisqu’il faut trancher enfin, nous jugerons que, parmi notre rapide tour d’horizon qui ne pr\u00e9tend en aucune fa\u00e7on \u00eatre exhaustif, le dossier r\u00e9alis\u00e9 par The Saker<\/em> sur l’affaire-MH17 est la pi\u00e8ce la plus remarquable par l’abondance de ses renseignements, de ses observations techniques, etc. On conna\u00eet le Saker<\/em> (voir le 30 mai 2014<\/a>) et l’on sait o\u00f9 son cur penche ; on doit aussi savoir qu’il fait constamment des efforts d’objectivation pour tenter de pr\u00e9senter la cause adverse. S’y ajoutent des capacit\u00e9s techniques d’une personne (The Saker<\/em>) qui s’affirme comme disposant d’une r\u00e9elle expertise militaire, notamment dans le domaine des syst\u00e8mes sol-air, et qui le prouve ; il n’y a aucune raison de ne pas lui faire cr\u00e9dit de tout cela, non seulement sur la valeur propre de ce qu’il \u00e9crit mais aussi, et encore plus, relativement \u00e0 l’usage vulgaire, indigne et imposteur que l’on fait en g\u00e9n\u00e9ral du cr\u00e9dit dans le chef de tant de commentateurs richement dot\u00e9s et aussi stupides qu’on peut l’\u00eatre dans le cadre du bloc BAO. Il y a dans son dossier-MH17 une recollection tr\u00e8s d\u00e9taill\u00e9e de tous les \u00e9l\u00e9ments caract\u00e9risant l’affaire du vol MH17, y compris ceux qui sugg\u00e8rent qu’il s’agit d’une op\u00e9ration dite-false flag<\/em> (le 18 juillet 2014<\/a> [voir le texte en fran\u00e7ais sur le Saker-fran\u00e7ais, le 19 juillet 2014<\/a>]), et d’autre part une appr\u00e9ciation technico-politique g\u00e9n\u00e9rale des possibilit\u00e9s de culpabilit\u00e9, volontaire ou pas (le 18 juillet 2014<\/a> \u00e9galement). Du second texte, nous extrayons les trois hypoth\u00e8ses consid\u00e9r\u00e9es : l’Ukraine-Kiev coupable, la Russie coupable, les s\u00e9paratistes coupables…<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00abThe Russikies and their capabilities.<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bbWhile, obviously, they don’t share with me the details of their moves, it is a pretty safe guess to say that, especially considering the war going on right across the border, the Russians literally had it all on that day: civilians radars, of course, but also long range radars (ground based and airborne), lots of advanced advanced surveillance (long range detection) radars, lots of tracking and fire control radars numerous radio and signal interception stations. Since all the data from this integrated network of systems could be fused at the higher level command posts we can safely assume that the Russian side had something like \u00ab\u00a020\/20 radar vision\u00a0\u00bb: just about as good as it can get. There is no way the Russian shot down this aircraft by mistake.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bbWhat about the Ukrainians?<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bbHere the reality is dramatically different: almost all of the Ukrainian air defense equipment is hopelessly outdated, far in excess of its normal shelf life. The Ukie air defense systems have not trained with live firing for dacades. Unlike the Russian who use contracted professionals on all crucial levels, the Ukies are known to be using conscripts simply due to a lack of funds. To illustrate the bloodly mess the Ukie air defenses are, it is enough to recall here how gross incompetence, mismanagement and outdated equipment resulted in the downing of the Siberian Airlines civilian aircraft in 2001. Since then, things in the Ukie air defenses have only gotten much worse. Still, the Ukies did have an ATC which at the very least should have reported that a civilian airline had a flight plan which would follow the points XYZ. I just cannot imagine a Ukie officer giving the order to shoot at an aircraft without checking for the available flight plans. Also, as far as I know, nobody ever reported that the transponder on the aircraft did not work and, if so, then that means that the Ukie air defense crew should have been receiving a clear signal identifying the aircraft. Let me add here that you can purchase special receivers and antennas which can receive transponder signals on the market and that they are comparatively cheap (1000 bucks range I think). Lastly, but still an option, a Ukie air defense operator could have simply lifted the phone, called the ATC and asked who such and such aircraft was. And even without that: when you see an aircraft flying right around 550 knots at 10’000m in a straight line in a civilian air traffic corridor, you can kinda guess that this is not a military aircraft on a bombing run. So regardless of the state of disrepair of the Ukie air defense forces, there is just no way that they could have mistaken this airliner for a Russian military jet flying on a combat mission. Oh, and did I mention MH17 was flying on west to east course, not from Russia, but towards Russia? Bottom line here for me is this: there is no way the Ukies could have shot down this aircraft by mistake.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bbThe Novorussians now<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bbWell, here again we truly have a dramatically different picture emerging. First, the Novorussians have no ATC. Second, 99% of their air defense systems are either MANPADs (man portable) or heavy machine guns. I did see footage of some kind of air defense radar and command post, but I suspect that this was simply one surveillance radar left by the Ukies. No data fusion here, no integrated air defense network, no long range missiles. Except for the few Buk M-1s which they did get as a trophy when they took control a Ukie base a month or so ago. The fact is that I am still unsure whether they really got anything operable systems at all (the Ukies claim that their soldiers had disabled them, but that might not be true). But we probably have to assume that they got their hands on a least one operational vehicle with its own surveillance radar, engagement radar and missiles. As I mentioned earlier, modern states would integrate the Buk into a full air defense network, but since in war time this might not be possible, it is possible for the Buk to detect, acquire and engage a target all by itself. Frankly, I find it very unlikely that the systems the Novorussians got their hands on would have been operational. I find it even more unlikely that they would also have the people to operate them. Still, just to cover our bases, we have to assume that with Russian aid these systems could have been more or less fixed, and that a crew could also have been sent from Russia. Unlikely? Far fetched? Yes. But, alas, not impossible.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bbStill, there is the flight profile issue. The real threat for Novorussians comes from close air support (low level) and from reconnaissance (medium level) aircraft. Not those flying at 10.000 meters. Also, a Boeing 777 is much larger than an An-26, Su-25, Su-24 or even Su-27. Also, ask yourself, IF you had such a capable and advanced air defense system as the Buk, would you waste it on a poorly identified target? Probably not. Still, I think that at least in theory the Novorussians could have shot down this aircraft.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \tSaker<\/em> poursuit en argumentant autour de la fameuse question cui bono?<\/em> (A qui profite le crime ?), et la r\u00e9ponse est sans ambigu\u00eft\u00e9 : \u00e0 Kiev, et \u00e0 Kiev seulement. Dont acte. Au-del\u00e0, rien d’assur\u00e9 ne peut \u00eatre avanc\u00e9, et nous entrons dans la grande bataille des narrative<\/em>. La seule chose qui nous r\u00e9jouit, c’est que la narrative<\/em> du bloc BAO est beaucoup plus complexe que celle des antiSyst\u00e8me, et pleine de chausse-trappes qui peuvent susciter des effets fratricides. Il est tr\u00e8s ais\u00e9 de s’entendre sur cette simple affirmation : Kiev est coupable ; \u00e0 partir du moment o\u00f9 deux coupables, proches l’un de l’autre mais de natures diff\u00e9rentes (Russes et s\u00e9paratistes), sont possibles, la chose devient complexe, et parfois contradictoire. Que faire lorsqu’on affirme que le tir est venu du territoire des s\u00e9paratistes (Sa Majest\u00e9 BHO Elle-m\u00eame), d’une part, et qu’on affirme d’autre part (le ministre de la justice de Kiev) que les s\u00e9paratistes n’ont pas de missiles capables de tirer aussi haut et aussi loin, et qu’ils sont incapables d’en user ? Faire marche-arri\u00e8re et affirmer que, oui, finalement les s\u00e9paratistes avaient de ces missiles-l\u00e0, et que les Russes sont venus les manier pour eux … Tout cela est affreusement compliqu\u00e9 et rend la besogne de la narrative<\/em> du bloc BAO \u00e9puisante. Reste l’hyst\u00e9rie comme moteur de la chose (voir Antiwar.com<\/em>, le 19 juillet 2014<\/a>. <\/p>\n<\/p>\n \tCertes et pour en revernir \u00e0 lui, r\u00e9p\u00e9tons-le, on sait vers o\u00f9 penche le cur de Saker<\/em>. Il ne s’en cache aucunement. Quant \u00e0 nous, nous avons aussi notre parti-pris, moins \u00e9motif sans doute, et aussi plus dilu\u00e9 et \u00e9dulcor\u00e9 dans une appr\u00e9ciation g\u00e9n\u00e9rale qui est la suivante… Certes, nous jugerions plus probable et plus juste que le cas-MH17 soit une d\u00e9monstration ouverte et incontestable de la f\u00e9lonie \u00e9vidente du bloc BAO, via les gens de Kiev ; nous n’en avons aucune certitude assur\u00e9e ; d’un autre c\u00f4t\u00e9, qu’importe et que nous importe… C’est l\u00e0, en effet, que se situe le nud central de notre position.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \tL’affaire-MH17 ne doit pas, ne peut \u00eatre jug\u00e9e en elle-m\u00eame. Elle n’est fondatrice de rien, ce n’est pas un \u00e9v\u00e9nement-premier si l’on veut, un \u00e9v\u00e9nement ouvrant une s\u00e9quence majeure et rassemblant en lui-m\u00eame toutes les responsabilit\u00e9s de la s\u00e9quence. Cette trag\u00e9die (MH17) se situe au terme d’une cha\u00eene d’\u00e9v\u00e9nements progressant de causes \u00e0 effets, avec, \u00e0 l’origine, un \u00e9v\u00e9nement fondateur. C’est l\u00e0 que pr\u00e9sident les responsabilit\u00e9s qui importent. L’\u00e9v\u00e9nement fondateur de la s\u00e9quence, c’est la politique US d’extension de l’OTAN des ann\u00e9es \u00e0 partir de 1992, contre toutes les promesses faites aux Russes jusqu’alors. Tout ce qui suit dans cette s\u00e9quence doit n\u00e9cessairement renvoyer \u00e0 cette responsabilit\u00e9 initiale d’une superpuissance bient\u00f4t hyperpuissance, alors (\u00e0 cette \u00e9poque) ma\u00eetresse d’elle-m\u00eame comme de l’univers pour paraphraser l’Auguste de Corneille. (Bien s\u00fbr, au-del\u00e0, la responsabilit\u00e9 c’est le Syst\u00e8me, n\u00e9cessairement. Cela va de soi mais d\u00e9passe l’\u00e9v\u00e9nementiel historique et terrestre.)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \tCe point est int\u00e9ressant \u00e0 relever aujourd’hui parce qu’un article r\u00e9cent, dot\u00e9 d’une r\u00e9f\u00e9rence indiscutable, rappelle cet \u00e9pisode qui a accouch\u00e9 lointainement de MH17. Le 17 juillet 2014<\/a>, sur UNZ.com<\/em>, John V. Walsh, reprend le t\u00e9moignage important de l’ambassadeur Jack Foust Matlock, Jr., qui fut ambassadeur des USA \u00e0 Moscou de 1985 \u00e0 1992 et qui fut un des acteurs principaux du rapprochement USA-URSS du temps de Gorbatchev et de la glasnost<\/em>. \u00abBut the most damning indictment yet of the Clintons on the world stage comes in the book Superpower Illusions by former Ambassador to the USSR, Jack Matlock. The book came out way back in 2009, but it is worth examining again…<\/em> […]<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bb There is no doubt that Matlock knew what was going on during this period, and he saw considerable promise for a peaceful, secure future at the end of the Bush I presidency. So when he forcefully condemns the Clintons for a disastrous turn in U.S. policy, he is a voice that must be heeded. The original sin of the era stains the Clintons, and they spawned their own inevitable Cain in the form of W. Being a diplomat, Mattlock speaks diplomatically of the colossal, damaging shift in U.S. -Russia relations under the Clintons who reversed the approach of Reagan and Bush I…<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \tCe rappel opportun nous ram\u00e8ne \u00e0 MH17 et \u00e0 sa v\u00e9ritable signification, telle qu’elle peut \u00eatre comprise \u00e0 partir des d\u00e9clarations d’Obama, justement, retour pour conclure sur l’introduction de ce Bloc-Notes<\/em> dans le chef d’une analyse pr\u00e9cise de WSWS.org<\/em>, ce 19 juillet 2014<\/a>, des d\u00e9clarations d’Obama dont nous avons us\u00e9 plus haut, fort lestement. La conclusion in\u00e9vitable de cette analyse serr\u00e9e, c’est la perspective d’une marche vers une confrontation avec la Russie.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00abThe remarks Friday by President Barack Obama on the tragic crash of Malaysian Airlines flight MH17 in eastern Ukraine raised far more questions than they answered. Obama continued the mind-numbing propaganda barrage from US officials and media, denouncing Russia and pro-Russian separatist forces in eastern Ukraine for shooting down the plane and demanding the surrender of the separatists to the Western-backed regime in Kiev. However, his remarks themselves underscored that this propaganda campaign has no factual basis whatsoever and is leading Washington into an explosive confrontation with Russia.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bbObama said: Here is what we know so far. Evidence indicates that the plane was shot down by a surface-to-air missile that was launched from an area that is controlled by Russian-backed separatists inside of Ukraine. We also know that this is not the first time a plane has been shot down in eastern Ukraine. Over the last several weeks, Russian-backed separatists have shot down a Ukrainian transport plane and a Ukrainian helicopter, and they claimed responsibility for shooting down a Ukrainian fighter jet. Moreover, we know that these separatists have received a steady flow of support from Russia.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bbReread Obama’s comments carefully. You will see that nothing he said proves that pro-Russian forces fired a missile at MH17. Separatist rebels have shot down low-flying Ukrainian military aircraft with portable anti-aircraft missiles, but this does not mean they had either the intent or the capability to destroy a jumbo jet flying at 33,000 feet an act they knew would hand Washington a massive propaganda weapon.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bbAs for Obama’s claim that the separatists control the area from which the missile was fired, for which he presented no evidence, this means nothing given the chaotic conditions in eastern Ukraine. In the city of Donetsk, the stronghold of the anti-Kiev separatists, forces loyal to Kiev control the airport, from which they routinely shell the city. In fact, shortly before MH17 was allegedly destroyed by a BUK missile near Donetsk, the Kiev regime reinforced its anti-aircraft batteries in the region. Remarkably, Obama went on to admit that his administration does not know who shot down MH17 or why. He said, I think it’s too early for us to be able to guess what intentions those who might have launched the surface-to-air missile might have had In terms of identifying specifically what individual or group of individuals, you know, personnel ordered the strike, how it came aboutthose are things that I think are going to be subject to additional information that we’re going to be gathering.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bbAgain, reread Obama’s statement carefully. Behind all the conditional statements and verbal hedging, he is saying nothing about who launched the strike. Obama’s remarks directly contradict those of his own UN ambassador, Samantha Power, who had just stated that there was credible evidence that Russia was responsible for the crash, adding, Russia can end this war. Russia must end this war.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bbObama proceeded to throw a question mark over the entire coverage of the MH17 crash: I want to point out there will likely be misinformation as well. I think it’s very important for folks to sift through what is factually based and what is simply speculation. The picture of the situation that emerges from Obama’s account is remarkable. By his own admission, the United States and its allies are hurtling toward a military confrontation with Russia, under conditions where the White House does not know who is responsible for the MH17 crash and believes powerful political forces are feeding misinformation to the media.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \tFull Circle<\/em>, de l’hyst\u00e9rie diffus\u00e9e et d\u00e9cupl\u00e9e par le syst\u00e8me de la communication \u00e0 la perspective de l’encha\u00eenement vers une confrontation directe avec la Russie. Que va-t-il se passer ? La trag\u00e9die de communication ordonnera-t-elle la trag\u00e9die tout court, ou bien sera-t-elle emport\u00e9e par la m\u00e9moire courte de notre \u00e9ternel pr\u00e9sent<\/a> ? L\u00e0 aussi, retour \u00e0 la case-d\u00e9part : c’est \u00e0 la m\u00e9tahistoire qu’il appartient de trancher.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n <\/p>\n \tMis en ligne le 19 juillet 2014 \u00e0 12H09<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" R\u00e9v\u00e9lation du pr\u00e9sident : MH17 s’est \u00e9cras\u00e9 Nous quittons le mode m\u00e9tahistorique auquel nous avons sacrifi\u00e9 hier 18 juillet 2014 pour le mode op\u00e9rationnel que nous avions explicitement \u00e9cart\u00e9… Alors, quelles sont les derni\u00e8res nouvelles de la trag\u00e9die du vol MH17 de Malaysia Airlines, cette \u00e9trange compagnie qui collectionne les trag\u00e9dies suspectes ? Eh bien,… <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"neve_meta_sidebar":"","neve_meta_container":"","neve_meta_enable_content_width":"","neve_meta_content_width":0,"neve_meta_title_alignment":"","neve_meta_author_avatar":"","neve_post_elements_order":"","neve_meta_disable_header":"","neve_meta_disable_footer":"","neve_meta_disable_title":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[15929,4646,15931,12793,3329,12098,4327,15928,15932,15927,584,2730,12664,1296,5169],"class_list":["post-75410","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bloc-notes","tag-airlines","tag-antisysteme","tag-bao-monde","tag-donbass","tag-elargissement","tag-false","tag-flag","tag-malaysia","tag-matlock","tag-mh17","tag-otan","tag-russie","tag-saker","tag-ukraine","tag-wsws-org"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/75410","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=75410"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/75410\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=75410"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=75410"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=75410"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}