The tragic events of this week, which saw Malaysian Airlines flight MH17 shot down over the Russia-Ukraine border, killing 298 people, should not be undermined. It’s tragic, there’s no understating that. Despite the clickbait headline and the image caption, I’m not here to make fun.
It raises plenty of questions, too – such as why a plane would fly over a well-advertised conflict zone despite warnings being distributed as recently as that day, why Malaysia Air are having the worst airline PR year in history, and of course – who fired the shot?
Do I think Tony Abbott had anything to do with it? HA! Don’t be so stupid. If you clicked the link in hope of an answer of ‘yes’ then you’re a fucking idiot, but thanks for visiting.
I appreciate the ability many people in Western society have developed to question the news, and understand that just because something is printed doesn’t make it fact. While distrust isn’t a great thing to foster, it’s a handy attribute to have – to a point.
Do I think Putin had anything to do with it? Honestly – do you? Is he a despot of North Korean proportions? I find him entertaining, sure, and they have similar photo collections but no, I don’t believe he is. When I watched him, sitting next to Sepp Blatter at the FIFA World Cup Final last week, personally I thought he was the lesser of two evils – though that says more about Blatter I think.
The question becomes, with the world watching, is someone like Putin stupid enough to practically begin a full-scale international conflict when he’s already having enough trouble on the domestic front? By shooting down a plane full of Dutch people and Aids experts? That just happens to be from the same airline that brought us the greatest aviation mystery of modern times and was flying over an area it shouldn’t?
At this point you might be snorting derisively and wondering “well, what do you think really happened then, dickhead?” Personally, I believe that the plane was indeed shot down by pro-Russian separatists, but that it was most likely an independent action. Further to that, I’m happy to wait and see what happens, and what comes out. Yes, if they did it they were using highly technical weapons, and if they have those weapons they probably came from Russia, but that doesn’t mean Putin personally picked up the phone and said “quick, shoot that shit down!”
False flag theories have been around forever, and they’re already beginning for the MH17 tragedy less than 48 hours after the events occurred. Given that they’re providing all the intelligence on the issue, and that they’ve spent the last week enforcing stronger economic sanctions on Russia, the United States are prime suspects. With a lack of foreign intervention so far in the Ukraine-Russian conflict, wouldn’t orchestrating such an act provide justification? This is what a false-flag theory is, in case you didn’t know.
There are a number of people out there who believe similar actions took place during Pearl Harbour and September 11, so it’s not a new idea. It’s a natural by-product of human curiosity and the previously mentioned distrust, but it becomes fact to some people. I tweeted yesterday about my ‘keen anticipation’ (sarcasm probably missed) for all the false flag theories that would emerge, and funnily enough the retweet I got was from a false-flag theorist (sarcasm DEFINITELY missed), who was already under the impression that the US were responsible, and getting that message out there.
As I’ve said, I’m ok with questioning official lines along the grounds of vested interest, but isn’t then taking the idea you want to believe and trying to state it as fact doing the same thing? You complain that people will easily fall into the trap of believing what the media tell them but then you scoff when someone dares question what you believe? It confuses me. When they say “don’t believe the truth”, they’re not telling you to free your mind, what they actually mean is “believe my bullshit instead”.
I can understand where the theory comes from, to an extent, but what’s stopping us from positing a whole bunch of other theories? Given that Israel began their ground offensive in Gaza on the same day, perhaps they wanted a news story that would take the lead over anything they did? I’m watching the news right now, and after a whole 15 minutes on MH17, Gaza is going to get a mention, followed by more MH17. Governments like to announce their worst policies on days that they know they won’t be the lead news story, so why wouldn’t Israel do the same? They have ties to the US, and they’d be helping each other out don’t ya know.
Let’s go even further – given that the vast majority of people on the plane were Dutch, how do we know this wasn’t a retaliatory attack from some disillusioned Mexicans, Costa Ricans or Spaniards who wanted World Cup revenge?
What about Indonesia? They had a war with Malaysia back in the 60’s over the island of Borneo, perhaps they still hold some ill-will and wanted to disable their rivals national carrier so they can launch another offensive on the island?
What about Malaysia Airlines themselves? Probably headed towards bankruptcy, and with a tarnished international reputation, why not change your own narrative to the innocent victims of aggression instead of ineptitude?
But really, who had some horrible news this week that they want to bury? Who needs a boost in the polls much like Howard did before 9/11? Who knows that during a national tragedy people look for hope and inspiration from their leaders? Who’s never been looked at for hope and inspiration previously in his life? TONY ABBOTT! What better a way to bury the Carbon Tax repeal and bring the nation together than a tragedy?
It’s a stupid, offensive theory based on little more than coincidence, distrust and speculation.
The sad thing is, most of them will be – and the truth will be buried somewhere too.