MH17 Russian satellite evidence released Monday - not mentioned yet in our media

Follow @JohnPlatinumG Russia has released evidence from its satellite and radar images which ask serious questions about the downing of Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17. The US, UK, Australia and other western governments have repeatedly accused Russia of everything from shooting down the airliner to supplying BUK systems to the independence fighters in Eastern Ukraine. One of the latest articles, in The Guardian no less, relates to a story released by Kiev that has been on the internet for days, accusing Russia of providing a BUK missile launcher which was allegedly passing through the town of Torez, close to the crash site with one of its missiles missing. But the Russian evidence tells a different story which would discount The Guardian report. What makes this particularly bad journalism from the Guardian's man in Torez, Shaun Walker, is that the Russian evidence was available at the time he penned the story.

At 27 minutes 30 seconds into this presentation this same video that Kiev apparently released is examined using a frame from the video and puts the town as being Krasnoarmeysk on Dneproetrovskaya Street according to a roadside advertisement about a car-show. To prove its point the presentation zooms in on the advertising hoarding. So was it Torez, as the Guardian article claims, or was it the Krasnoarmeysk which is 843 kilometres from Torez? Krasnoarmeysk has been occupied by the Ukrainian military since May 11 when a number of residents were killed by Petro Poroshenko's armed forces. The Russian presentation earlier shows its evidence of what it claims are BUK II systems in Ukrainian-held territory one of which is missing from its site on the day Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17 was brought down, killing nearly 300 passengers. The presentation, which is a lot more convincing than Colin Powell's presentation of weapons of mass destruction, shows satellite images of what is apparently a fighter plane in the vicinity of the Malaysian passenger plane just before it was shot down. Here is a clip from the presentation showing the hoarding.

Regarding the missile systems transporter video frame Russia asks, without making allegations:

"What kind of launching sytem is it? Where is it [being] transported? Where is it now? Why is it loaded with shot missile ammunition? What was the last time it launched missiles?"

These are fair questions. The release of the video by Kiev may well have been an attempt to point the blame elsewhere, but like the apparently fabricated evidence released by Kiev intelligence regarding what it claims was an admission by a Russian major to shooting down the passenger plane, it appears to be a fake concatenation of intercepts which did not relate to Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17 but the downing of a military plane the day before. The time stamp of that video, according to experts, shows it also to have been cobbled together and released the day before the disaster.

"Get thee hence Satan!" says Desmond Tutu

Follow @JohnPlatinumG As a Christian, not a very good one, I have to question why in one of the most boring of debates the Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, who I quite like, recently shared a platform with Tony Blair? After nearly 30 minutes of viewing I tried to get somebody with more stamina than me to watch this tedium ad infinitum and precis it for me. She was bored out of her mind and could not rescue me by providing a more enthusiastic impression of the 'debate' than I had already formed. What I would really like to know about this event, and I think I can answer it, is would the Prince of Peace have shared a platform with the Prince of War? No. He would have said "Get thee hence Satan".

This is exactly, well not quite exactly, what Desmond Tutu said to Blair last week and what Rowan Williams ought to have told him previously. Yesterday Desmond Tutu wrote in the Observer that Blair and Bush should be tried at the Hague for war crimes. In response to Tutu's criticism Blair came out with the same old pathological lies. What 'independent analysis', I ask myself, can exonerate Blair from guilt for his crimes in Iraq? Is it the Hutton Inquiry he set up to prevent due process of coronial law taking place after Dr David Kelly was found dead in the countryside? Was it the 'dodgy dossier' that Blair fabricated to take us into an illegal war? I should like to know to what 'independent analysis' he alludes. Because if it does clear his name, and that of Jack Straw, believe me it will not be independent. It will be heavily biased.

You never know with Blair whether the lie is going to slip off the end of the right fork or the left fork of his duplicitous tongue! But you know it will slip out one way or the other.

Here is another piece of 'non-independent' news, that is real news, but you will not see it reported or broadcast anywhere in mainstream media outlets. In comments to The Guardian/Observer on the article linked above the sixth one down sorting by Oldest first was removed by moderators. Though I did not see it myself I have been reliably informed that it claimed Tony Blair should also be tried for not allowing an inquest into the death of Dr David Kelly. There was nothing as far as I can gather offensive about the comment. Before it was removed early yesterday it was taking a massive number of recommendations (more than 2000) in a matter of hours. Nobody at the Guardian has explained to its readers why this comment was removed. You have to ask yourself what kind of independence there is at the Guardian. About as much as one of Blair's independent analyses, I conjecture.