This entry is a back-up copy of my Facebook post that I originally made on 17.09.2015. For better user experience, please read, like and/or comment the original post on FB.

You have to be extremely wary of political YouTube comments and Twitter replies these days, as these things have been militarised to create an illusion of public consensus on certain issues, by using fake accounts and outright automated bots. They haven’t figured out how to do it automatically on FB yet (although there are troll armies made up of real people, either paid or honestly obsessed, who are well coordinated; too good FB provides decent moderation tools to fight this plague).

RT (Russian Today)​ had its YouTube comment section flooded with russophobic trolls at the beginning of last year (you could tell that it was unnatural because the campaign began suddenly, as a wave, following statements in regards to counteracting “Russian propaganda” made by the US State Department spokespeople). Nowadays, you can also see these hordes on Twitter, flooding topics such as the Ukrainian Crisis and the MH17 tragedy (I’m sure similar methods are used for other issues, such as the Syrian Civil War, although I haven’t been engaged in those discussions anywhere other than FB to notice anything strange).

Just a few of articles on the topic:

How the military uses Twitter sock puppets to control debate (by J. M. Porup)
“The researchers studied Twitter manipulation during the August 2013 Australian federal election, and identified mass participation of sock puppets (fake accounts), meat puppets (“guns for hire”), bots (automated accounts), and cyborgs (bot-assisted humans or human-assisted bots).
Automated accounts, in particular, they discovered, are being used for retweeting messages to spread misinformation and disperse propaganda. These accounts “can be used to trend desired hashtags, and thus bump up a piece of misinformation to a wider consciousness.”
The frightening thing about Twitter sock puppetry, they conclude, “is not that it is just a nuisance, but that it is capable of swaying elections by appearing to be genuine groundswells of support.” This phenomenon they label “slacktivism” — when Twitter followers mistake astroturfed Twitter content for “genuine voices of political conviction.”
Worse, these fake accounts can be used not just to distort debate but to actively suppress dissent”

The Real War on Reality (by Professor Peter Ludlow)
“The hack also revealed evidence that Team Themis was developing a “persona management” system — a program, developed at the specific request of the United States Air Force, that allowed one user to control multiple online identities (“sock puppets”) for commenting in social media spaces, thus giving the appearance of grass roots support. The contract was eventually awarded to another private intelligence firm.
This may sound like nothing so much as a “Matrix”-like fantasy, but it is distinctly real, and resembles in some ways the employment of “Psyops” (psychological operations), which as most students of recent American history know, have been part of the nation’s military strategy for decades. The military’s “Unconventional Warfare Training Manual” defines Psyops as “planned operations to convey selected information and indicators to foreign audiences to influence their emotions, motives, objective reasoning, and ultimately the behavior of foreign governments, organizations, groups, and individuals.” In other words, it is sometimes more effective to deceive a population into a false reality than it is to impose its will with force or conventional weapons. Of course this could also apply to one’s own population if you chose to view it as an “enemy” whose “motives, reasoning, and behavior” needed to be controlled.”

Revealed: US spy operation that manipulates social media (by Nick Fielding and Ian Cobain; published way back in 2011)
“The discovery that the US military is developing false online personalities – known to users of social media as “sock puppets” – could also encourage other governments, private companies and non-government organisations to do the same.
The Centcom contract stipulates that each fake online persona must have a convincing background, history and supporting details, and that up to 50 US-based controllers should be able to operate false identities from their workstations “without fear of being discovered by sophisticated adversaries”.
Once developed, the software could allow US service personnel, working around the clock in one location, to respond to emerging online conversations with any number of co-ordinated messages, blogposts, chatroom posts and other interventions. Details of the contract suggest this location would be MacDill air force base near Tampa, Florida, home of US Special Operations Command.”


From my personal experience, I would say that the best way to go about professional sock-puppets is to simply ignore their comments and avoid engaging them. It’s more about psychological warfare. You waste your time and stamina arguing with these trolls, while you could be doing something else (e. g. doing research or talking to other people). That’s what they seem to be aiming for.
Besides, when you talk to them, you, by default, give them feedback, so they can learn about new arguments and design strategies to dodge them in the future discussions with other people. So, just ignoring them is the most optimal way to go.

Besides mentally exhausting their opponents, they also aim at creating the illusion of public consensus on the issue. That’s a really powerful thing. See, when people are not 100% sure about what to think, they look for others’ opinion (that’s what we have naturally evolved to do, as social beings), therefore, in cases of even a slightest ambiguity, others’ strong opinions can radically change your own perception of reality. It’s been all thoroughly researched by psychologists since the 1950s (see Asch’s Experiments, for instance):

So, yeah, people, be very wary of the political comments on YouTube and replies on Twitter. Nowadays, they can be hijacked by the government intelligence agencies to brainwash you.

(and it’s actually sad, because it minimises the opportunity to have a proper discussion on issues in public cyber-space, and it also, kind of, stigmatises the official US/Western viewpoint, in many cases, because there is no trust in it anymore… *sigh*)


This entry is a back-up copy of my Facebook post that I originally made on 10.09.2015. For better user experience, please read, like and/or comment the original post on FB.

This post is probably going to make many of you pissed and angry, but, to hell with it. Someone should say these things anyway, sooner or later.

This refuge crisis… We’ve all seen these terrible images of people drowning, dead kids being washed ashore, poor Syrians fleeing the humanitarian catastrophe caused by the civil war and the rise of ISIS in the region, all these debates about how we have to hold to the higher moral standards, showing compassion towards these poor refugees, being humanistic, and stuff. Well, how about discussing the root causes of this crisis and thinking of the ways to avoid fucking it up even worse?

Syria used to be a nice, secular and stable place four years ago until the United States government began supporting the Al Qaeda-affiliated radicals in their effort to overthrow president Assad. Libya used to be one of the most prosperous countries on the continent, with its leader, Gaddafi, having a vision of the economically united Africa. Until the US and NATO bombed it back to the Stone Age, allowing the president to be beaten up to death in public by barbarians. And I’m not even mentioning the 2003 Invasion of Iraq (it was based on a pretext that Saddam Husain was possessing the weapons of mass destructions; turned out to be a lie), which destroyed the country with all of its security services, making it a perfect breeding ground for various extremist organisations. The responsibility on the current refuge crisis lies on the US foreign policy makers and those who supported it almost entirely. The mainstream media, of course, doesn’t talk about that.

Some still argue that those were the totalitarian dictators that were killing their own people, that they should have been ousted, etc, etc (although I’m pretty certain that most of the accusations made against them is nothing more than made up propaganda BS, same as with the Saddam’s WMD). Well, brining them down didn’t fucking help the situation, did it?

Back in 2011, when American and NATO chiefs were planning airstrikes against the Libyan government and doing their strategic risk assessments, didn’t they predict that the refugees would begin flooding Europe in the aftermath? I find it hard to believe. If they knew that this is likely to happen, why the fuck did they proceed with their aggressive military campaign anyway? Well, I can understand the US doing it, their neocons seek to maintain the US world hegemony, and, therefore, they always try to undermine all the other perspective geopolitical competitors, be it China or EU, but what about the European NATO analysts who were sanctioning this shit? What kind of irresponsible, moronic psychopath do you have to be to allow such stuff to happen?

As for solving the Islamic State problem, I’ve been saying it for long that the best way to do it is to stop fucking with the Syrian government, allowing it to focus on fighting these scum. I don’t see how the US training “moderate Syrian rebels” (thus further fuelling the civil war) is going to help anyone (by the way, many of these, so called, “moderate rebels” end up joining ISIS):

Yeah, let’s support the rebels, so they could overthrow the Syrian government, and let’s bomb the government forces who oppose them! Such a brilliant idea! Worked so well in Libya!
Oh, and let’s blame Russia and China for supporting Assad (who is also supported by the majority of Syrians, by the way), making it look like it’s them who fuel the crisis. The brainless sheepple/zombies will swallow anything:

As for the refugees themselves, to me it appears beyond idiotic to thoughtlessly accept anyone who comes as a refugee. Yes, there are people who are fleeing the war zones, yes, there are people who truly need help and support, but you simply can’t ignore the fact that there is also a very significant number of people who are simply pretending to be Syrian to get the benefits of the welfare state. There are thousands of people coming from all the other, relatively stable regions (some even from the sub-Saharan Africa) who seek to exploit the crisis to get free money from the states that accept the refugees. By blending in, those people make it harder for actual Syrians who flee from the war zones to get in. Plus, most of these opportunists are young, healthy men, who would benefit their own economies if they had stayed in their home countries and worked there.

Those who are running for their lives should be helped now, for sure (since the West has fucked up the situating in their home countries to such degree), but it’s also necessary to be more selective and try to do the background check on the people who are coming in, to make sure that they are not imposters (with such large numbers coming in, I struggle to think of the ways to do it properly).

You can hear the argument that these refuges will provide the workforce and improve the economies of the host countries. Well, I can’t really see it working that way, considering the current unemployment rates in Germany and other EU countries. And, once again, many of those people who sneak into Europe now aren’t even true refugees fleeing the war zones. Many of them simply pretend to be Syrian or Libyan with an intent to live lazy parasitic lifestyle off welfare payments in the host countries, thus, depleting the state budget and worsening the economic recession.

As a result, the situation will escalate, the refugees will be blamed, racial/ethnic tensions will grow, radical movements will gain momentum in Europe (we’ve seen shit like this happening in Germany after the WWI), ethnic minorities will consolidate in response, forming hostile communities (you wouldn’t be able to socially integrate all the newcomers at such rates). It’s going to be a mess.

But, apparently, raising these concerns somehow makes you inhumane and/or racists.

Maybe it’s time to pull your head out of your ass and start thinking on how to solve all these issues constructively and holistically, without relying on emotional propaganda?

Oh, by the way, since you’re all compassionate, humanistic, caring and so easily moved by the media pictures of dead children, I think I would not do wrong if I’ll show you this:

Here is more images of dead children for you:

Those are the images from Eastern Ukraine/Novorossia. The deaths are the results of the indiscriminate shelling and bombing of the civilian areas done by the Kiev forces against their (former) provinces.
A case of Gorlovka, for instance:
Here is the list of kids who died because of the shelling in that one town alone (use Google translate if you can’t read Russian):

Civilians and kids have been dying there for the last 18 months, but, since the assault of the region is being done by the regime that acts within the interests of the United States, nobody gives a fuck.

Seriously, people, once again, the general discourse about the current refuge crisis demonstrates that society thinks what they are being told to think through the mainstream media.
That’s just pathetic and deeply, deeply sad.

You can now call me names in the comments below.

This entry is a back-up copy of my Facebook post that I originally made on 28.06.2015. For better user experience, please read, like and/or comment the original post on FB.

Okay, people, this is going to be one of the longest and most important FB posts I’ve ever written.

I feel the need to talk about an ongoing event that is among the most misrepresented topics in the Western political and media discourse – the Ukrainian Crisis. This topic is of high importance, as its escalation may lead to WW3 and then straight to a Nuclear Apocalypse, which, obviously, isn’t going to benefit the majority of people on planet Earth. I believe that people generally should be well-informed and have balanced views on such issues, as the political decisions usually rest on public support. It’s within your responsibility too to prevent bad, misguided political decisions from being made.

Now, regarding the Crisis itself, the coverage of those events by the Western mainstream media to date has been done in a near-Orwellian style, with, so called, political pundits having discussions on-air, during which they struggle to come to consensus on whether Putin is an irrational maniac or a cunning evil genius with world domination ambitions. The general discourse is focused on condemning “Russian aggression” and “Russian behaviour in Ukraine”, accusing it of military invasion, destabilising the region, among other thing. Anyone who dares to disagree is labeled a “Putin’s apologist”. The official Russian viewpoint is labeled “Russian propaganda”, and everyone who considers it (or merely disagrees with the Western mainstream media narrative) becomes “brainwashed by Putin’s lies”.

It’s particularly disturbing that this narrative isn’t debated against within the mainstream media in any Western country (with the exception of Germany, perhaps). It saddens me deeply. I will try my best to explain my understanding of the Crisis. I will support my statements with links to materials that will include relevant articles, raw video-footage, as well as some official documentation.

First, let’s take a look back, just to refresh the memory, and see how it all began.

As many of you remember, the US-backed “Euromaidan” coup occurred in Kiev in late February 2014. The democratically elected president Yankovich was violently ousted and had to flee the country. People with the support from the West-Ukrainian establishment came to power. With many of them holding strong nationalist and blatantly anti-Russian views, they initiated a couple of controversial legislations, including the infamous abolition of the law that allowed Russian as an official language (a decent priority for a government that just came to power; way more important than the state of national economy and other boring things):

It wasn’t only that, of course. Many of those who came to power in Kiev were just russophobic in general, with some of them being openly neo-nazi (I will return to this point a bit later).

Evidently, such rhetoric didn’t impress people in the South-Eastern parts of Ukraine, the dominant majority of which are ethnically, linguistically and culturally Russian (especially given that it was an unconstitutional, undemocratic and violent co op; people in the South-East were opposing it from the start). A number of anti-Kiev/pro-Russia protests were carried across the region, with people demanding federalisation (predominantly, they demanded some autonomy through decentralisation from the Kiev government). Here is the footage of protests that occurred in Donetsk, Lugansk and Odessa (the Western mainstream media was very reluctant to report on these):

There were also a couple of reported incidents when protesters were taking over local administrative building by force. In order to be fair, it has to be pointed out that they were using the exact same methods employed by the pro-Euromaindan groups a few months earlier (when they were occupying city administrations in Western provinces and, later, storming administrative buildings in Kiev, with weapons, wearing masks, and everything).

What was suppose to happen in such situation? Well, ideally, the new Kiev government should have set a dialog with the people in the South Eastern provinces, to discuss possible solutions, try to find ways to reach a compromise, all that stuff that governments that call themselves democratic do. What did Kiev do? Well, they sent in tanks, helicopters and armed vehicles to repress the people:

Initially, the military campaign (labeled as “Anti-Terrorist Operation” by Kiev authorities) suffered a massive fail, due to soldiers arriving on the sites and seeing just ordinary people, whom they couldn’t shoot, so they didn’t know what to do. It was later, when battalions formed from ultra-nationalist got involved, that’s when the blood got spilled. For instance, here is video-footage of Dnepr battalion repressing a referendum in the town of Krasnoarmeysk, killing at least one civilian in the process:

Here is another instance of Kiev military shooting at the crowd and killing civilians (filmed in Mariupol on the 2014 Victory Day):

That’s when sh*t hit the fan, forcing people to take weapons and stand up for themselves. Note, those were Kiev soldiers repressing locals’ political will by force (that’s a crime that calls for a tribunal by itself), not “pro-Russian rebels” or “Putin’s thugs” advancing towards Kiev and killing Ukrainians on the way, let along mythical “Russian army invading Ukraine”, as mainstream media often tries to portray the situation.

Also, many people argue (and I tend to agree with them) that the Odessa Massacre that occurred on 02.05.2014, during which neo-nazi burned nearly 50 people alive, served as the point of non-return:

And here is the footage that shows pro-Maidan activists making Molotov cocktails that were used to set the building on fire:

Either way, it’s a civil war, ignited by the US-backed Kiev’s aggression towards its (former?) Eastern provinces.

Interestingly, the U. S. officials knew that the situation may develop into a civil war way back in 2008, as revealed by now leaked documents. A confidential memo sent to the Joint Chief of Staff by William J. Burns (he used to be a U. S. ambassador to Russia) said the following (published by Wikileaks; dated 01.02.2008):
Ukraine and Georgia’s NATO aspirations not only touch a raw nerve in Russia, they engender serious concerns about the consequences for stability in the region [!]. Not only does Russia perceive encirclement, and efforts to undermine Russia’s influence in the region, but it also fears unpredictable and uncontrolled consequences which would seriously affect Russian security interests. Experts tell us that Russia is particularly worried that the strong divisions in Ukraine over NATO membership, with much of the ethnic-Russian community against membership, could lead to a major split, involving violence [!!!] or at worst, civil war. In that eventuality, Russia would have to decide whether to intervene; a decision Russia does not want to have to face.

Here is the link to the leaked memo:

Again, I want to stress your attention at this particular moment. The U. S. actually knew that if “pro-Western” course is enforced by/on Kiev, that may lead to INTERNAL regional destabilisation and, at worst, a civil war (that’s essentially what we’ve been observing happening there for over a year now). They knew about such possibility, yet they purposefully supported (both politically and financially) the Euromaidan movement (and all the neo-nazi radicals who stuck to it) that, consequently, overthrew the democratically elected president and then waged repressive military campaign against people who had a different opinion. What the hell does Russia (or Putin) have to do with it?

As for the “Russian invasion of Ukraine” accusations, it’s been more than a year since those claims began to appear, and still there is no proper evidence in support of this. No satellite data (it would have been abundant if the accusations were true; NATO and U. S. have been registering all the slightest moves made by the Russian military formations within the Russian territory, yet, no proper data of them crossing the border), no official video documentation, no verifiable video-footage made by journalists and/or locals (everyone has cell phones with cameras nowadays, and the Internet access is widespread in those regions). Also, don’t forget all the international journalists and observers (e. g. OSCE) who are being there constantly.

I mean, just think about it. Remember when Saudi Arabia intervened in Yemen a couple of months ago? Remember the amount of data it generated? Remember the Israeli forces moving into Gaza last year on 17.07.2014, and the uproar it caused instantly? A better example, if you actually want to know what Russian military intervention looks like, go back to 2008 and examine the Georgian conflict, when president Saakachvili attacked Tskhinvali and the Russian peacekeepers in South Ossetia, so Russia had to retaliate (by the way, that conflict is of special significance because it wasn’t covered univocally in the Western mainstream media back then; the American media was forcing the usuall “Russian aggression” narrative, while media outlets like BBC were more neutral in their coverage; that’s because the conflict was solely within the interests of the Republicans in the U. S., as they wanted to use it for John McCain’s presidential campaign; it didn’t go as planned, because they didn’t expect Russia to retaliate properly). By the way, here’s a famous example of how Fox News failed live while discussing the 2008 conflict:

The only things that have actually been properly documented moving from Russia to the region are the numerous humanitarian aid convoys (they are being checked by the OSCE):

Also, if the tale of Russian invasion of Ukraine is true, then why doesn’t Kiev also fight it in Crimea? Well, I hope the answer is obvious: that’s because they know that if they go to Crimea, they will actually encounter the Russian troops…

And, let’s be serious here, if Russian troops were really to intervene in Eastern Ukraine/Novorossia, they would have done it fast, as with the Georgian conflict, with many tanks, armoured and support vehicles moving through (with combined personnel of multiple thousands, all crossing the border at once), they would have used air support, with jets and helicopters flying over the region. That would be impossible to hide. And there would be no need to. The Crisis would be over in a couple of days time, in such case (don’t want to put anyone down here, but the Russian military forces objectively have more troops, they are better equipped and have a couple of newer thing in the arsenal).

Here is a good article that elaborates the inadequacy of the “Russia invaded Ukraine” BS/narrative well:

Now, put yourself in the shoes of a chief editor that works for some big mainstream media outlet. How would you go about keeping the narrative in the absence of any proper evidence for months? Well, the BBC made an attempt by coming up with an article that explains the invisibility of Russian army by a military doctrine the BBC editorial named “Maskirovka”:
“Maskirovka” is an actual Russian word for disguise, but I’ve never heard of such military doctrine, there is no article on it in the Russian language Wikipedia; there is one, however, in the English Wikipedia, but, if you go to the edits history, you’ll see that the majority of it was written in January-February 2015, when the BBC article was published; the BBC article itself is absurd; it’s like the author took a couple of names and dates from the history and began juggling them wildly, making bizarre extrapolations that have no correspondence to reality whatsoever.
The CNN weren’t that sophisticated, apparently, so they decided to just report that there are mobile crematoriums in Eastern Ukraine that Russians use to burn their dead soldiers to hide the evidence:
This story was picked up by numerous other newspapers and media outlets (such as the Business Insider, which has turned into an info-dump, publishing the most bizarre junk “journalists” come up with about the Ukrainian Crisis and Russia). I feel sorry for these “journalists” who have to resort to coming up with these nonsense and then reporting it. I wonder if they have to take any recreational drugs to boost their creativity in the process. Seems like it.

As for the reports of spotting Russian military equipment in the region – those are among the most facile arguments you can come up with. Ukraine is a former Soviet state, and it uses the same weaponry systems as Russians do (with the exception that Russians have been able to implement a couple of new improvements since 1991; and a couple of new models too, such the Armata tank). There are stockpiles of Soviet military gear all over the Ukrainian territory, because, back in the late-1980s and the early 1990s, following the Warsaw Pact dissolution, when all the Soviet military bases were drawn back home from East Germany and East-European countries, a huge amount of weaponry systems condensed at the periphery of the USSR (and then it just stayed there, because Russian politicians were too busy privatising state property during the 1990s and, thus, didn’t have time to attend to this issue). I mean, it’s such a facile argument that appeals to pure ignorance. “Aaahhh!!! A Russian T-80 tank is spotted in rebellious provinces! That proves that Russia supplies them with lethal aid! RUSSIAN AGGRESSION!!!1111”. Following that logic, Putin must also supply Kiev, because 95% of everything they use is of Soviet design too.

Now, to the issue of Russian citizens fighting among rebel forces in the region. Yes, there are Russian citizens who are fighting there. Nobody is denying that. But to use it as a proof of Russia destabilising Ukraine and fuelling the conflict is, again, facile. Yes, there are people from Russian participating in the conflict, but so are the mercenaries and volunteers from Poland, Germany, Serbia, Spain, Belarus, and the US, and they can be seen fighting on both sides:,Polish-volunteer-dies-fighting-rebels-in-Ukraine
… and so on.

So, does it mean that all these countries, whose citizens fight in Eastern Ukraine/Novorossia, both with and against the rebels, have invaded Ukraine or otherwise destabilise the region? Unlikely.

The fact that there are more Russian citizens than citizens of any other country among the fighters is easily explained by the deep cultural ties between Ukraine (particularly its Eastern parts) and Russia. Hell, it used to be one country some mere 24 years ago, with no borders and people were moving back and forth easily. Half of all Russian families have relatives living in Ukraine, so, on social levels, Russians are deeply concerned about the Crisis, with the majority seeing the current Kiev government as an enemy, and many individuals are driven enough to help the rebels, with some even travelling there and joining their ranks.

I do believe that Russia might have sent in some covert operatives into the region, although I have no proof (it’s just that it would be strange if the Russian government wouldn’t try to somehow regulate the conflict that is happening right at its borders), but would that make Putin/Russia bad? Hardly so, given that it wasn’t Putin who initiated the Crisis (I think I’ve already covered this point extensively in this post).

But are there any external forces that fuel the Crisis? Yes, there are. The U. S. and NATO are sending the military aid to the Kiev forces and are doing so officially:

They also train the Kiev soldiers (the Canadian government does so as well):

So, let’s get it clear, the Western powers are actually doing what they are accusing Russia of, i. e. providing military aid and training for one of the sides in the conflict. They are doing so officially, yet, they accuse Russia of destabilising the regional situation, using it as a pretext for economic sanctions. Doesn’t that concern people in the West? Or is it just that the majority of people have no time nor analytical skills to see the blatant double standards and the dichotomy employed by the West, both diplomatically and in the mainstream media?

Well, one might argue that the West has the right to do so, as it supports the official government, and not some rebels/separatists. To respond to this, I would like to remind you that the current Kiev government was established as a result of violent, UNCONSTITUTIONAL co op, which was financed and diplomatically supported by the U. S. Essentially, it’s a puppet government that was violently installed by the West:
Why should the Eastern regions comply to it?

“But wait!” you say, “Let’s ask what Ukrainians themselves think about the Crisis. It’s always essential to know what people who actually live in the country think of what is going on, right?”. Right. But before asking such questions, you should decide which Ukrainians to include in the survey. Western Ukrainians? Ukrainians from Kiev? Maybe people who live in the Eastern provinces?

Well, Crimea was once a part of Ukraine. The people there have already expressed their position at a referendum in March 2014. The resent surveys done by three independent Western organisations confirmed that way over 90% of Crimeans are happy living as a part of Russia and do not regret their choice:

The people of Donetsk and Lugansk regions are saying that they are being bombed and shelled by the Kiev army:

There are many videos of East-Ukranian/Novorossia residents saying what they think is happening. They are all over YouTube. I can post more in the comments if you want me to (it’s just that there are way too many links in this post already). Generally, I would recommend checking Graham Phillips’ YouTube channel. He is a British freelance journalist who has been working in the conflict zone since the very beginning. He has been attacked multiple times by his colleagues in the Western mainstream media, with allegations that he is a “Russian propagandist” being made. He is strongly pro-Russian, indeed. But the special value of his work is that he uploads raw footage online (just adding English subtitles to it). He also interviews random people on the streets, from time to time. So, definitely worth checking (lots of material there that the Western mainstream media won’t show you):

Now, what about the other Ukrainians? Well, yes, if you’re going to ask any Ukrainian who doesn’t live in Donbass, the chances are that they are going to blame Russia and Putin for all the horror that has been happening there. Why? Well, let’s talk about the Kiev controlled media…

He is one example of how the Ukrainian media lied (in an Orwellian style), and how these lies were picked up by European politicians and referenced at a UN assembly (I dare you to watch it):

Horrifying, isn’t it?
Well, there is more. Such lies and propaganda are being told by the Kiev media on the daily basis. Literally. The Western mainstream media likes to talk about Russian media faking stuff (yet, they always use that one example of the “crucified boy” story), yet they never mention daily fabrications done by the Ukrainian media.
There is a guy named Anatoly Sharij, he is a Ukrainian journalist in exile. He now lives in Europe and harshly criticises the current Kiev government, debunking their fakes. He uploads short videos to his YouTube channel regularly, showing where and how Kiev media outlets lie to their audience. 3-5 new uploads are made daily! Recently, he began putting English subtitles to some of his videos. So, check it out (it’s truly horrifying to see what Kiev media is doing to their people):
Here are some examples of his mini-investigations (don’t forget to turn the subs on):
A Ukrainian TV channel steals video footage uploaded by a Russian volunteer, video footage that shows the results of Kiev authorities, cuts and edits it and then presents it as a “proof” of the rebels committing those atrocities:

A Ukrainian TV channel steals a video report on “anti-war” meeting in Donetsk (filmed by Graham Phillips), edits it, cuts out the bits where citizens accuse Kiev forces of shelling, and then reports the event, making it look like the people are protesting against rebells’ actions:

A Ukrainian TV channel completely distorts information and fabricates negative stories about Russia:

Kiev news websites report a fake story about a rebel commander being killed:

A Ukrainian TV channel spills dirt on Crimean prosecutor by using photoshopped pictures:

Ukrainian news websites glorify Ukrainian airforce by stealing video of Russian jets:

The Ukrainian Security Service lied about the “Russian BUK system” involved in the MH17 tragedy, publishing its photos on their official web-site. The photos turned out to be of a BUK system used by the Kiev forces:

Again, these fake reports and propaganda are being fed to people daily, from all Kiev channels and online news services. It’s like an alternative reality that is being created by the Kiev media and their blogosphere. It’s important to note that a significant portion of such propaganda is aimed at the emotional level of perception, making people feel either sad or angry, to the point when a person’s analytical skills become switched off. I believe that such propaganda, if fed for months non-stop, can stress people to burnout, so there is a risk of becoming brainwashed down to psychosis.
And the scariest thing is that there is no alternative point of view in the Kiev media. All the Russian TV channels became banned straight after the co op (that was one of the first initiatives by the new government), journalists, writers and politicians who voice their criticism towards the government nowadays have bad things happening to them. In April, there were reports of at least 10 opposition figures dying in Ukraine this year alone (including two journalists, Kalashnikov and Buzyna, who were shot dead within a 24-hour period):
The numbers might have increased since then.
By the way, here is the translation of an official statement made by Buzyna about the Kiev media and on why he left his post as a chief-editor in a mainstream newspaper (his opinion cost him his life):

There have also been stories about newspapers and news agencies that didn’t support the Euromaidan movement being forcefully shut down right after the coup. I can’t remember the details off the top of my head now, but I might try to specify the info, if you want me to.
The Western mainstream media, of course, isn’t concerned about that. In fact, BBC and CNN often just rewrite the official Kiev press releases (yet, they treat all the information that comes out of Russia as propaganda).

But it’s not only the Kiev media that is guilty of such misinformation. The Western mainstream media has also been caught multiple times producing Orwellian style fakes. For example, here is MSNBC being caught editing video footage from the conflict zone, misinterpreting it by completely turning the meaning upside-down:

Or here is another example. The Daily Telegraph caught reporting the presence of the Russian army in Ukraine with a video that actually shows Kiev forces:
There are more examples like these out there. These fakes have been appearing in the media systematically since the very beginning of the Crisis.

And it’s not only the media outlets that do that. High ranking officials have been caught using fakes to “proof” Russian military presence in Ukraine too:

Apart from blatant fakes, there is also just a general tendency in the Western mainstream media to morbidly misinterpret the information. Sometimes it gets really, really low:

The lies and misinformation are spread quickly and systematically. Here is a simple demonstration of how media corporations use search engine indexing algorithms to spread and amplify certain stories on the Internet:

Ask yourself: if the evidence of Russian invasion of Ukraine is so abundant, as the media claims, then why the hell do they keep fabricating these stories and publishing fakes?

Another side of the Western mainstream media manipulation is omission of facts. The mainstream media never reports on Kiev forces shelling civilian areas (although there is abundance of video materials on this all over the Internet). You wouldn’t be able to find reports on atrocities committed by neo-nazi battalions in the mainstream media.
CNN, BBC, ABC, etc. will never show you this (just give this link to anyone who treats the info about nazis in Ukraine as “Putin’s propaganda”):

By the way, a quick point about neo-nazis. You can find certain marginalised ultra-nationalist groups in many places all around the globe. There are Hitler worshipers and sympathisers in Germany, the U. S., the UK, and in many other countries. It’s okay to allow a few imbeciles to get swastika tattoos and talk about white supremacy for the sake of freedom of speech, freedom of political expression, and such. But it becomes truly messed up when these imbeciles get to have their own military units (that don’t correspond to the Ministry of Defence), with their representatives holding high positions in the government, allowing their ideologies to spread and giving WWII nazi collaborators a national hero status.
Coupled with constant brainwashing by the media, it can lead to mass-psychosis:

There is an additional level to the mass hysteria that was purposefully brought upon the nation of Ukraine, and it concerns their collective identity. There is one interesting piece on the subject to which I will provide a link in the comment section (it’s a link to a FB post; FB links seem to affect posts’ shareability within the network, so I’ll just post it in the comments).


Let’s do a short summary.
It was the West that sponsored the violent, unconstitutional coup in Ukraine’s capital in February 2014. It was the new, radicalised government that suppressed the dissent at home and then refused to talk with the people of Eastern Ukraine, trying to repress them with military force instead. It was Kiev that waged war against its own provinces for having a different opinion. The American officials knew that the crisis could lead to a bloodbath civil war, yet they kept pushing towards it by brining those radicals to power and then supporting their military campaign against East Ukraine/Novorossia, providing military aid and training their troops, while blaming Putin for everything by constructing political and media discourse that is based on facile arguments, misinformation and blatant lies, and then using it to impose economic sanctions on Russia (i. e. waging economic warfare).
Who is the aggressor?

You know what, let’s now do a quick thought experiment. Forget everything I’ve told you. Imagine that the Western mainstream media tells the truth, and that it is, indeed, Putin who has been destabilising the region from the very beginning, orchestrating the crisis and then fuelling the war in Eastern Ukraine. Would that make Russia/Putin bad? Perhaps… But not worse than the U. S., who have actually been doing this in Libya and Syria for years now.
You know what, it’s actually amazing how the mainstream media does its job. The U. S. has been accusing Russia (with no proof) of doing something it ACTUALLY does in Syria, a country that is located 9 000 km away from its borders. The U. S. does support radicals (who kill innocent civilians; some of them end up joining ISIS) there, officially supplying them with weapons, helping them financially, training their fighters, etc. Again, doesn’t that concern people? Or are people so bad at analytical thinking they can’t even spot the morbid double standards in this issue? I mean, the entire media and political discourse about Evil Putin’s/Russian aggression towards Ukraine is so deeply, fundamentally facile, on so many levels, it makes me so angry and frustrated that…. I can’t even finish this thought.

Either way, people, the mainstream media isn’t there to inform you. It’s merely a tool to shape public opinion. A propaganda machine. And the cause benefits no-one, but the military-industrial complex and a bunch of trans-national financial institutions.
That’s not just my personal opinion or some crazy conspiracy theory. It’s actually been studied academically for decades now:

Red pill, anyone?

So, given that the Western mainstream media spews nothing but propaganda, what could you do to form a balanced opinion on the issues? Well, the most obvious way is to consult alternative media (and, no, people, The Guardian isn’t really an alternative to NYT when it comes to Ukraine or Russia), trying to get the other side’s perspective.

Here is a couple of Russian state sponsored media outlets that run in English:
Russia Today –
Sputnik News –
(for those of you who don’t trust RT after the last year incident when a news anchor quit on-air because she “couldn’t keep whitewashing the Russian deeds in Ukraine”, well….. it was staged by the American neocons: )

There is also a web-resource called Russia Insider, which was founded by Western russophiles to target the Western mainstream media narratives about Russia –

As for non-Russian alternative media sources, I would recommend:
Consortium News –
Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity –
StormCloudsGathering (these guys often dive into conspiracy theories, but, nevertheless, they are excellent at putting info together and giving food for thought) –

Here is an article that lists additional non-Russian alternative sources on the Ukrainian Crisis:


I think I’ve covered everything I had on my mind in relation to the Western mainstream media coverage of the Ukrainian Crisis. I know this post is long and it’s not something you would normally see on Facebook (I applaud you if you’ve been able to read it all), but it’s just all these points had to be made and explained. The post is really info heavy, so some of you may find it useful to save it and revisit it later, to examine the links more carefully.
Try to put it all together.

A few additional articles on the topic that are worth reading:

I think my job here is done for now.

Use your brain, always analyse and question everything you watch, hear and read. Especially when it comes to the mainstream media.
Don’t let them brainwash you into the WW3.

Much love, everyone.

P. S. It’s good to finally be on holidays ;)

The materials cited in the comments

This entry is a back-up copy of my Facebook post that I originally made on 23.07.2015. For better user experience, please read, like and/or comment the original post on FB.

It’s been over a year since the day the MH17 tragedy took place. I was watching news reports on Channel Ten and SBS for two days (last Friday and Saturday) to see how discourse is constructed here amid the One Year Anniversary of the event. I must admit, I was pleasantly surprised by the absence of anti-Russian hysteria and finger-pointing this time. Unlike last year coverage of this tragedy, the reports were far more moderate, without explicitly blaming rebels and Russia. Sadly, they were still working within a very narrow narrative, deliberately omitting and completely ignoring all the other information that is now known and could easily be found in open sources. Many important issues weren’t brought to light.
The aim of this post is provide links to information the mainstream media doesn’t want to talk about.

Let’s begin with that “newly emerged”, “exclusive” video footage that shows rebels being on the crash cite shortly after the plane was brought down, the video that began circulating in the Australian media early in the morning on 17.07.2015. First of all, it’s not newly emerged. Neither it is exclusive. The footage was produced by a rebel fighter who goes by a nickname “Zhuk” (Beatle) and given to the media last year. BBC aired it on July 20, 2014, three days after the crash. In an interview to BBC’s Joh Donnson, Zhuk explained that the rebels were collecting documents of the victims and other items that contain information to hand it all to the investigators. When asked why he gave footage to the media, Zhuk replied that he hoped it would assist the official investigation. Here is this report by BBC:

But that’s not the most interesting bit. What the Australian mainstream media also failed to report is what the rebel fighters are actually saying in this video. What they can be heard saying is that the plane was brought down by a jet-fighter (that’s such a small and insignificant detail all the major news outlets omitted, isn’t it?):

But okay, Australian mainstream journalists are human beings too, not all of them are able to understand Russian language (especially when it’s spoken with a Southern/Ukrainian accent), and certainly not all of them are professional enough to check the existing media archives. Misreporting happens. Let’s assume it wasn’t done for implicitly evoking anti-rebel/anti-Russian moods amid One Year Anniversary of the Tragic Event, and that it was an honest mistake made in rush for sensationalism. Okay. But are there any particularly strange things about the MH17 investigation that should be discussed by public, yet the mainstream media just roles with it, as if there is nothing wrong? Yep.

For example, why the hell is investigation done in secrecy, with everything we see being vague, inconclusive reports coming out once a year, or so? Well, it could be argued that it’s done to allow a coherent investigative team to be focused on their work, without disruptive pressure by numerous third parties. Okay, fair enough. But there is one big “but”. When you watch news reports on TV or read mainstream news outlets, you get an impression that the Dutch Safety Board is unbiased, and that the investigation is being conducted with the help of the global community experts, but that’s not really the case. It’s a four-party comity, all the members of which have signed a non-disclousre agreement, the agreement that prohibits the release of findings until the consensus on the results is reached (a very shady thing to do to begin with). Who are the four members? They are the Netherlands (a leading NATO member, which is one of the most anti-Russian organisation imaginable), Belgium (also a NATO member), Australia (a member of the ANZUS Treaty, which obliges it to construct its foreign policy within the US interests), and (wait for it!)…. Ukraine:
This, so called, international comity is, kinda, one-sided, don’t you think so? And Ukraine being involved in the official investigation, while being one of the primary suspects, doesn’t add to its credibility either. It’s the same as having a murder case, with five primary suspects, in which investigators decide to assign some investigative duties to one of those five suspects (with the condition that the results won’t come out if he doesn’t like them). How freaking insane is that? They should get the DNR and LNR rebels involved in the investigation too then. Why won’t they allow Russian experts to join this secret investigation? Make it truly international, invite aviation, ballistics and forensic experts from China, Iran, North Korea. Make it a proper, UN-led investigation, for f*ck’s sake! What kind of results should we expect from closed investigation conducted in secrecy by a comity of four nations, all of which are explicitly anti-Russian and one of them being a primary suspect?
You can already hear some very disturbing bells ringing:
Should the public be aware of these issues? Hell yeah! Have you ever heard SBS, Channel 7, BBC, CNN, etc., raising these questions? I haven’t.

Another massive issue with the MH17 case is that both the Dutch Safety Board and the mainstream media completely ignore the multiple eye-witness accounts.
For instance, here is a report done by Graham William Phillips. He messed up with the technical aspect here, as the sound channels are mixed at the very beginning, and the subtitles become desynchronised with the video in the middle of the report. But, nevertheless, it’s a valuable piece of evidence as it contains interviews with the residents. The interview with those who were on the scene during or shortly after the plane was taken down can be seen at 11:17, 22:10 (they say they saw fighter jets), 24:13, 26:45, 33:21 (says he saw a jet firing a rocket), 38:30, 55:33, 1:02:35 (that woman who had a dead body falling on her house and penetrating her roof; she was shown by the Australia media a couple of times, yet, the majority of the stuff she says here has never been broadcasted by any mainstream media outlet), 1:11:11 (one of the guys says that he saw two jets). All the interviews are worth watching, many interesting details are given:

In general, pretty much all the people interviewed say that they heard two loud claps. Those who were indoors didn’t understand what was happening at first, they thought they are being bombed by the Kiev army.
Here is another eye-witness interview:
BBC was also interviewing local residents, who were saying that they saw fighter jets, but that report got censored because it didn’t meet the “editorial values”:

Going back to the Graham Phillips’ report, there is one very interesting detail the very last interviewees mention. The guys say that they saw the news reports about “Russian-supplied BUK shooting down MH17” popping up in the Ukrainian media within the first 15 minutes (!!!!) after the plane got taken down…
Just think about it. The plane just crashed loudly, there is panic, everyone is confused, the residents in that area haven’t figured out what happened yet, but the Ukrainian media and their blogosphere are already posting detailed reports, blaming rebels and Russia, who allegedly supplied BUK to them.

This information is consistent to what Anatoly Sharij, a Ukrainian journalist in exile, famous, among other things, for debunking the initial SBU (the Ukrainian Security Service) lie about the BUK system, said in his interview to a Dutch journalist about the Ukrainian media being anomalously fast with reporting on the MH17 tragedy. Here is the fragment from his interview (I will post a FB link to the full interview in the comments section):

I was surprised and extremely worried that Ukraine gave its version VERY fast, almost instantly. As if it were prepared, as if the version had been written before the preliminary conclusions got out.
But even before a visit of the first official representative of the government to the crash site (by the way, I do not know if they visited it at all), the Prime Minister, as well as the President, revealed such strange details and made statements that were not backed by anything.
5) Now look. The Ukrainian mass media started reporting that the separatists had weapons to shoot down planes at high altitudes from the very morning. Where did this information come from, who provided it to the media? It’s unclear.
Before the information about the plane crash appeared at dispatchers’, it, again, has been provided to the Ukrainian mass media [!!!]. I know Ukrainian media very well, it takes them often from five to ten hours to publish the news that I’m aware of.
Such a sudden efficiency. Isn’t it suspicious?
Isn’t it disturbing, that the mass media even knew the flight number and the number of passengers? It did put me on my guard in the first minute. Because it is UNTYPICAL for the Ukrainian media…

The interview was never published. Did it also fail to meet the “editorial values”, as all the other stuff that doesn’t go along with the mainstream media narrative? Seems like it. Frustrated, Sharij decided to just post it on his FB page (again, links to all the FB content can be seen in comments section; give it a read).

Now, let’s look closer at the Western mainstream theory of MH17 tragedy, the theory that suggests that the plane was taken down by the rebel forces who used sophisticated BUK system that was, allegedly, provided to them by Russia.
If it was a BUK missile, it would have left a trail in the air for everyone to see and document it. The problem is that, to date, only two photos of this smoke trail exist in the public domain. The photos came out from an anonymous photographer more than 4 months apart from each other:

The first photo, the one that shows clear blue sky, was immediately criticised by people on social media because, as documentation and eye-witnesses tell, it was cloudy on that day. Those who propagated this photo as evidence explained that the photographer had his camera settings adjusted so that the smoke trail would be more visible, hence the sky looks blue. The second photo (again, it was released more than 4 months after the first one) shows the sky colour and the clouds that were reported seen on that day by multiple sources. The image is blurry because, reportedly, the camera auto-focused on the wires…. Bugger! The blurriness makes it impossible to analyse the smoke trail image pixel by pixel to tell whether it was photoshopped or not.
An independent investigative researcher Max van der Werff​, the creator of, has travelled to the crash site to interview residents and to check the veracity of these photos. And guess what! There are no wires that obstruct the view from the roof, and there could never be any, because the roof of that 9-storey building is the highest point in the area. The wires were photoshopped in to justify the image blurriness that hides the traces of digital manipulation. The photos are fake.
Moreover, residents who live in that building say that they knew the photographer. They say that he faked the photos, and that “everyone knows that”. Here is the full report:

That’s the “evidence” from social media for ya!

The same kind of “evidence” that the US State Department and NATO chiefs often rely on:

But what about those photos and videos of the Russian BUK system that are all over the Internet and have been shown by the media multiple times? Well, there are only 3 (three) videos and 4 (four) photographs that have been shown to public to date (plus one picture from Twitter, which served as illustration to a tweet and turned out to be from 2011), all low quality, hardly verifiable, with some of them provided directly by SBU (Ukrainian Security Service). Some of the photos appear to be photoshopped (but then, again, they are all conveniently low resolution images).
This excellent analysis by Sergey Mastepanov explores each piece of, so called, “evidence” from social media in detail (it’s 44 pages long, I strongly suggest you find some time to go through it; it’s excellent at addressing the issues with the social media evidence on concrete MH17-realted examples, including the infamous “the rebels themselves bragged about taking a plane down”; the guy does what the professional journalists suppose to do; if only they had any professional integrity):
Here’s a PDF copy:

Here is another article by van der Werff that explores the exact sources of all the BUK evidence (in short, most of it was anonymously posted on the Interned via now-deleted accounts that were only created to upload the material, yet someone made sure that the Ukrainian Security Service, anti-Russian bloggers and the Dutch Safety Board would notice and quickly save and repost it):

That’s it. That’s all the evidence there is for the “Russian BUK” theory. Three unverifiable videos and a couple of low quality pictures (some of which have obviously been photoshopped, as with the “missile trail” photos). Yet the mainstream media and various politicians have been asserting that there is an “overwhelming amount of evidence” for Russia’s involvement in the tragedy. If you look at it all carefully, the “Russian BUK” theory starts to look like the “CIA planted explosives in the Twin Towers prior 9/11!” type of allegations (with the only difference that the CNN and BBC weren’t covering those conspiracy theories, and the official investigative comity didn’t focus on them, desperately trying to find the evidence that would support those allegations).

I sometimes see reports in the mainstream media mocking Russia for propaganda, saying that Kremlin confuses its own narrative, Putin can’t keep his lies straight, etc. That only shows that those who write such pieces consider their audience brainless sheep. The Russian government never had an official version of the MH17 disaster! Couldn’t have, in principle (unlike the Western politicians and the mainstream media), because the investigation hasn’t been conducted yet and it’s too early to make any definitive conclusions. The Russian government has only been presenting different kinds of information to the public. E. g. there was a Ministry of Defence conference a few days after the tragedy took place, during which satellite, air traffic and radar data was released, all showing that the plane got deviated from its normal flightpath, that there were a number of Ukrainian BUKs on the ground in the region and that there was a military jet in the MH17’s vicinity shortly before the crash:

Then there was a press conference conducted by Almaz Anty (a weapon manufacturer; so, not exactly the official voice of the Russian government), during which they presented their own analysis and expressed their own theory based on the data available, concluding that it might have been a Ukrainian SAM that brought it down:

Then there was a report by aviation security experts suggesting that it might have been an air-to-air R-60 missile:

But none of those can be regarded as an official Russian narrative. Those are simply the presentation of available evidence with different theories being made by DIFFERENT BODIES. Yet, instead of discussing the actual content of all these reports and presentations, the Western mainstream media prefers to mock it all as “Kremlin can’t keep its story straight”. No surprise here. We’ve seen multiple times before that these, so called, “journalists” treat all the information that comes out of Russia as if it was written by Putin personally. It appears to me that somebody should tell these imbeciles that this particular article by The Onion News is just satire:–38519

Now, in regards to the Russian Ministry of Defence press-conference, the Western mainstream media ignored it completely last year. This year, however, there was a wave of articles accusing the Russian government of faking their data. Multiple news outlets reported that. All were citing the “independent investigative journalists and forensic experts” from a site called Bellingcat. There were a number of (pseudo-)analytic reports, in which they used open source information to try to debunk the Russian Ministry of Defence data, showing it as fake (e. g. they used pictures from Google Earth to compare them with the satellite data presented, doing shadow casting analysis, looking into the image data, etc). Again, Bellingcat went viral with multiple mainstream news outlets citing them as showing “irrefutable proof” that Kremlin lied to the World community and to the families of the MH17 victims. But not many bothered to report on what real forensic experts had to say about the Bellingcat analysis. For example, here is Jens Kriese explaining why you have to be an idiot to rely on error-level analysis (ELA) in the way the Bellingcat people did it:

Here is a Russian blogger Tymofey Vasilyev taking their analysis apart in two parts (if you’re too lazy to use Google Translate, you can just look at the pictures, they are very self-explanatory; some of the major points include: the file data analysis will give meaningless result if it’s not original raw data, they based their extrapolations on wrong assumptions while trying to date the satellite images, the creators of the digital tools they used themselves have come out and accused Bellingcat of manipulating data (!), Google Earth satellite imagery dates are approximate and, therefore, couldn’t be used for forensic analysis, in principle, Bellingcat people are just a bunch of fraud with agenda):
Part 1.
Part 2.

Interestingly, this was not the first time Bellingcat deceived their audience with faulty analysis. Back in February this year, they wrote a “conclusive” research piece, stating that Russia has been shelling Ukraine within their territory (they based their findings on crater analysis). The “study” was cited by NATO (!) and the UK Foreign & Commonwealth Office. Yet, when the real forensic experts, who designed the method of crater analysis, were reached, they said that the method is highly experimental, and that there is no scientific evidence to tell whether it actually works:

It has also been established that the creator of Bellingcat, Elliot Higgins, is a member of CENTRIC, a British intelligence and security organisation that collaborates with Law Enforcement Agencies and intelligence communities in the UK. So much for “independent, crowd-funded, citizen journalism”:

But in oder to understand the true magnitude of what’s wrong with Bellingcat and Elliot Higgins, we have to step in outside the context of the Ukrainian Crisis.

Elliot Higgins is also known as the creator of the Brown Moses blog (although the mainstream media is very reluctant to mention it these days). Back in 2013, he presented a faulty analysis, implicating the President Assad in sarin gas attacks on his own people. Initially, the analysis caused a massive uproar in the mainstream media, with everyone presenting it as “irrefutable proof”, and was about to be used as a pretext to justify military invasion of Syria by NATO and the US forces. But the weapon experts from Massachusetts Institute of Technology had a different view. A team lead by Theodor Postol, a professor of science, technology and international security, published their analysis in which they demonstrated that the gas attack was, in fact, conducted by the US-backed terrorists. As for Higgins, Postol said that “he has done a very nice job collecting information on a website. As far as his analysis, it’s so lacking any analytical foundation it’s clear he has no idea what he’s talking about”:

So, here we have it – Elliot Higgins, the creator of Billingcat, always pushing the US State Department line, always providing pseudo-analytical pieces for officials and the mainstream media to rely on, yet being constantly slammed by real academics and forensic experts.

But wait, there is more! A pro-Assad hacktivist group known as the Syrian Electronic Army once hacked into the Facebook messenger archives of Matthew Vandyke (another “pro-democracy” paladin and a KONY 2012-style propaganda maker, whose works the Western mainstream media used to peddle while covering the civil wars in Libya and Syria), showing that he, at one point, told Higgins that the anti-Assad terrorists possess a chemical weapon (that demonstrates that Higgins was deliberately lying in his reports):

But how do we know that those leaks are real, and not just some stuff that was made up by Syrian hacktivists? Well, some of his contacts have confirmed that they accounts have been hacked and that the information that was published is true. Matthew Vandyke himself then had to admit that those convos were real, after sh*tting some bricks:

So, it is now apparent that Elliot Higgins has been associated with intelligence/secret services and numerous mainstream media journalists for years, yet he still presents his projects as “independent, crowd-funded investigative citizen journalism”.

Higgins has been discredited multiple times by forensic experts, he has been exposed as a fraud repeatedly, his lies and evidence manipulation has nearly caused a war in 2013, and now he comes back again, with a project that goes under a different name, and begins to produce slander against the Russian government, in the case of MH17 and in the context of the Ukrainian Crisis in general (with his works being, again, repeatedly debunked). But neither the mainstream media nor the Western government bodies seem to care, and are always happy to use his works as groundbase for their accusations. That’s how propaganda works in the 21st century, my friends. I would blame people’s short memory span for this.

Okay, now, what are some other things the Western mainstream media doesn’t talk about when it comes to the MH17 tragedy? There is a couple. I’ll try to be brief.

Kiev still hasn’t released air-traffic control records that would help to understand why the plane got deviated into the war zone and then ordered to lower its altitude minutes before it was taken down. The preliminary report did contain some snippets in text format, but we can’t possibly know whether those dialogs are real or just made up by SBU and presented to the Dutch Safety Board as transcripts (SBU has a long record of fabricating evidence; I’ll link my post about disinformation in the Ukrainian Crisis in the comments section). We need to hear the actual, verifiable audio-logs. The world is that SBU confiscated them straight after the disaster happened.

Kiev lied about not having military aircrafts in the air on 17.07.2014:

Also, it appears that someone manipulated publicly available air-traffic control data 6-7 days after the plane went down, in an effort to make it look like the MH17 was going through its normal flightpath (numerous sources, including pilots and the Russian Ministry of Defence data, indicate the contrary):

We are yet to see the data from the American satellite that was flying over the region on that day, precisely at the time when the plane was shot down, and see their intel in general (the Russian Ministry of Defence has requested it on 21.07.2014, yet nothing has come out yet, apart from accusatory statements that are backed by nothing but the earlier explained “social media evidence”):


Let’s sum up. How come that the mainstream media shows one-year-old footage on One Year Anniversary, trying to subtly implicate the Novorossia rebels in downing the flight MH17 while failing to report that those were the rebels themselves who gave this footage to the international media, and also failing to report the actual content of what the rebels are saying on the video? Why does it happen that the news outlets don’t bring into public discussion the fact that the official investigation is run by a one-sided, anti-Russian coalition, with a government who is a primary suspect being actively involved in the process? Why is it being conducted in secrecy? How come that both the official investigation and the mainstream media refuse to look at anything other than a crazy conspiracy theory that is based on a couple of low resolution, low quality pictures and video snippets that have SBU fingerprints all over them, while ignoring the real evidence? Why do news outlets keep citing a discredited fraud whose lies nearly caused a war a couple of years back? Why aren’t news outlets concerned about the fact that Washington refuses to release its data? And why the hell nobody is talking about the fact that Kiev should have closed its airspace over the warzone in the first place?
Those and many other questions are to be addressed to the News Corp Australia, and other corporations of the same type that control the discourse in the mainstream media. The questions are, of course, rhetorical.

To me, it appears like the investigation is being postponed on purpose, as there is no evidence to implicate the rebels and/or Russia in this tragedy. Remember the Germanwings plane crash that happened earlier this year? The investigators were able to draw all the necessary data and make all the conclusions within mere days after the tragedy, yet, with the case of MH17, everything we have to date is a vague preliminary report, with the investigation, which has been going for over a year now, being continuously extended.

If you go back to the report done by Graham Phillips (the one that I linked earlier in this post), you’ll see that the investigators have been quite slack and lazy, neglecting some of their key duties (e. g. collecting parts of the fuselage that have holes on them and, therefore, should be analysed by ballistic experts, or interviewing the eye-witnesses). It appears that no one really needs a proper investigation now. Why would they? The case has already been made. All those headlines last year, i. e. “MH17 downed by Putin’s missile” or “Putin killed my son” have already been made, days before the investigators arrived at the site. Who needs an investigation if the public opinion has already been formed and economic sanctions against Russia have already been implemented?

And the fact that the investigation is being conducted in secrecy, with all the extensions, makes it 10 times more suspicious. Like, how do we know that they are not just waiting for the United States to research and develop some crazily advanced hi-tech ways to fake satellite data, for instance?

No, really, just think about it, if they really had any proper evidence against the rebels and/or Russia, wouldn’t they release it straight away, without relying on baseless propaganda and some fraudulent “bloggers”? It’s like they need more time to find and/or fabricate the evidence.

I mean, think what would happen if they release their findings and it turns out that they do not implicate the rebels (or, even worse, will show proof that it was the Kiev government that shot the plane down). What would it do to the credibility of all the politicians who have been accusing Russia from the very beginning? Imagine how foolish Tony Abbott would look if it turns out that neither Russia nor the rebels themselves are responsible…. well, okay, I agree, not the best example, but think about senator John Kerry, PM David Cameron, the entire US State Department. All were making pretty strong accusatory statements right after the crash. What would happen to their reputation and credibility? Moreover, if the truth about the MH17 comes out and it turns out that the rebels are not responsible, it might collapse the entire Ukrainian Crisis narrative about “Russian aggression”, and such. It’s really a house of cards. Also, think what would happened if some smartass makes a suggestion that Russia should demand a financial compensation for all the damage to its economy made by the US and EU sanctions that were baselessly implemented after the tragedy…

On a completely unrelated note, back in the 1960s, there was a proposed US military strategy against Cuba codenamed Operation Northwood. It was declassified recently. Here is a snippet from it. Read it:
I’m not implying anything. I just decided to post it here because I think it’s interesting.

Hmm… What else? Aah! The tribunal thing! Well, to me, it appears that the Russian government opposes this idea because it will make the investigation even more politicised. To me, it appears logical to have the forensic conclusions being presented first, so it would become possible to talk about the legal implications later (not that there is much hope for proper forensic analysis, though…).
By the way, if you want to talk about tribunals for those who shoot down civilian airliners, then, perhaps, you should ask yourself why hasn’t George H. Bush been sentenced for shooting down the Iranian Air Flight 655 on July 3, 1988:

Either way, here are some additional readings on the topic that are worth going through: (I’ve already cited this article above, but it’s a good read on its own)

A very solid RT documentary on the Dutch-led investigation and the problems with it:

Additionally, here are a couple of articles that explain information warfare on the Web and social networks. I have been seeing various bots and trolls propagating the mainstream narratives on the Internet in an unnatural manner (e. g. there are some Twitter and YouTube users who spend all day arguing about topics such the MH17 tragedy, making 15-20 substantial posts per hour for 12+ hours during a week day; obviously those people are doing their full-time job):


I think you I’ve covered everything I wanted to talk about in regards to the MH17 tragedy.
That’s it from me for now.

Always remember to question and analyse everything you hear, see and read, especially when it comes to the mainstream media. Always seek alternative views.
Don’t let them brainwash you into the WW3.

Peace, everyone!

The materials cited in the comments.

[1] Here is the unpublished Anatoly Sharij’s interview to the Dutch media I was citing (scroll down a little for English text):

[2] My previous post about the Ukrainian Crisis, the mainstream media lies about it and the information warfare: 

Alphabet for Kids

Posted: February 16, 2012 in Just for LULz

Let’s learn some letters today!


Stay tuned!


Solarstone was doing a 3 hour set at The Family Nightclub yesterday (21.10.2011). I couldn’t afford to miss this event, considering the fact that I’ve been listening to his works since I was 13-14.

Solarstone is a name of a project that started in the UK in the first half of 1990s. The group consisted of 3 producers back then: Richard Mowatt, Sam Tierney and Andy Bury. The lass two have left the project after a few years, so now the alias belongs to Mowatt himself. Solarstone has always been known as a pioneer in the UK trance music scene. He was among the first non-German trance-artists who became famous on an international level. His atmospheric downtempo sound made a huge influence on the genre during its peak in the 1997-2003 era.

Sadly, not many people know him here, in Australia. This is probably due to the downtempo nature of his production and mixes, which, unlike fast-paced upbeat electronic dance music, is incapable of getting much attention from the “general public” (those people, who aren’t particularly interested in EDM), plus, Solarastone’s peak popularity fell on the late 1990s and the early 2000s, which was before EDM has hit the mainstream in the US and Australia. Also, Solarstone’s style hasn’t change much since the early 2000s. It is still this nice, very atmospheric downtempo trance music. What esle would a trance-nerd like me need? So I went to the Family nightclub to see him performing live.

The entry cost was $15 at the door, but I came there  before 10 pm, so I got in for free. I was really worried that the place might get filled up with intoxicated 18-years-olds (sounds a little bit snobby and anti-social of me, I know, but they often spoil the atmosphere and occupy free space on the dancefloor, without knowledge and appreciation of the EDM-scene… okay, now that just sounded way too hipster-like!). The Family is a popular destination for people on Friday and Saturday nights, because of the prestige of the place (gosh.. I hate this word!). Interestingly, it didn’t happen. At 1 am, when Solarstone started his set, there were only about 50-70 people, the majority of whom were dedicated fans of his production. The rest left quickly (they probably got spooked away by the smooth beatless downtempo music that he started his set with).

During the first hour of his set, Solarstone was playing music from his Electronic Architecture 2 compilation album (his current World tour is about promoting this work, by the way). It was really nice and atmospheric. Surprisingly, it turned out to be quite danceable in the club environment. The visuals were incredible (start watching from 1:20).

Many people were dancing on the stage, right next to the DJ. There were no security or bouncers, no one was pushing. The conditions were perfect.

As the set progressed, the music started to become more and more upbeat. He was playing many classic tunes, such as “Made of Love” by Ferry Corsten, “Sun & Moon” by Above & Beyond, his own “Seven Cities”. The heat was slowly going up.

Soon, he started giving away free CDs and T-shirts with Electronic Architecture 2 logo. I got both the CD (it was a sampler of EA2) and the T-shirt.

I quickly changed the T-shirt from the one I came in to this new one and continued raving wearing the EA2 logo for the rest of the night. I used my old T-shirt to wipe the sweat off my face and neck. The fun was increasing exponentially.

One guy was sitting on his knees and literally worshiping the DJ! Many people joined him… I did too.

During the last hour of his set, Solarstone was playing epic and euphoric trance produced in the late 1990s and early 2000s. The legendary tracks, such as “Synesthesia” by The Thrillseekers, “Jump the Next Train” by Young Parisians (another alias for Solarstone) and many, many others. Everyone went ecstatic at that point.

He finished at 4 am.

I think that was one of the best clubbing experiences I’ve ever had. Like, seriously, it was amazing. Ferry Corsten’s show, to which I went earlier this year, was also great, but the club was so packed-up back then, it was hard to dance. With Solarstone and only 50 dedicated fans – it was like a cult with real raving to excellent trance music. Many trance DJs and producers have become more housey and electro-like in recent years, but Solarstone is still maintaining his production and live DJ-sets at a pure trance level. And that’s good. It gives you such an amazing experience!

So, to sum up: yesterday, I got into the club for free, got a free CD and a T-shirt, raved for 3 hours non-stop to a pure trance set delivered by very experienced hands and got a chance to interact with the trance legend himself. I left the club at 4:20 am, tired and happy. I couldn’t hide that idiotic smile on my face for the rest of the morning, until I got home and went to sleep.

It was such an Epic night!

People suggested “Quantum Levitation” as a topic for a blog post. I haven’t been studying Subatomic/Quantum Physics for over 2 years now and my knowledge of this subject hardly exceeds grade 12 Physics class, so, sorry if some of the things you read here seem incorrect or way too oversimplified. You’re always welcome to correct me and/or add some additional info and in-depth explanation.

So, I think that many of you have already seen this video:

The phenomenon demonstrated in this video has been known for almost 100 years now, and it’s been properly explained in mid-1930’s by German physicists.

See, when cooled to a certain temperature, some materials tend to convert into a state of superconductivity, in which all electrical charges can go through this material without delays and energy loses. Why? I’m not sure. Maybe it has something to do with the energy levels within atomic shells (where all their electrons “spin” in a quantum cloud), considering that the energy would be at a very minimum level under such temperatures (the temperature of liquid nitrogen, which they used to cool down this piece of sapphire in the video, is usually below -196 C), so there might be some weird things occurring.

Interestingly, when a material becomes superconductive, it “pushes” all the magnetic fields out of its body. So, when a ferromagnet is introduced to a cold superconductor, its magnetic force gets repelled, causing it to levitate near this superconductor. And it can also be moved across its surface with no friction whatsoever (as there is no physical contact between these two materials, and the magnetic fields don’t produce friction by definition), so it might be a very efficient mode of transportation one day (if you discount the cost of liquid nitrogen in such quantities, as well as the aerodynamic friction).

My explanation is way too oversimplified, and it doesn’t cover some key things observed in this video-demonstration (such as why the hell gravity has no visible effect on the magnet when it’s “fixed” in space and turned upside-down). I would be really thankful to hear a more in-depth explanation of this phenomenon.

Anyway, what’s the practical application of this? I’m not sure. Of course, hypothetically, you can come up with lots of fun stuff, such as quiet frictionless trains, aircrafts that are powered by magnetic fields alone (UFO, anyone?), some weird space rails (temperature is rather close to the absolute zero out there, so it wouldn’t be problem to turn a pile of metal into powerful superconductors, lol). But those are still nothing more than wild sci-fi fantasies (lol, again). We need to figure out lots of things and solve multiple purely engineering problems first….