I Think I’m Going To Buk

No, not because I read Ian Stirling Ireland Lang Simeone Celsius Welch’s latest rendering, although that can be cause for it on occasion.

It’s just that I’m not certain what to make of this Malaysian Airlines Flight 17 incident that occurred in the sky above Eastern Ukraine. It’s difficult to get any sense of the truth, if there is any, from the mainstream and alternative media — both have an agenda and increasingly there is no between the lines so you can’t even try to read the truth in that already narrow space.

For example, I tuned into CNN Saturday late night — around 11pm — after watching the first episode of Henning Mankell’s Wallander on Netflix (excellent series by the way, so check out the link if you haven’t seen it). This is something I haven’t done in eight or more years — tune into a mainstream news source for news. I didn’t choose to, really, it was the station that was on when I flipped the remote from Netflix back to DVR — I do sometimes watch specials on CNN like Anthony Bourdain or Spermin Morloch or The Hunt with John Walsh. So, CNN was on the dial and Erin Burnett’s coverage, or lack of coverage — on her tits at least, of the Malaysian Airlines Flight 17 incident was preempting the regularly-scheduled CNN special.

Usually, or I should say always, I turn the station quickly or just shut the TV off, but Erin Burnett’s wonderfully-exposed cleavage precluded that reflexive response with another reflexive response. For the first five minutes or so, I didn’t hear a word she and her guests said — I was so mesmerized and enthralled with her exposed, heaving bosom. It’s as though it was talking just to me, inviting me to wallow in it and explore its vast horizon. I’ve seen this Erin Burnett before and never found her overly attractive, but for some reason, Saturday night she was particularly radiant and comely, and so I couldn’t concentrate on the show’s content because Erin’s other content, front and center and in-your-face, was running interference. Thankfully, my wife broke the spell and said “do you think she’s showing enough cleavage?” to which I said, “hmmm, I didn’t even notice.” My wife’s comment was enough to slap me out of my sultry stupor and snap me back into the topic of the program.

I have to say, I haven’t missed much in all these years I’ve tuned out of mainstream news — with the exception of bountifully-strategic cleavage. Although, I kept wondering after I was able to snap out of my ogling, who the hell is the target market of that cleavage ploy? Surely it’s not me or those like me because I don’t watch any longer. Is it frisky old men who have nothing better to do on Saturday nights except turn the dial until they land on cleavage of any sort? Maybe so, but surely Burnett and the CNN producers/directors were aware of her choice of attire before she went on. Either way, it was a distraction initially, but with great discipline I was able to both look at her cleavage admiringly and follow the conversation amongst her guests about the topic — something akin to walking and chewing gum at the same time … but even more challenging than that. Women don’t understand how difficult this can be for a healthy, virile male — or maybe some do, like Erin, and hence the cleavage. Maybe it’s some sort of brainwashing mechanism where you think you’re not paying attention because you’re under the spell of the cleavage, but all the while the messaging is making its way deep into your sub-conscious since your blood is busy in other areas of your body and your defenses are down. Maybe. Or maybe not. You decide.

That satire aside (and yes, it was satire meaning I didn’t really feel that way about Erin Burnett but I said as much for satirical effect), after watching Burnett’s coverage/cleavage, I have the following takeaways.

Missile or No Missile?

From the get-go, there was no question according to Burnett’s coverage that a missile brought down this plane. It was a consensus amongst her panel which included the likes of Miles O’Brien (who has a hip new look by the way from eight or more years prior — these folks are constantly updating their appearance for maximum effect — look at me not the content) and Richard Quest (this guy is so completely and utterly over-the-top annoying you want to strangle him, but thankfully Burnett’s cleavage overrode any potential urge to strangle and mute this obnoxious dramatist and that’s a good thing as Martha is fond of saying, because Quest apparently likes to be strangled if you read the link behind his name). Also, there was Mary Schiavo who, in case you don’t know, is a former Inspector General and she did have some interesting insight to add about the alleged looting which I’ll cover later.

It wasn’t clear why this cast of characters was so firmly convinced the plane was brought down by a missile — it was just understood it was, and it was the pro-Russian separatists who were responsible with the aid of Russia — the degree of which was in question. I got the impression that seasoned crash site investigators could tell from the photos of the wreckage it was a missile that brought it down, but if that’s the case, what about TWA Flight 800 — wasn’t it obvious from photos of that wreckage that it was a missile that brought it down? If the answer is “no, there had to be further investigation,” well, that should be the same answer with Malaysian Airlines Flight 17 — that “it’s too early to tell and we’ll have to wait for further investigation to make any determination of what caused this crash.” But CNN isn’t doing that or saying that, and one person on Burnett’s guest panel Saturday night, no strike that, two guests, had backgrounds in investigating plane crashes and they did not object to the missile assertion (not theory).

Don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying it wasn’t a missile, but if it’s being claimed it is as fact, then provide the evidence for that assertion. They did make mention that the pro-Russian separatists more than likely used a Russian-made BUK (pronounced bewk) anti-aircraft missile launcher either provided to them by Russia or it was confiscated from the Ukrainian military. A Russian blogger has announced today that he/she has uploaded footage of the BUK M1 allegedly being transported back to Russia from Eastern Ukraine per this link from The Independent.

A Russian blogger has uploaded video footage that may show the BUK anti-air missile launcher which shot down Malaysia Airlines flight MH17 over Ukraine last week.

Ukrainian sources have seized on the clip as evidence that the launcher – key to the investigation into the deaths of the 298 people on board – has now been returned to Russia.

Though the exact location where the video was captured cannot be independently verified, it apparently shows a part of western Russia not far from the border with Ukraine.

Taken at around 8.45pm on Saturday, it shows a convoy of at least two trucks, one of which is loaded with a covered military vehicle with caterpillar tracks.

It comes after another video emerged at the end of last week which Ukrainian officials said showed the BUK M1 launcher – with one of its missiles missing – being moved on a truck towards the Russian border.

If there is any validity to this claim, that Russian blogger is a dead man walking. They will hunt him/her down and skin him, or her, alive. Still, it seems the cart is being put before the horse. It first needs to be established that a missile did indeed bring down the plane, and if it did, who’s missile was it and how did the perpetrators do it, i.e. what system was used to bring down the plane. Remember, the missile, if it’s determined one brought down the plane, could have come from a fighter jet, so that can’t be ruled out.

Break out the vodka boys! We’re going to party with my little friend.

Unfortunately, since Ukraine is in the midst of a civil war in the East of the country and the plane wreckage is strewn in a field that is occupied by backwoods separatists with no experience in crash scene investigation, the chances of conducting a proper and objective investigation are exactly nil despite feigning to the contrary, i.e. the NTSB sending one investigator. That’s a nice gesture, but does any reasonable person with a shred of honesty believe this one investigator is going to make a difference? Why bother except for show? And doing it for show is cheaply transparent. If the international community really wants to know what happened to this plane, then they would quickly assemble a team to plop down in Ukraine where the plane crashed accompanied by military protection that will blow the backwoods separatists to smithereens and beyond if they attempt to impede the investigation in any way. After the belongings and bodies were gathered and the evidence to include the black boxes recovered, the backwoods separatists could have come out of their holes and sniffed the ground like dogs in search of the spilled bone marrow of the survivors left behind by the investigators as they returned to civilization with the evidence intact and ultimately a more objective verdict.

But that didn’t happen and it won’t happen. Apparently the international community doesn’t care enough about the dead to honor them by conducting a humane accounting. Instead, the international community will use this tragedy as a political football of “he did it, he did it” rather then taking the necessary steps to determine what happened and who was responsible. The political opportunists take advantage of the obscurity and ambiguity once again. So yes, Erin Burnett and her guests certainly are biased and come off as anything but objective, but they’re not alone. All sides in this political dispute are lying; The West, Kiev, the backwoods, pro-Russian separatists and Russia. If you haven’t had the chance lately, take a look at The Vineyard of the Saker blog. That blog author has gone off the deep end. His reality, if he’s even for real, is so far from anything reasonable, it boggles the mind he has the following he does. He’s a liar. Those who read him and believe him and use him as evidence in their arguments are liars. Also, take a look at this post by b at Moon of Alabama blog about this Malaysian Airlines Flight 17 incident. In place of the “Blame Russia” key he’s installed a “Blame America” key and the folks over at Ian Stirling Ireland Lang Simeone Celsius Welch’s blog sport erections and get moist at the chanting. I responded to b and his anti-American audience as follows:

So let me ask. Is there any amount of proof that would lead any of you to ever believe foul play involving Russia, because I get the feeling you’ve taken the opposite side of the blame coin and instead blame America. If there’s proof America was behind this and it was a false flag, I’m willing to look at and consider it. Are you all willing to do the same if there’s convincing proof Russia was behind it?

That question was early on, and since then b’s audience has wrapped up its investigation and it’s clear, to them at least, it was a false flag perpetrated by an American-Kiev alliance of some sort. Ian Stirling Ireland Lang Simeone Celsius Welch on the other hand, has provided convenient cover for both the pro-Russian separatists and Russia if it turns out either was, or both were, responsible for shooting down the plane. Since a false flag, by Welch’s implication, would have been perpetrated by The West, it is therefore purposeful because false flags are by their very nature purposeful. But if the separatists or Russia or both brought the plane down, well, according to The Welch Collective, it was a mistake, no ifs, ans or buts about it. Here’s what Welch had to say, and keep in mind, had I made this blog post at his venue, like a coward, he would have either deleted it or overwritten it like he has done to several other posts I made at his space. That’s the worst thing a writer can do to another writer — to destroy his/her creative thought. It’s criminal, if you ask me — not that anyone did ask, but I’ll tell you anyway. I wouldn’t and couldn’t do it. But those who have no respect for words and ideas that aren’t their own, have no qualms destroying critical and creative thought.

And perhaps, when the rebels were known to have SAMs with the distance to shoot down airliners, airliners should not still have been allowed to travel over the conflict region? That decision is Ukraine’s, by the way.

There can be no defending the targeting of civilians and if this is not a false flag operation, it will turn out to have been a mistake, it is in no one’s interest to be blamed for such an attack.

Is the part in bold even necessary to say? Isn’t that obvious and to say it superfluous? Anyway, pay special attention to the messaging. The message is if America did it (i.e. a false flag operation), there is no defense. I agree. But, that’s not the end of the message. Not by a long shot. He goes on to provide cover for the backwoods separatists by stating Malaysian Airlines had no business flying over this airspace and that Ukraine is responsible by allowing flights in that airspace, so even if the rebels did it, it was a mistake, certainly not on purpose as it would be if it was the Amercian-Kiev alliance if it were responsible, and a mistake that could have been avoided if not for the negligence of Kiev. Russia and its Eastern Ukraine backwoods separatists are provided immunity once again, and we don’t even know what happened yet. Priceless. Does this guy and others like him work for Putin? If not, why not? Why not get paid for gratuitous shilling? Why would someone do this for free?

Looting

American mainstream media has a looting fetish, I believe. They have a proclivity to bring it up any time they’re covering a national catastrophe or international catastrophe and they’re charged with politicizing the event. Katrina comes to mind as the most egregious case, but here we see the looting fetish has been carted out again in this politicized event as well. Repeatedly throughout her coverage, Erin Burnett alluded to the looting that was reported. She tried to get Chris Cuomo to report he’d seen looting but he wouldn’t. He did however mention that there was suspiciously no valuables like expensive jewelry to be found among the wreckage. Was he looking to loot and pissed the Ukrainian yokels picked all the good stuff? I doubt it. Chris is well taken care of — he doesn’t need to scrap to survive. That name sounds familiar — Cuomo. Where have I heard the name Cuomo before? Oh, of course, Mario Cuomo — how could I forget? Remember Mario who couldn’t run for president because of his mob-connected past? Well, Chris is his son and Chris is not only a lawyer, he’s also a correspondent for CNN. How do these beautiful people do it — juggle two high-powered busy careers at once? Chris reminds me of the dashing Sanjay Gupta who is not only a CNN correspondent but also a neurosurgeon who conducts brain surgery. Can you imagine this? I feel like a total loser in comparison, but I am thankful to have them perceive my reality for me. I hate doing it myself. It’s much better leaving that driving to them — the experts.

Remember earlier I promised I would mention the value Mary Schiavo offered as part of Erin’s program? Well, it’s time to provide that. Mary mentioned that outside Western countries it’s quite common for local inhabitants to loot crash sites like cock roaches cleaning house after a big party. It’s not that inhabitants in the West wouldn’t do the same, because they would and have in the past, and this is one of the reasons securing the crash site is so important — because looting is a very human behavior and respone to catastrophe. Without plans in place to quickly access the crash site and secure it by professionals, looters, like a scene right out of The Walking Dead, will descend on the crash site and pick it over like the gators did when ValuJet Flight 592 crashed in the Florida Everglades. So, it’s not because Westerners are superior morally to any other inhabitants of the Earth, but it’s because Western society is more civilized by virtue of the fact it has a system in place that beats this latent looting behavior to the punch. That being said, yeah, it is pretty sickening and despicable behavior, but that’s not surprising, is it? How sickening and despicable is it for the most intelligent minds ever known to humanity to create a weapon, when mass produced and deployed in unison, that is capable of destroying the entire world? Pretty disgusting for something heralded as an achievement and not an abomination.

In conclusion, the jury’s still out for me on what happened to Malaysian Airlines Flight 17, and I suspect I will never definitively know. I’m not going to enter the politicized fray and opine what I think may or may not have happened — there are too many possibilities and not enough information to make an educated guess. It would be irresponsible speculation — something that hasn’t stopped all the other liars in this politicized debate, including CNN. I will say, I won’t be watching CNN again any time soon for news. Erin Burnett’s cleavage isn’t enough, as alluring as it was, to keep me coming back for more. My wife’s more beautiful anyway, so I’d feel like I was cheating if I indulged in ogling Erin’s flaunted bosom any further. It is a riot how elitist CNN is, both in the audience it caters to and the people they have delivering the perceptions packaged as news. Chris Cuomo’s elitist roots are obvious. Erin Burnett was an investment banker with Goldman Sachs and made her way all around Wall Street prior to becoming CNN anchor of Erin Burnett Outfront. The title of her show cracks me up considering her cleavage — something sure is outfront. Erin is married to an elitist Wall Street banker, David Rubulotta; he’s managing director of Citigroup. When do they find the time to see each other? I bet they have to make appointments for him to get beneath that cleavage.

That’s it for now. If you have an opinion about the Malaysian Airlines Flight 17 incident and its coverage and implications, don’t be shy — leave a comment. I promise I won’t delete or overwrite it like some people we know.

Until next post, lie well and live long my friends.

Advertisements

5 thoughts on “I Think I’m Going To Buk

  1. As has been my habit at this blog, I will call out comments made at other venues, whether they be ridiculous or excellent. Here’s an excellent one I found in this thread over at the Moon of Alabama blog. It deserves proper attention, and I’m reluctant to give it a thumbs up over at that venue because when I’ve done that in the past, the commentator will eschew my thumbs up. I don’t really care about who or what the commentator is or how he or she cares about my thumbs up, it’s the words that matter, and so, here are the words of an individual who appears to be one of the few who can think for themselves.

    Brian #85,

    so the government of the Ukraine is a fascist junta and the folks at the Maidan were all fascist dupes. And the Crimea up and spontaneously annexed itself without any outside interference from Russia to be free of fascism.

    Fine I will buy that. And now my theory about the airliner: that plane must have just shot its own self down.

    That seems to be the only theory that is not being spread by the various sides. It points no fingers at anyone. The government in Kiev can remain a fascist junta to those who see it that way, and a beacon of freedom and hope for those who see it otherwise.

    And Putin can be a scheming dictator who let his thugs get out of hand or a force for democracy and stability and Russian soverignity in the region.

    Because there is only room for black and white in modern political discourse.

    Thank god that the world and the media are still large enough to allow both to exist simultaneously. The only people who get hurt are the ones who get caught in the crossfire between black and white.

    Posted by: ralphieboy | Jul 22, 2014 8:15:38 AM | 105

  2. You said in your previous article, “It’s a blood lust to stoke the flames of conflict by encouraging the weaker side of the conflict to suffer more and harder under the guise of some noble ‘resistance.’ That’s not ‘resistance’. It’s sick.”

    I agree, and in particular about the Ukraine conflict. My own experience with Vineyard of the Saker, to which I made a number of relatively sympathetic comments (though not sympathetic enough for some participants), is that I presented on that blog a Ukraine Peace Proposal, which I researched deeply and had sent to a number of world figures. The Proposal outlined a simple plan that would stop the fighting while protecting the investments of such energy magnates as the Rothschilds and Biden’s son, resolving Poroshenko’s conflicts of interest with respect to the IMF and the EU, and providing security and autonomy for the Novorossiyans. I expected Saker to react with enthusiasm, and to spread the word about this or other possible Peace Plans. Instead, I got the brush off. I was shocked. Isn’t Saker’s foremost concern to stop the killing of Donbass people? Apparently not. I then posted on his site a comment complaining that “no one seems interested in peace”. Another of Saker’s prominent commenters said, “You’re right. Nobody is!” I’m like … what??

    Then I began to wonder, what is that fine line between supporting the weaker but possibly more righteous faction, and actually instigating war? Which side of that line do Saker and his flock fall on? It’s too complicated for me to sort out. But the fact is, the Novorissyan Defense Forces are having a hard time getting their civilian population to fight. This bodes ill for the idea of righteousness being on the side of those forces.

    Nevertheless, Poroshenko seems a brutal and illegitimate leader, nor should Russia have to tolerate NATO right at its borders.

    BTW, there is clear proof the Ukrainian government shot down the MH17, believe it or not. The Twitter feed of @spainbuca happened simultaneously with the event. The only way he could have known was if he was in that air control tower. I’m not asking you to argue for or against this point. I am just stating that this is my firm conclusion.

    Keep an open mind! The real battlefront is expansion of one’s understanding.

    • If you’d like, you can post that proposal at this blog as its own stand-alone blog post for people to discuss and debate openly at a venue that doesn’t take sides and isn’t afraid to go where no inquisitor dare go. Let me know if you want to take me up on the offer. Mi blog es su blog — or something like that.

      Now, there’s this, because language and linguistics matter and mean all the world:

      and providing security and autonomy for the Novorossiyans

      I’m curious why you refer to the inhabitants of Eastern Ukraine as “Novorossiyans?” That is a historically loaded term, and I don’t think it fits the majority of Eastern Ukrainians. To be sure, some, and what that percentage is I can’t be sure but it’s not a high percentage and maybe even single digits, prefer to be called this rejuvenated term, but I’m fairly certain most don’t.

      It is interesting it’s being bandied about so much as of late. Putin really got the ball rolling back in April when he plucked the term from history in a television question and answer session with the Russian public. His purpose was to set Eastern Ukraine apart from the rest of Ukraine and imply it was more aligned with Russian interests than Ukrainian interests. Bollocks! His motives are transparent, and I don’t think it has anything to do with NATO. He knows NATO’s harmless. He knows NATO won’t do a thing. And yet he doesn’t invade and annex like he did Crimea. Why? Because he doesn’t have to spend that treasure and blood when he can get all of Ukraine to his dirty work for him. By using both sides as his own proxy in this fomented and largely fabricated civil war, he can get Ukrainians to destroy themselves and their country and then he can walk in and divvy up the spoils partitioning the neutered Ukraine into easily managed, obeisant, mafia-run statelets. Thankfully, so far, most Ukrainians aren’t cooperating, but the longer this goes on, the more difficult it will be for them to remain neutral and ultimately, like in the former Yugoslavia, they will be forced to kill each other.

      “Novorossiya,” the latest historical concept to worry about in Ukraine

      During an epic question-and-answer session with the Russian public Thursday, President Vladimir Putin dropped a reference that is likely to be obscure to many in the West. Talking about the Ukrainian elections and ethnic Russians in that country’s east, Putin took a detour through history.

      “I would like to remind you that what was called Novorossiya back in the tsarist days – Kharkov, Lugansk, Donetsk, Kherson, Nikolayev and Odessa – were not part of Ukraine back then,” Putin said. “The center of that territory was Novorossiysk, so the region is called Novorossiya. Russia lost these territories for various reasons, but the people remained.”

      Putin’s comment might be taken as it was portrayed – as an aside, or a little tidbit of information – if it weren’t for the fact that Novorossiya has been brought up so often in recent days by pro-Russian activists, who have reportedly been chanting the word as they argued against staying with Kiev. Someone has even set up a Web site that appears devoted to bringing the historical region back.

      If nothing else, Putin’s comments are relatively accurate, historically: Novorossiya was won from the Ottoman Empire in the late 18th century. Its name, which means “New Russia,” is a reflection of that. It became a part of the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic in the early years of the Soviet Union, and remained a part of Ukraine after the collapse of communism.

      Talking about Novorossiya fits in with Putin’s broader habit of talking about a golden era of Russian empire, and using history to justify modern action. It’s a similar action Putin made with Crimea, though in this case, the historical justification is a little harder to make: Crimea only became part of Ukraine in 1954, and you have to wonder what’s to stop Turkey from deciding that its own claims on Novorossiya, earlier still than Russia’s, are more valid?

      In the modern world, things are more complicated. As the map below to the left shows, Crimea’s large ethnic Russian population is not matched in any of the regions that once made up Novorossiya. However, as you can see from the map on the right, it makes up a big portion of the GDP of Ukraine.

      It’s not clear right now whether Putin has any real plan to annex Novorossiya, or whether it is just talk. But if Putin is hoping to foment chaos in Ukraine, it would appear that Crimea has shown him that history can be potent weapon.

  3. Hey, thanks! I’d like to post my Ukrainian Peace Proposal. How do I do it? Can I send it to you as an email? Or do I post it as a comment?

    BTW, I used the word “Novorossiya” just as something to call it. In the Peace Proposal it is referred to as the more neutral “Donetsk-Lugansk Region”, and in one instance “Donbass”. The terminology for this thing has just gotten so tricky. There is no generic term acceptable to all.

    • I agree the terminology is tricky, so with geopolitically-charged issues such as Ukraine, who’s future is still very much up in the air, it’s advisable to keep the terminology as neutral as possible for serious proposals. I like the “Donetsk-Lugansk Region” or “Donbass” for that reason, or even “Eastern Ukraine,” although the previous two are more specific.

      You can post it as a comment and then I will take what you’ve posted and repost it as its own blog post with you as author and then delete the original comment since it will be redundant.

      Does that sound fair enough?

      It is interesting and telling that no one seems interested in peace, especially the so-called alternative media that could have been, once upon a time, the saving grace of the fourth estate.

Comments are closed.