The IMF’s Demand That Kiev 'Pacify' the Eastern Rebels Makes Them an Accomplice to Murder

Malaysia Airways Boeing 777

Who knows at this point who actually pushed the button that launched the missile downing Malaysian Airlines MH17 over eastern Ukraine and the murder of 300 innocent people. Was it a mistake by the rebels? A false flag operation by Kiev? But one thing is certain, nothing happens in a vacuum, set and setting are always factors. One factor unmentioned in the western media, or anywhere else that i can find, is the role played the IMF's conditions in pressuring Kiev to continue the violence instead of negotiating a settlement with the rebels.

The Zerohedge article on 05/01/2014, 'IMF Warns Ukraine: Fight For The East Or No Money', says, quoting the IMF announcement of the previous day, "If Ukraine government loses effective control over the east of the country, the $17B IMF bailout would need to be redesigned." Which, roughly translated, appears to mean go to war with pro-Russian forces and 'pacify' the resistance or you don't get your money.

As economist and author Michael Hudson told RT’s Truthseeker [complete interview here]: "IMF and European lending is designed to prop up the Ukrainian currency so the Ukrainian oligarchs can move their money safely to British and US banks. Adding, "The IMF has publicly threatened and blackmailed Ukraine that it will ‘re-design’ its aid package, unless Kiev goes to war on fellow Ukrainians in the East of the country and stops them protesting. Does that not make it now literally a criminal accomplice or instigator of war and murder?"

Hudson concludes ominously, "What is at issue is whether economies throughout the world will let financial leverage dismantle the power of elected governments, and hence of democracy. Governments are sovereign. No government actually needs to pay foreign debts or submit to policies that negate the three definitions of a state: to create its own money, to levy taxes, and to declare war. At issue is who shall rule the world: the emerging 1% as a financial oligarchy, or elected governments. The two sets of aims are antithetical: rising living standards and national independence, or a renting economy, austerity and international dependency."

When assessing who is guilty of a crime establishing motive is usually of prime investigative importance. The criminologist’s question is: who benefits? It seems to me the only side that would stand to profit by this atrocity is Ukraine and the U.S. What would they have to gain by shooting down a friendly aircraft? On the surface, nothing. However, when a person one listens to the rhetoric being ratcheted up by seemingly outraged voices directed at Russia who would have nothing to gain by having a passenger aircraft shot down, or to encouraging the separatists to do it, one sees some of reason for the U.S. side to have murdered 298 humans. False Flag operations have been the CIA's trademark since its inception.This mass murder could be yet one more bloody instance.

Today's article by Finian Cunningham titled 'US Aims at Blowing EU-Russia Rift with Downed Airliner' speaks to the immediate returns such a False Flag operation might generate for Washington's 'Evil Empire'. In this long but very informative piece Finian points out that, "American geopolitical interests are best served by this atrocity, by shocking a laggardly Europe into adopting its aggressive sanctions towards Russia, even though that militates against European economic concerns. Shooting down a civilian airliner would ensure blowing a decisive rift between Europe and Russia."

Countering the U.S. claims that they have satellite and other 'intelligence' proving that the missile was fired from rebel held territory are the reports from local eyewitness that claim they saw Ukrainian army units fire surface-to-air missiles, or official Russian military sources who say they have radar traces on the ill-fated day also implicating the pro-Kiev forces?

So the details here are as clear as mud. The most likely scenario is that a mistake was made by the rebels who thought they were firing at a government transport plane. But, if it isn't a mistake and we may never know for sure, considering that the three biggest questions in any muddy criminal investigation, and the murder of 300 innocent people is a criminal act, all sides, IMO, equally have the 'Means' and the "Oppurtunity' but only one side has the 'Motive'.