Thread by @IbnRiad

Thread: a deeper investigation of the downing of the Ukrainian flight during the Iranian attack on the US at Ain al-Assad base in Iraq.

This thread is a follow-up to my previous, about how the accidental downing of Flight 752 was used by the US to attack the Iranian government, and how their greater plan was foiled by Iran - all of which is underpinned by the US having had foreknowledge of the downing.

You can find that previous thread here:

https://twitter.com/IbnRiad/status/1216217400598761474?s=20

Now this thread follows up on how the US could have known of the downing beforehand - by exploring the different ways in which the US could have set Iran up for the downing.

This is going to be a long one, so buckle up.

Let us begin by taking a look at the very concept of the US trying to trick an enemy nation into downing a civilian airliner. In principle, & considering their rich history of bloody & reckless acts & false-flags, there would be nothing surprising about such an action.

But we can take it further: this exact outcome has been attempted before, by an ally of the US against an ally of Iran.

Precisely this plot was attempted against Syria in December 2018, when Israeli jets bombed the country then swiftly took cover behind nearby civilian jets.

A report of this incident:

mintpressnews.com/analysts-confi…

It is clear their intention was not only to hide, but also to trick the Syrian air defenses into downing a civilian plane, which they could then use to pile all kinds of political pressure on Syria, incriminate it, even justify further military action (whether by them or the US).

This Israeli attempt is firm indication that this trick is already firmly within the imperial playbook, and would be equally as viable as an option for the US.

Thus, if the US did indeed have a hand in the downing, it would not even be the 1st time this trick is attempted.

Now let's look at the case of the Ukrainian airliner. Though we have no outright evidence yet, we know the US's motives, and we know this trick has been tried before. Thus what is left is to explore the ways in which the US could have realistically conducted this interference.

There are two unlikely possibilities I will discount immediately. The first is a mole in the IRGC who intentionally fired the AA missile. The IRGC is known for fierce loyalty, & the chance of the US bribing the specific person manning the correctly-positioned battery is very low.

The second highly unlikely possibility is the US stationing a friendly element (possibly MEK) on the ground with a shoulder-mounted MANPAD. If nothing else, the IRGC would simply not admit responsibility missile had not come from their actual AD systems.

We have to consider the IRGC's official statement, which *may* intentionally omit mention of US interference, but which I do not believe would contain outright lies. The missiles did come from their air defenses, and the firing *was* a mistake. But ... mistakes can be encouraged.

It is important remember that the US and Iran have long been engaged in a cyber warfare battle, including events like this:

theguardian.com/world/2019/jun…

(This is not to say that the US is successful in all its hacks, but it is in fact a two-way battle: the success of the Iranian missiles hitting Ain al-Assad without being detected or shot down is very likely an Iranian cyber warfare success as much as it is a military one).

So, *could* the US have interfered in a way that made it more likely that this error took place?

The answer is yes - it could.

Let us look at the possibilities.

1. US interference in the flight course of the Ukrainian plane.

This is the simplest explanation, based on initial reports that the Ukrainian plane changed course, away from its flight path, heading either back to the airport or towards downtown Tehran.

(You can through this thread to see some speculation about the heading of the flight based on debris locations):

https://twitter.com/bleidl/status/1215882065587179520?s=20

It is no great stretch of the imagination to say that the US has the technology to take control of civilian jets, especially with Boeing being itself a giant of the US military industry. The US ability to hack the plane is actually the least problematic part of this explanation.

I am confident this could have been done, and there have been suggestions that the heading the plane took, plus its altitude, made its radar cross-section resemble that of an enemy target.

(see also the linked thread at the bottom of this tweet)

https://twitter.com/abuDharr10/status/1215853118128300032?s=20

Thus this would have been simple: the plane could have been made to change course in a manner that made it fly towards a sensitive military zone and take on the shape (and altitude) of a hostile target in Iranian radar readings.

But the statement made by Gen. Hajizadeh of the IRGC tells a different story: he insists that the plane did not change course dramatically before being shot down.

Were it not for that statement, I would have called this most likely way for the to US "encourage" the shoot-down.

Again: while I think there is a chance that the IRGC's statement told a certain perspective of the truth - with certain omissions - I do not think they will have told outright lies.

https://twitter.com/shafei_d/status/1216097619312873475?s=20

2. US interference in Iranian air defense readings

We now consider another explanation. There exists ELINT technology called Suter which, among other things, can hijack air defense displays to show a falsified image different to the reality.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suter_(co…

Suter can:

- Show normal air traffic screens to hide bombers

- Show screens with fabricated hostile aircraft, even when none exist

- Intercept comm's

- Shroud enemy in a debilitating fog of war

In short, just the kind of thing that would lead to a mistaken downing...

To me, this seems by far the most likely way the US could have silently interfered in a way that directly caused the 'human error' of firing at the civilian aircraft: by simply hacking into the displays of the air defense unit in question, and showing it what they want it to see.

This makes even more sense considering the Tor M1's that were stationed in Tehran, according to Moon of Alabama, had only a rudimentary radar and was not linked up to the rest of the AD system, as they'd been brought in for an extra layer of defense during the attack.

(The Tor M1 has been identified as the air defense unit responsible for downing the flight - you can read more in the Moon of Alabama article, which can be found here, and which I will discuss in a bit more detail later):

moonofalabama.org/2020/01/was-th…

(I've also been pointed to a WikiLeaks doc. indicating that Iran's Tor M1's are actually compromised, making this conclusion even more painfully likely. I won't go into further detail right now - let's just say the Tor M1 being responsible makes everything even more suspect.)

This explanation would also perfectly fit the IRGC statement: the flight did not change course, it did not need to - it was enough to trick the AD readings of the Tor M1 in question into showing a hostile target there where there were none.

It would also make sense for the IRGC to take full responsibility for the error, & to accept it as a mistake of their own, for indeed it was human error that caused the firing - even if that error was based on falsified readings presented by a hacked system.

So too does it make sense for them not to openly discuss what had encouraged this human error - the hack being difficult to give evidence for, while also revealing a lost 'battle' in the cyber-war with the US (even while the attack on Ain al-Assad was an cyber success for Iran).

3. US direct hacking of Iranian air defenses

A third possibility we must entertain, even if I find it less convincing than the above, is a direct hack by the US to make the Tor unit fire at the Ukrainian jet, skipping the step of tricking the soldier manning the battery.

This merely cuts out the middle man, and seems less likely because the Iranian side would be immediately warned of foul play had their anti-air batteries gone off unannounced, and would be far less likely to adopt it as a human error of their own.

One could argue that Iran prefer to take the blame than to admit the hack, but I find it difficult to believe they would accept the backlash had it not been truly a soldier of theirs who had pressed the button. For this reason, I continue to find display hack far more convincing.

So, then, we have seen some of the possibilities, which serve only as examples of the ways in which the US could have interfered, & without contradicting the IRGC's narrative: in scenario 1 & scenario 2, human error is still partly responsible - but, not fully.

There are no doubt plenty of other ways in which the US could have used electronic warfare to instigate the tragic mistake that the Iranian air defenses made - some of which may be knowable, others secret and classified. I have only given some examples, by way of demonstration.

Did the US do it?

It cannot be said outright that they did (or didn't)- it can only be demonstrated that they had the means, motivation and precedent to do so - and this is what I believe I have done.

Based on:

1. an Israeli attempt to burden Syria with the same tragedy barely a year ago

2. US-led protests in Iran that immediately capitalized on the downing of the jet

3. the feasible ways the US could have intervened

- US involvement cannot be discounted.

This is in addition to other suspicious or eyebrow-raising elements, like the fact that Bellingcat received a video of the airliner on fire in the critical seconds.

@bleidl puts it very well:

https://twitter.com/bleidl/status/1215449022384787456?s=20

@bleidl This whole affair, from very early on, had all the hallmarks of a US false flag of some kind, which is why so many of us immediately ridiculed the idea of Iran being responsible, and why so many of us were shocked when Iran revealed that it had done so, even if accidentally.

@bleidl At the same time, there is still a good chance I am wrong, and I cannot at all discount the possibility of a genuine mistake having been made, with no US involvement whatsoever.

Very little can be entirely ruled out. All we can do is look at all the possibilities.

@bleidl For this purpose, I would also like to share with you agaion the brilliant @MoonofA's article, which makes a very convincing case for how a genuine human error (with no US interference) could have taken place:

moonofalabama.org/2020/01/was-th…

@bleidl @MoonofA MoA cites: fog of war, comm. jamming, a real threat of imminent war, news of approaching US cruise missiles, a 8-10 second time-frame for the AD operator to react, the responsible Tor unit having been newly added, not integrated with the AD system, & having no effective radar.

@bleidl @MoonofA The Saker also finds US interference unlikely, though not impossible:

thesaker.is/of-aircraft-ho…

@bleidl @MoonofA On the other hand, the esteemed Pepe Escobar is highly convinced there was foul play by the USA, which you can see across the various posts on his Facebook page:

facebook.com/pepe.escobar.7…

@bleidl @MoonofA In the past few hours, as I was putting this thread together, this news has also broken, which seems very interesting indeed.

It would appear that the idea of an American con of some kind is slowly gaining attention & credibility.

https://twitter.com/khoosh_/status/1216782662968455168?s=20

@bleidl @MoonofA I have presented what I hope is a feasible reasoning on what could have happened, how and why, as well as a range of possibilities & also opinions.

If further news breaks, further information emerges, or I find further analysis to make, I will continue to add to this thread.

@bleidl @MoonofA Thanks to @NazeerSuliman, @bleidl, @gumby4christ, @BohdarH, @habib_dosti and many others for pointing me to various articles, information & analysis.

@bleidl @MoonofA @NazeerSuliman @gumby4christ @BohdarH @habib_dosti This is the article to read for more on Suter and other ways the US army has of manipulating vision, data and just about everything else:

mil-embedded.com/guest-blogs/si…

Just look at the phrasing of the conclusion to the article...

@bleidl @MoonofA @NazeerSuliman @gumby4christ @BohdarH @habib_dosti On Boeing being susceptible to hacks:

aviationtoday.com/2017/11/08/boe…

@bleidl @MoonofA @NazeerSuliman @gumby4christ @BohdarH @habib_dosti From the great Pepe Escobar:

The guy who filmed the plane hit from a derelict car park at 6am turns out to be Nariman Gharib, anti-gov dissident. What a coincidence, that an anti-government activist happens to be in precisely the right spot at the right time!

sputniknews.com/amp/columnists…

(Thanks @dragin97)

If nothing else, it’s enough indication of foul play that an anti-gov. activist was wandering around the precisely correct spot and filming the sky in order to forward the video through to the famously fraudulent Bellingcat. If a 100% accidental downing, how did this happen?

https://twitter.com/IbnRiad/status/1217169174444769280?s=20

(Credit to @fcn_84 as well!)

@fcn_84

https://twitter.com/izak_novak/status/1217170737078980608?s=20

@fcn_84 A thread by @3lwiyahhh summarizing the thoughts of Dr. Iman Khosravi (postdoctoral degree in Remote Sensing Engineering, University of Tehran), who considers external interference in downing of flight 752 'not far-fetched'.

https://twitter.com/3lwiyahhh/status/1217094113021104128

@fcn_84 @3lwiyahhh Dr. Khosravi:
- Iran has one of the most advanced air defenses in the world; shot down a supposedly "invisible" Global Hawk, among achievements.

- GPS satellites controlled by NASA, who has ability to show fake signal (& this played a role in the fall of Saddam's Iraq in 2003)

@fcn_84 @3lwiyahhh Dr. Khosravi:
- A Boeing could easily have its GPS tampered with, to change bearing towards a sensitive Iranian base, & appear as a threat.

(This is what I call Scenario 1: US interference in the navigation of Flight 752, for which Dr. Khosravi now provides a workable framework)

@fcn_84 @3lwiyahhh Dr. Khosravi even suggests the US had two plans: either successfully crash the flight into the Iranian military base and score casualties (without being directly implicated), or else force the shoot-down (as occurred).

@fcn_84 @3lwiyahhh In any case, a lot more is slowly coming out about these possibilities as time goes on. It still could be nothing, and this could be a blind alley, but equally, we should keep an eye out for more information as it becomes available.

@fcn_84 @3lwiyahhh

https://twitter.com/IbnRiad/status/1217189855613947904?s=20

@fcn_84 @3lwiyahhh Article by Joe Quinn, essayist and author, which follows the same logic, has the same hypothesis and reaches the same conclusions as I do in this thread:

(Thanks to @Epsilonm!)

joequinn.net/2020/01/13/was…

@fcn_84 @3lwiyahhh @Epsilonm "According to Russian Experts: The US Bears 'Partial Responsibility' for the “Human Error” Which Caused the Ukrainian plane crash"

paulcraigroberts.org/2020/01/13/acc…