Comments on an article by Ron Paul, who has been thoroughly brainwashed by the Russians

Authored by Ron Paul via The Ron Paul Institute,
Just days after the tragic crash of a Malaysian Airlines flight over eastern Ukraine, Western politicians and media joined together to gain the maximum propaganda value from the disaster. It had to be Russia; it had to be Putin, they said. President Obama held a press conference to claim – even before an investigation – that it was pro-Russian rebels in the region who were responsible. His ambassador to the UN, Samantha Power, did the same at the UN Security Council – just one day after the crash!

While western media outlets rush to repeat government propaganda on the event, there are a few things they will not report.
They will not report that the crisis in Ukraine started late last year, when EU and US-supported protesters plotted the overthrow of the elected Ukrainian president, Viktor Yanukovych. Without US-sponsored “regime change,” it is unlikely that hundreds would have been killed in the unrest that followed. Nor would the Malaysian Airlines crash have happened.

This is an often repeated, well-crafted piece of propaganda in its own right.  Yanukovych left of his own accord.  The evidence is that the US and the West in general were overtaken by events.  This was a spontaneous uprising, the kind of thing that puts fear into the US, EU and Russia equally.

Without Yanukovych’ departure, of course, Ukraine would have remained under Russia’s thumb, and Putin would have felt no need to cause trouble.


The media has reported that the plane must have been shot down by Russian forces or Russian-backed separatists, because the missile that reportedly brought down the plane was Russian made. But they will not report that the Ukrainian government also uses the exact same Russian-made weapons.

This is flat wrong.  It is well known and widely reported that Ukraine has about 60 Buk systems.

They have not used them in this conflict because the rebels have no air power.  They are allegedly being supported by Russian MIGs, but Ukraine is too cautious to shoot at them.

They will not report that the post-coup government in Kiev has, according to OSCE monitors, killed 250 people in the breakaway Lugansk region since June, including 20 killed as government forces bombed the city center the day after the plane crash! Most of these are civilians and together they roughly equal the number killed in the plane crash. By contrast, Russia has killed no one in Ukraine, and the separatists have struck largely military, not civilian, targets.

Note the constant use of colored words, a hallmark of propaganda whoever writes it.  “Coup” is a colored, propaganda word.  It is not a coup when almost the whole country is united in the desire to rid itself of a corrupt leader.

In a guerilla war it is impossible to tell who the civilians are.  This is by design.  The separatists (I’ll call them by Ukraine’s propaganda word – terrorists) have taken over the civilian infrastructure.  The Ukrainians are in uniform.  They are military.

They will not report that the US has strongly backed the Ukrainian government in these attacks on civilians, which a State Department spokeswoman called “measured and moderate.”

The United States has given diplomatic support but no logistical support.  Ukraine is fighting pretty much with its own resources.  The “terrorists” are using Russian-supplied arms.

They will not report that neither Russia nor the separatists in eastern Ukraine have anything to gain but everything to lose by shooting down a passenger liner full of civilians.

Shooting the plane down could not have been intentional.  Even suggesting as much is a red herring.

They will not report that the Ukrainian government has much to gain by pinning the attack on Russia, and that the Ukrainian prime minister has already expressed his pleasure that Russia is being blamed for the attack.

Ukraine has gained immense world sympathy from this incident.  Also the shameful aftermath – no access to the site, hidden black boxes, looting by armed and drunken men at the site.

They will not report that the missile that apparently shot down the plane was from a sophisticated surface-to-air missile system that requires a good deal of training that the separatists do not have.

The “terrorists” had shot down several Ukrainian airplanes in the previous week.  When the battle turned against them, they suddenly had air defense missiles.

Who pulled the trigger is an interesting question.  Shooting an innocent civilian aircraft would seem like an indication of a lack of training.  In any case, all sides of this question have been widely covered in the press.  Claiming that “they will not report” is just plain wrong.  A lie.

They will not report that the separatists in eastern Ukraine have inflicted considerable losses on the Ukrainian government in the week before the plane was downed.

Of course it is reported!  Read the Kyiv Post for a daily count of Ukraine’s battle losses.  I am sure that Ukraine imposes some censorship, as does any country at war, but this war is so ill-defined that it cannot be very effective.

They will not report how similar this is to last summer’s US claim that the Assad government in Syria had used poison gas against civilians in Ghouta. Assad was also gaining the upper hand in his struggle with US-backed rebels and the US claimed that the attack came from Syrian government positions. Then, US claims led us to the brink of another war in the Middle East. At the last minute public opposition forced Obama to back down – and we have learned since then that US claims about the gas attack were false.

I have to admit that I was convinced by the claims that Obama was rushing to war in Syria.  I believed Putin.  Events in Ukraine make me wonder if I was a victim of Russian propagande then as well. Anyhow, it worked.

Of course it is entirely possible that the Obama administration and the US media has it right this time, and Russia or the separatists in eastern Ukraine either purposely or inadvertently shot down this aircraft. The real point is, it’s very difficult to get accurate information so everybody engages in propaganda. At this point it would be unwise to say the Russians did it, the Ukrainian government did it, or the rebels did it. Is it so hard to simply demand a real investigation?

He says this with his fingers crossed all the way up to his elbows.  As committed as Ron Paul is to the Russian side of the story, there is no way he will ever recant.
Many are demanding an investigation.  The Russians have and will continue to slow-roll and stonewall any investigation that might help.  If they had any intention of being helpful, they would have allowed access to the crash site.


2 thoughts on “Comments on an article by Ron Paul, who has been thoroughly brainwashed by the Russians

  1. How I responded to Paul about his 7/20/14 article before I read your thoughts:

    Here are my thoughts about your thoughts on the destruction of MA17 in Ukraine. But first I should identify myself as a 72 year-old Alaskan who has not been a member of any political party for 30 years but who generally adopts Libertarian positions coupled with Alaska Independence party positions.

    Since I have a friend whom I knew in the San Francisco Bay Area (where I grew up) who purposely moved to Kiev seven years ago, I tend to follow events there. I freely admit that my information is second hand. Regardless, I think you are dead wrong on several counts:

    1. Use of the term “propaganda value”. Propaganda presupposes a cause. The main stream media tends to parrot Obama (or explain away his idiocies, ignore his disregard for the Constitution, etc.) or Obama’s causes or positions. Our wishy washy president has exhibited little enthusiasm for becoming involved in Ukraine. Thus I think that your statement reflects the observation that the longer one opposes somebody, the more he becomes like that somebody.

    2. You claim that the EU and the US helped overthrow Yanukovytch. From what I read, he high-tailed it with lots of loot as evidenced by his mansions (in contrast with the way he left his country). Recall that prior to running off Yanukovytch Ukraine had the revolts of one kind or another. Here is the Wikipedia entry:
    “Since the start of Ukraine’s independence movement in 1990, the square has been the traditional place for political rallies, including four large-scale radical protest campaigns: the 1989 student “Revolution on Granite”, the 2001 “Ukraine without Kuchma”, the 2004Orange Revolution, and the ongoing Euromaidan.”

    Briefly, Ukrainians had a fair amount of experience holding revolutions in their country without the EU or US promoting or helping revolutions. Your comment looks like you’re Putin’s tool. You provide no proof that the EU or US sponsored regime change.

    3. It’s far fetched to make the claim that there would be peace were the EU and US not involved. Russia has no or minimum natural borders like the Pacific and Atlantic Oceans separating the USA from lots of countries. Russia has a history of wanting compliant vassal states adjacent to its borders. With the not-very-subtle annexation of the Crimean peninsula and the continuing not-very-subtle incursions into the Ukraine’s eastern oblasts, it is easy to say that MA flight 17 would not have been destroyed by a Russian-made missile. It might have been any flight. It’s hardly profound or informative to predict that a single flight would not have had trouble. But it’s certainly foreseeable that civilian planes may look like military planes in a revolution, conflict, or war (take your pick). And since the Ukrainian “rebels” had no air support, who had the means, motive, and opportunity to knock a plane out of the sky? The Ukraine government (and I think it as legitimate a government as the early government of the U.S. under John Hanson) had no rebel targets for SAMs in the area. So, so what if the Ukraine military has the same SAMs as those supplied to the rebels? It takes lots of money to move the machinery and weapons to fight a war; money the government in Kiev doesn’t have – but Yanukovytch got his share.

    4. Have you some independence in Ukraine to verify that the Russians killed no one. How many Ukrainians did Stalin starve? Ukrainians are regarded as having little of no culture or sense by Russians.

    5. “They [the press] will not report that the US has strongly backed the Ukrainian government.” Did I miss Obama’s call to mobilize to help Ukraine? Has Obama mobilized much other than the IRS? The only thing that Obama has strongly supported is Muslim rebels, abortion, Obamacare, spying on US citizens, illegal immigrants, and a few other unAmerican things but no Ukraine.

    Anyway, you can see where this is going. Present some facts, produce straightforward conclusions, and quit being something like Putin’s tool if not his tool.

    Donald Braun
    Alaska Voter 01541859

  2. Ron Paul seems to have overshot here. His Russia tilt in his critique ignores Russia’s long term interest in controlling the Ukraine. Their invasion, putting in trained military and reservist into the situation, supplying arms and advanced weapon system, and recent history of downing planes in the regions is sufficient to point the finger to Russia. How anyone could expect Ukraine government forces to shoot down a plane going East and already over “speratist/russia” control is a puzzle.

    So Paul overshoots and plays out his more isolationist themes. Why not tackle the real reasons the US is so reluctant to become involved? Progressive anti war and isolationist who call some of the tunes for Obama, the penultimate isolationist, should the real target here. Not a bit player like Paul.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s