Tag: vlucht 9268

Hier een scherpe analyse van Justin Raimondo, over vlucht 9268, die vorige week neerkwam in de Sinaï woestijn. De speculaties, de politieke bemoeienis, de gevolgen en een mogelijke ‘verantwoordelijke’ passeren de revue. Onder dit artikel kan u klikken voor een vertaling, al neemt het ‘downloaden’ wel wat tijd in beslag:

Who
Downed Metrojet Flight 9268?Was
it ISIS – or somebody else?By
Justin Raimondo

November 06, 2015
“Information
Clearing House”
– “Antiwar”
– First they said the downing of Russian Metrojet Flight 9268 was
most likely due to Russia’s “notorious”
regional airlines, which supposedly are rickety and unreliable. The
Egyptian government denied that terrorism is even a possibility, with
Egyptian despot Abdel Fatah al-Sisi proclaiming:

“When there is
propaganda that it crashed because of Isis, this is one way to damage
the stability and security of Egypt and the image of Egypt. Believe
me, the situation in Sinai – especially in this limited area – is
under our full control.”

However, it soon came
out that the person in charge of Sharm el-Sheikh airport, where the
Russia plane had landed before taking off again, had been “replaced”
– oh, but not
because of anything to do with the downing of the Russian passenger
plane! As the Egyptian authorities put
it:

“Adel Mahgoub,
chairman of the state company that runs Egypt’s civilian airports,
says airport chief Abdel-Wahab Ali has been ‘promoted’ to become
his assistant. He said the move late Wednesday had nothing to do with
media skepticism surrounding the airport’s security. Mahgoub said
Ali is being replaced by Emad el-Balasi, a pilot.”

Laughable, albeit in a
sinister way, and yet more evidence that something wasn’t quite
right: after all, everyone knows the Egyptian government does not
have the Sinai, over which the plane disintegrated in mid air, under
its “full control.” ISIS, which claimed
responsibility for the crash hours after it occurred, is all
over that peninsula.

Still, the denials
poured in, mostly from US government officials such
as Director of National Intelligence James
“Liar-liar-pants-on-fire”
Clapper, who said ISIS involvement was “unlikely.” Then they told
us it couldn’t have been ISIS because they supposedly don’t have
surface-to-air missiles that can reach the height attained by the
downed plane. Yet that wasn’t very convincing either, because a)
How do they know what ISIS has in its arsenal?, and b) couldn’t
ISIS or some other group have smuggled
a bomb on board?

The better part of a
week after the crash, we
have this:

“Days
after authorities dismissed claims that ISIS brought down a Russian
passenger jet, a U.S. intelligence analysis now suggests that the
terror group or its affiliates
planted a bomb on the plane.

“British Foreign
Minister Philip Hammond said his government believes there is a
‘significant possibility’ that an explosive device caused the
crash. And a Middle East source briefed on intelligence matters also
said it appears likely someone placed a bomb aboard the aircraft.”

According to numerous
news
reports, intercepts of “internal communications” of the Islamic
State/ISIS group provided evidence that it wasn’t an accident but a
terrorist act. Those intercepts must have been available to US and UK
government sources early on, yet these same officials said they had
no “direct evidence,” as Clapper put it, of terrorist
involvement. Why is that? And furthermore: why the general
unwillingness of Western governments and media to jump to their usual
conclusion when any air disaster occurs,

and attribute it to
terrorism?

The answer is simple:
they didn’t want to arouse any sympathy for the Russians. Russia,
as we all know, is The Enemy – considered even worse, in some
circles, than the jihadists.  Indeed, there’s a whole section
of opinion-makers
devoted to the idea that  we must help
Islamist crazies in Syria, including
al-Qaeda’s affiliate, known as al-Nusra, precisely in order to
stop the Evil Putin from extending Russian influence into the region.

In a broader sense,
the reluctance to acknowledge that this was indeed a terrorist act is
rooted in a refusal to acknowledge the commonality of interests that
exists between Putin’s Russia and the West. The downing of the
Metrojet is just the latest atrocity carried out by the head-choppers
against the Russian people: this includes not only the Beslan
school massacre, in which over 700 children were taken hostage by
Chechen Islamists, but also the five
apartment bombings that took place in 1999. The real extent of
Western hostility to Russia, and the unwillingness to realize that
Russia has been a major terrorist target, is underscored by the
shameful
propaganda pushed by the late Alexander Litvinenko, and endorsed
by Sen. John McCain, which claims that the bombings were an
“inside job” carried out by the Russian FSB – a version of
“trutherism” that, if uttered in the US in relation to the 9/11
attacks, is routinely (and rightly) dismissed as sheer crankery. But
where the Russians are concerned it’s not only allowable, it’s
the default. A particularly egregious example is Russophobic hack
Michael D. Weiss, who, days before the downing of the Russian
passenger plane, solemnly informed us that Putin was “sending
jihadists to join ISIS.” Boy oh boy, talk about ingratitude!

This downright creepy
unwillingness to express any sympathy or sense of solidarity with the
Russian people ought to clue us in to something we knew all along:
that the whole “war on terrorism” gambit is as phony as a
three-dollar bill. If US government officials were actually concerned
about the threat of terrorist violence directed at innocent
civilians, they would partner up with Russia in a joint effort to
eradicate the threat: that this isn’t happening in Syria, or
anywhere else, is all too evident. Not to mention our canoodling
with “moderate” Chechen terrorists, openly encouraging them to
carry on their war with Putin’s Russia. Our “war on terrorism”
is simply a pretext for spying on the American people, and most of
the rest of the world, and cementing the power of the State on the
home front, not to mention fattening up an already grotesquely obese
“defense” budget.

With the belated
admission that the downing of the Russian passenger jet was an act of
terrorism, we are beginning to hear that this a tremendous blow
to Putin’s prestige at home – something no one would dare
utter about Obama’s or Cameron’s “prestige” if the Metrojet
had been an American or British passenger plane. They say it’s
“blowback” due to Russia’s actions in Syria, with the clear
implication that it’s deserved. And yet, according to US officials
and the usual suspects, the Russians aren’t
hitting
ISIS so much as they’re smiting
the “moderate” Islamist head-choppers – the “Syrian rebels,”
as they’re known — who are being funded, armed, and encouraged by
the West.

If
that’s true, then what kind of blowback are we talking about –
and from which direction is it coming? Given this, isn’t it
entirely possible that Metrojet Flight 9268 was downed by US-aided
–and-supported “moderates,” who moderately decided to get back
at Putin?

Justin Raimondo is
the editorial director of Antiwar.com, and a senior fellow at the
Randolph Bourne Institute. He is a contributing editor at The
American Conservative,
and writes a monthly column for Chronicles.
He is the author of Reclaiming
the American Right: The Lost Legacy of the Conservative Movement[Center
for Libertarian Studies, 1993; Intercollegiate Studies Institute,
2000], and An
Enemy of the State: The Life of Murray N. Rothbard[Prometheus
Books, 2000].

Click
for
Spanish,
German,
Dutch,
Danish,
French,
translation- Note- Translation
may take a moment to load.

Zie ook: ‘Koenders geeft alleen reisadvies voor vliegveld Sharm-el-Sheikh…..‘

       en: ‘Van Bommel vindt Egypte een fijn vakantieland……… AUW!!!‘

Voor meer berichten over/met vliegramp S, Sharm-el-Sheikh, Rusland, Putin, Tsjetsjenië, Cameron, Philip Hammond, ISIS en/of Abdul Fatah al-Sisi, klik op het desbetreffende label, onder dit bericht.

Excuus voor de layout, die ik niet juist kreeg.