Game Changer (if true): What Did US Spy Satellites See in Ukraine?

[Karmadillo]

Interesting to see how this will play out as evidence (as opposed to speculation masquerading as evidence) accumulates.

http://consortiumnews.com/2014/07/20/what-did-us-spy-satellites-see-in-ukraine/

Exclusive: The U.S. media’s Ukraine bias has been obvious, siding with the Kiev regime and bashing ethnic Russian rebels and Russia’s President Putin. But now – with the scramble to blame Putin for the Malaysia Airlines shoot-down – the shoddy journalism has grown truly dangerous, says Robert Parry.

By Robert Parry

<edit>

The dog-not-barking question on the catastrophe over Ukraine is: what did the U.S. surveillance satellite imagery show? It’s hard to believe that – with the attention that U.S. intelligence has concentrated on eastern Ukraine for the past half year that the alleged trucking of several large Buk anti-aircraft missile systems from Russia to Ukraine and then back to Russia didn’t show up somewhere.

Yes, there are limitations to what U.S. spy satellites can see. But the Buk missiles are about 16 feet long and they are usually mounted on trucks or tanks. Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 also went down during the afternoon, not at night, meaning the missile battery was not concealed by darkness.

<edit>

What I’ve been told by one source, who has provided accurate information on similar matters in the past, is that U.S. intelligence agencies do have detailed satellite images of the likely missile battery that launched the fateful missile, but the battery appears to have been under the control of Ukrainian government troops dressed in what look like Ukrainian uniforms.

The source said CIA analysts were still not ruling out the possibility that the troops were actually eastern Ukrainian rebels in similar uniforms but the initial assessment was that the troops were Ukrainian soldiers. There also was the suggestion that the soldiers involved were undisciplined and possibly drunk, since the imagery showed what looked like beer bottles scattered around the site, the source said.

more...

[KoKo]

1. Robert Parry has been a good reporter on the Democratic Side...

Thanks...will check it out.

Meanwhile Pepe Escobar has an interesting post in the Asia Times which is an interesting read, also:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12691139

[Karmadillo]

4. Thanks for the link. That, too, is an excellent article. The power

of bad reporting in the service of oligarchy, no matter how this plays out in the end, is frightening.

[sabrina 1]

6. Two excellent journalists both of whom have been right far more often than the MSM

over the past years. Thanks for that link, Pepe Excobar was one of the most reliable sources during the Bush era.

[bananas]

84. Agree. Over at conservativecrackpots.com they really hate Parry and Escobar. nt

Last edited Mon Jul 21, 2014, 06:21 PM - Edit history (1)

[kelliekat44]

152. Well what are they going to do about the teenager and the farmer who say they saw the missiles being

launched by the rebels? That was a first report over the radio just after the incident. I looked for a report on that in our media and found none. I guess they have been disappeared?

"However a report on the website of Russian state television from late June described how the rebels in Donetsk had taken control of a Ukrainian missile defence facility that was equipped with Buk systems. The report said that the rebels planned to "defend the sky over Donetsk" using the missiles.

On Thursday afternoon a social media site attributed to Igor Strelkov, a Russian citizen who has emerged as the commander of rebel forces in Donetsk, announced that the rebels had shot down an An-26 Ukrainian transport plane, and also that there was "information about a second plane". The post was later removed.

Audio was circulated on social media, apparently released by Ukrainian security services, purporting to be an intercepted conversation of pro-Russia rebels confirming they had shot down a civilian jet."
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jul/18/mh17-pressure-on-russia-as-world-demands-answers-over-planes-destruction

[roamer65]

2. We know exactly what happened from the satellites.

We're giving Putin a chance to "come clean" before the evidence is brought before the UN.

[ThoughtCriminal]

3. Doubtful that even the best military satellites have the resolution

to identify Ukrainian uniforms.

[alcibiades_mystery]

5. Much less scattered beer bottles

The "source" forgot to name the brand of beer!

[Karmadillo]

8. Everything you wanted to know about the spy satellites

The side-by-side photo comparison is beyond my ability to link to, but it's worth a click to see how detailed the image is.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2014/03/20/behind-the-spy-satellite-tech-that-led-mh370-investigators-to-australia/

Everything you wanted to know about the spy satellites that might’ve found MH370
By Brian Fung March 20

<edit>

That's consistent with what Mark Lowenthal, a former intelligence official, thinks, too. According to Lowenthal, president of the Arlington-based Intelligence and Security Academy, commercial satellite imagery can make out objects that are as small as 20 inches across. But Lowenthal notes that according to various press reports military satellites are about twice again as good, capable of resolution down to 10 inches. The Federation of American Scientists has a great side-by-side comparison of the same image sampled at various resolutions.

more...

[ThoughtCriminal]

10. 10 cm (4-inches) is probably the maximum for any existing - in ideal conditions.

And these satellites do not provide continuous coverage of a specific location. Low Earth orbit means you have to be lucky to catch something.

In any case, any source that claims to identify uniforms and see scattered beer bottles in a satellite photo is almost certainly unreliable.

[stevenleser]

11. They absolutely have that ability. But there is a serious flaw in the OP article.

And that is, in order to have that kind of resolution, the satellites have to be focused on that object.

Our satellites could tell you what I am wearing in great detail the moment I walk out of my house. But they have to be completely focused on me and a rather small area around me. Those satellites would then not even see what is happening a block away.

What this means is, in order to have caught the launch and the uniforms of those who launched the missile, they would have already had to be focused on that particular missile battery in advance. The chance that the satellites were randomly focused on this battery in advance of the launch against the plane is so low as to be negligible and so we know the article in the OP is complete B.S.

That particular site is known for being in the tank for Putin. This is yet more evidence of that.

[ThoughtCriminal]

18. Yes and no

Yes you are correct about timing, but at best it might be able to tell that you are wearing red instead of green even if was perfectly positioned. The physics of light and diameter of the largest satellite we can put in orbit limit the resolution, and contrary to TV and movies, there is no "Zoom and enhance" to fix that.

Here is what typical Ukrainian uniforms look like:
http://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/men-in-military-uniform-wait-to-cast-their-vote-in-a-news-photo/493716641

Even this close, the nationality is unclear.

[stevenleser]

22. Well , let me be clear, I was in AF Space Command and had friends who dealt with those satellites.

I had the ability to see the screens myself on a number of occasions when I was assigned here--> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cheyenne_Mountain_nuclear_bunker

Just do a search on my last name in that article. I was there. The satellites we had even back then almost certainly could have identified someone's uniform. But again, all you would have seen is that person and a few feet around them.

I think we are in agreement at least that the article is complete nonsense.

[Spider Jerusalem]

53. Even if they can identify the uniforms, they can't identify them as definitively Ukrainian

you know why they can't? Guess who else uses the same camouflage pattern? That would be...Russia.

[stevenleser]

91. Even more to your point, nothing is to say the rebels didn't steal and are using Ukrainian uniforms.

This is all much flailing about. We know where the missile battery was when it fired. It was in rebel held territory. The rebels did it. I am sure it was accidental in terms of they hoped it was a Ukrainian military plane they were shooting down, but they did it.

[grasswire]

128. Parry is in the tank for Putin?

Honestly, you have ZERO idea who you are talking about.

Either that, or you deliberately intend to discredit one of America's finest investigative journalists. One who was blacklisted for his exposing of the Iran Contra scandals.

Get a grip.

[n2doc]

134. Exactly

There are rapid response imaging systems that could look at the area based on the heat flash from the missile launch, but that would take time anyway and probably would have to be directed further. It would be post launch, no matter what. And cloud cover would also be an issue for anything optical.

Given Obama's response, and he would certainly have been told a lot more about this than anyone else, I would say this report is BS also.

[stevenleser]

154. Well put. I have no idea what ignored said above you but...

... chances are they should read your comment too.

[mainer]

157. Something we found out with the disappearance of earlier Malaysia Air flight

It turns out satellites aren't focused on everything all the time.

[stevenleser]

159. There is actually a law of optics that talks about the relationship between resolution and viewing

area. It is an inverse relationship. You can view large areas but only with minimal detail and vice versa.

[bananas]

162. "we picked up the imagery of this launch" - Kerry

Last edited Mon Jul 21, 2014, 06:19 PM - Edit history (1)

You wrote:

What this means is, in order to have caught the launch and the uniforms of those who launched the missile, they would have already had to be focused on that particular missile battery in advance. The chance that the satellites were randomly focused on this battery in advance of the launch against the plane is so low as to be negligible and so we know the article in the OP is complete B.S.

But Kerry said they did exactly that - according to your reasoning, Kerry's statement is complete B.S.:

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/us-outlines-case-russia-downed-plane-24640689

"There's a buildup of extraordinary circumstantial evidence," Kerry said. "We picked up the imagery of this launch. We know the trajectory. We know where it came from. We know the timing, and it was exactly at the time that this aircraft disappeared from the radar. We also know from voice identification that the separatists were bragging about shooting it down afterward."

(edit to add: Parry's source didn't say we imaged the launch - just that we had images of the missile battery - the images may have been taken some time before or after the launch.)

[stevenleser]

170. No, you completely misunderstand what I said and the technology.

First of all, there are several different kinds of satellites set to do different things. In general, we have satellites at any given moment set for a wide viewing area covering much of the globe. Each can detect missile launches happening anywhere in lets say an area the size of Europe. But they are not set to see what any particular person is wearing in Dusseldorf. In order to do that, someone has to make the effort to focus that satellite on that person. That takes time and when that is done, that satellite will only see that person and a few feet around them albeit in great detail but that satellite will completely miss anything happening just a block away.

The job of missile detection and warning does not require that the satellites be focused on getting high resolution images of small areas, the exact opposite. It requires satellites be able to detect the blooms and be able to determine trajectory of multiple missiles over a wide region.

[MADem]

65. They can read license plates.

Although a number of nations have launched spy satellites, the U.S. and the Soviet Union are responsible for by far the greatest number. The Russian Federation, which inherited most of the Soviet Union's space system after 1991, has been unable to afford the cost of adequately updating its spy satellite network. In contrast, the U.S. has continued to deploy ever-more-sophisticated systems in a steady stream. Thus, the majority of spy satellites in orbit today, including all the most capable units, are U.S.-owned. Although the precise technical capabilities (and in many cases even the basic missions and orbits) of U.S. spy satellites are secret, it is thought that the best U.S. visible-light spy satellites are capable, given clear skies, of imaging surface features only a few centimeters across. A modern U.S. spy satellite can, given clear skies and a good viewing angle, probably read a license plate from space.


Read more: http://www.answers.com/topic/satellites-spy#ixzz384lXeiim

[ThoughtCriminal]

161. An old myth

It would take a mirror many times larger than any satellites we have put in orbit. 10-cm is at the upper limit of what is even theoretically possible under ideal conditions, never mind practical considerations. "A few centimeters accross, CANNOT resolve a license plate. You need to go down to a tenth of a centimeter:

http://fas.org/irp/imint/resolve5.htm

[MADem]

163. OK, sure, if you say so!

I don't consider a source that is nearly two decades old controlling and I would advise anyone to look at that material through the long lens of recent history--just saying.

But you go on ahead and believe what you'd like.

http://www.fas.org/irp/imint/resolve5.htm
Created by John Pike
Maintained by Webmaster

Updated Tuesday, December 30, 1997 10:19:25 AM

[muriel_volestrangler]

165. It may be from the limits of resolution possible with light

which depend on the wavelength of light and the diameter of the aperture/mirror of the observing device. The Hubble telescope can resolve to 2.8*10-7 radians, which, at a distance of 300km for a fast, low-flying satellite (a bit above the height above ground, since you've got to look slightly sideways to see a license plate), is 8.4cm. Which wouldn't be enough to see a license plate. If they've got something about 10 times better than the Hubble, they can read a license plate.

[ThoughtCriminal]

168. KH-11 mirror is about the same size as Hubble

We know this from the size of the payload compartments of the Titan IV and Delta IV launch vehicles and ground observations. There are also a number of declassified and leaked hints, but suffice it to say, they cannot be much larger than 2.4 meters. We also know their orbital parameters. 10 times better than the Hubble would not be enough for a licence plate or uniform identification, it would have to be about 80 times better (Modern uniforms are hard to tell apart even when a few meters away).

We can get a higher resolution by looking at a shorter wavelength of light (UV, X-Ray, Gamma), but when you venture very far outside of visible light, the Earth's atmosphere is opaque to those wavelengths.

[freshwest]

175. Street level google is almost that good. I used to have an atlas of China made by CIA satellite pix.

Beautiful images in full color. It had many details about their industries, demographics, agriculture and buildings. I was in my 'love all things China' phase then.

[MohRokTah]

7. .

[Takket]

9. If that were true...

None of the actions by Russia or the separatists since the crash would make any sense. If they didn't know they were responsible, they would be screaming it from the rooftops, instead of evading and spreading disinformation.

[Karmadillo]

13. Maybe they're not screaming because they don't know. KoKo's Escobar article

makes that very point:

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Central_Asia/CEN-01-190714.html

<edit>

From now on, it all depends on Russian intelligence. They have been surveying/tracking everything that happens in Ukraine 24/7. In the next 72 hours, after poring over a lot of tracking data, using telemetry, radar and satellite tracking, they will know which type of missile was launched, where from, and even produce communications from the battery that launched it. And they will have access to forensic evidence.

Unlike Washington - who already knows everything, with no evidence whatsoever (remember 9/11?) - Moscow will take its time to know the basic journalistic facts of what, where, and who, and engage on proving the truth and/or disproving Washington's spin.

The historical record shows Washington simply won't release data if it points to a missile coming from its Kiev vassals. The data may even point to a bomb planted on MH17, or mechanical failure - although that's unlikely. If this was a terrible mistake by the Novorossiya rebels, Moscow will have to reluctantly admit it. If Kiev did it, the revelation will be instantaneous. Anyway we already know the hysterical Western response, no matter what; Russia is to blame.

more...

[jeff47]

15. So they're utter and complete morons

that are unable to ask the question "Who fired the missile?"

Suuuuuuure. And I'm pope.

[Karmadillo]

17. I don't think the difficulty lies in asking "Who fired the missile?" The

difficulty lies in answering the question. Escobar points out the complexity and time-consuming nature of a good faith effort (as opposed to the USA government/media's immediate accusations) to determine who did what.

[jeff47]

23. So they are morons who can't say "Not me?"

Look, there's not a lot of separatists who have Buk launchers. Asking each of them "did you fire the missile?" is not at all hard for the separatist leadership to do.

The people talking up "it's hard to tell what happened" are searching for a way to blame Ukraine.

Things that are known:
-Missile was fired from rebel territory.
-Ukraine has not deployed their Anti-Aircraft units, because the rebels don't have aircraft.

So how could the Ukrainians have been the ones that fired? They would have had to launch a large-scale invasion of rebel territory in order to roll out an anti-aircraft launcher, to fire at aircraft that were not normally crossing the area. And then they pulled all their troops back out. And nobody noticed the invasion or the retreat.

Meanwhile, the separatists are deleting their claims about shooting down a Ukrainian transport and getting in the way of crash investigators. Two things that would not have happened if the Ukrainians had fired - the separatists wouldn't have known about the launch to tweet it, and they'd be thrilled for international investigators to point the finger at Ukraine.

[Karmadillo]

35. If I'm not mistaken, both Russia and the separatists have denied firing the missile.

That doesn't mean they're telling the truth. Just as it doesn't mean Ukraine is telling the truth. The idea, I would think, is to let the evidence accumulate. A conclusion will become increasingly obvious. The US/corporate media is pretty much in 24/7 WMDs/mobile weapons lab/they'll love us once we're there/it won't cost much mode. Should we follow blindly behind? How did that work out last time?

[jeff47]

38. Which is why I didn't list any denials.

I'm utterly ignoring denials, because people are lying.

Which gets us to things like the range of the missile, where it had to be fired from to reach the airplane, and the public behavior of everyone involved.

The missile was fired from separatist territory. We know that because of where the plane crashed, and the range of the missile system.

The separatists started the incident claiming to have shot down a Ukrainian transport. How would they know that if they didn't launch the missile?

The separatists are blocking access to the crash site, and taking the bodies at gunpoint. Why would they do that if Ukraine was the one that fired? Why would they protect the Ukrainian government?

Meanwhile, for the Ukrainian government to get a SAM launcher to that area, they'd have to launch a major push into separatist territory. Just to get the launcher into the right place. If that had happened, the separatists and the civilians would have mentioned that Ukrainian troops are invading. And since the area is now held by separatists, they also would have mentioned the retreat. Nothing was mentioned.

The idea, I would think, is to let the evidence accumulate.

Because the laws of physics will change if we wait.

The US/corporate media is pretty much in 24/7 WMDs/mobile weapons lab/they'll love us once we're there/it won't cost much mode.

Good thing absolutely nothing I said came from US media.

[JustAnotherGen]

156. These are all good points

And something that has stuck with me the past few days that you made there in between the lines - why all the 'protection' of the Ukrainian government by the Separatists?

That makes no sense that they would be looking out for Ukraine's honor

[geek tragedy]

19. Escobar is telling everyone to believe

whatever Moscow says. Which means he has nothing intelligent to say.

[renegade000]

12. um, hardly "game-changing"

assuming the report is credible, there's a pretty simple explanation for that, the pictured people were defectors: http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2014/04/ukraines-offensive-falters-as-elite-units-defect-to-pro-russia-side/

i certainly doubt that even our best spy satellites can go inside people's brains and determine their allegiance in times of civil war

[jeff47]

14. Um, bullshit.

We can't resolve something as small as a beer bottle, except in badly-written novels. Especially not when looking at a broad area.

[former9thward]

141. I love how everyone on DU has suddenly become an expert on spy satellite imagery.

[jeff47]

158. As opposed to a guy who knows a guy who knows a guy who says

he saw beer bottles. Really! He did!

[geek tragedy]

16. A person has to be in the tank for Putin

to believe this nonsense from Parry, a chronic Putin cheerleader an apologist.

His anonymous source knows a guy who knows a guy who says the US satellites were watching the rocket launch in real time, and that they identified the individuals as Ukrainian by uniform.

Please.

[KittyWampus]

20. Consortium News lost all credibility after Syria. But DU's diehards will keep searching f/this crap

[Karmadillo]

21. Did the US media lose all credibility after Iraq?

[geek tragedy]

24. Judith Milller did, and Parry is even less credible

than she is. She at least told lies that were within the realm of physical possibility.

[Karmadillo]

29. LOL. Just Judith Miller?

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/jamie-stiehm/2013/03/21/how-the-media-cheered-the-rush-to-war-in-iraq

Press Cheerleaders and the War They Didn’t Question
A press eager to cheer on the troops got played in the march to war.

<edit>

The opinionmaker Mary McGrory, a Washington Post columnist, gave great weight to his words. Every journalist, print and broadcast, treated Powell's speech with veneration just because Powell delivered it. To be sure, it was a commanding performance, but few remembered Powell's military culture and stellar career was about giving and obeying orders. He's no dissenter.

[Read the U.S. News Debate: 10 Years Later, Was the Iraq War Worth It?]

It's clear Cheney, too, had an exalted image in the media coverage in the early days of the war. The storyline from the start was that he was the Bush Administration's steady hand, a sober grownup who'd make sure the younger Bush didn't do anything reckless. In fact, we now know, he was the reckless one. I remember the Sunday show chat about how wonderful it would be to have his experience, linking the presidential father and son. I'd name names, but it would take too long. Really. He was a Washington media darling, hard as that seems to believe.

Structurally, the shrewd Pentagon plan to "embed" prominent correspondents with the desert troops, in their tanks and tents, led to any number of small-town hero stories that contained no real digging or skepticism about the larger war picture. The Pentagon had learned its Vietnam lessons well, determined to avoid any new versions of the "Five O'Clock Follies," the nickname war correspondents gave to the daily news briefings in Saigon.

The networks played the picture of the Saddam Hussein statue falling a thousand times, but gave precious little time to the looting of Iraq's antiquities museum on our watch. This tragedy raised serious questions about U.S. readiness and planning beyond the first few days of the war.

We were there to stay a while, but the media did not quickly report on how Rumsfeld's Pentagon excluded the State Department from the entire Iraq War and occupation plan. In fact, there was no coherent plan for the years of occupation which followed. Yes, it was a folly. This time, the media was part of it.

[geek tragedy]

31. Maybe Parry's source is Curveball.

Pretty sad that this is the best you can do to deflect blame from Team Russia.

Maybe you can find a story from rense.com or infowars for your next act.

Pity your last attempt got hidden because it's analysis was taken from a fascist Holocaust denial site.

[Karmadillo]

40. Just in case anyone reading this believes you to be a credible source,

I posted an article by Lambert Strether from nakedcapitalism.com (neither known to be fascists or Holocaust deniers) regarding the US/corporate media sprint to judgment on the destruction of MH 17. I assume people are free to go read to the site to read it to see if Mr. Tragedy's posting is an attempt to enlighten or an attempt to mislead.

[geek tragedy]

44. Lambert lifted his analysis

from a truly vile, horrific, psychotic Russian fascist and Holocaust denial and virulently anti-Semitic website called the vineyard saker.
From crazy- ass lambert's article :

Cui bono?

Well here at least the reply is unambiguous: only the junta in Kiev could have benefited from this tragedy. For the Russians and the Novorussians [the "rebels," or "separatists"], this is something between a real pain and a disaster. Just when the Novorussians were winning without any overt help from Moscow and just when Moscow was gradually successful in denouncing the human costs of Poroshenko’s murderous policies – suddenly the entire planet focuses just on one downed aircraft and the imperial corporate media blames it all on Russia. As for Poroshenko, this disaster is God-sent: not only has everybody forgotten that much promised “surprise” turned out to be a disaster, he can now kill scores of Novorussians with no risks of that being reported in the corporate media. Not only that, but that gives the Ukies a golden excuse to ask for “protection” from their “aggressive and threatening neighbor”. Again, the only party who can benefit from this disaster is the junta.

So, in summary, we have this list of candidates:

1) A deliberate or mistaken Russian attack: superlatively unlikely

2) A mistaken Ukrainian attack: most unlikely

3) A deliberate Ukrainian attack: most likely

4) A mistaken Novorussian attack: possible

5) A deliberate Novorussian attack: most unlikely

I don’t know about you, but to me #3 is the one blinking red.

(The Saker forgot “the US administration in an election year,” but never mind that.) Of course, motive isn’t dispositive, but it’s nice to be clear. For myself, I’d give #4 (a mistaken “Novorussian” attack) more weight, but as we shall see, a lot of that depends on the concrete, on-the-ground operational characteristics of the missile batteries themselves.) Do note, however, that the Ukrainian media implicitly supports The Saker’s thesis. BBC:

The reaction of the Ukrainian media to the disaster is near unanimous on one point made forcefully by various newspapers including the popular daily, Segodnya. It says that the crash has become a “a turning point” in the armed conflict between the Ukrainian government forces and the pro-Russian separatists and that the war is no longer a local conflict.

Well, that’s an interesting point of view, isn’t it? If it’s no longer a “local conflict,” just what kind of a conflict is it?

A 0.0% Nazi content rule is generally a good idea.

Here is the Saker's take on the 20th century:

I am fully aware of the role which Jews played in the horrors of the 20th century, I am aware that they declared war on Russia first, and on Germany after that (both times the order came from organized American Jewry and Jewish banks), I loathe both Rabbinical Judaism and Zionism because both are based on self-worship and racism. I don't need lectures on all the bad things Jews have done or are still doing. Believe me, I have read more anti-Jewish books than most people here (if only because I read them all not only English, but also in Russian which has at least 10 times as many anti-Jewish books as there are in English).

https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=4046811478707691837&postID=8548500973030252166

By the way, fascists trying to deny their own atrocities--not a surprise holocaust deniers are one of the sources of this "Ukraine shot down the plane" malarkey.

Lambert is a certifiable crazy person. His praise of the analysis of holocaust deniers is proof.

[Karmadillo]

46. A 0.0% Nazi content rule? As a fervent support of Ukraine's government,

you should forward your rule to them for consideration.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-hughes/the-neo-nazi-question-in_b_4938747.html

The Neo-Nazi Question in Ukraine
Michael Hughes

<edit>

It isn't too surprising that conservative outlets like FOX News would downplay Russian allegations but the so-called "liberal" press has also contributed to the American disinformation campaign. Celestine Bohlen from The New York Times considers harsh epithets, like the word "neo-Nazi," which Putin has hurled at the demonstrators in Kiev as part of a Russian propaganda effort to tarnish Ukraine's revolutionary struggle against authoritarianism.

Yet after simply Googling the terms "Ukraine" and "Neo-Nazi," the official position of the United States government along with the stance taken by many in the American media both now seem quite dubious, if not downright ridiculous, especially considering that one would be hard-pressed to machinate the lineup that now dominates Ukraine's ministry posts.

For starters, Andriy Parubiy, the new secretary of Ukraine's security council, was a co-founder of the Neo-Nazi Social-National Party of Ukraine (SNPU), otherwise known as Svoboda. And his deputy, Dmytro Yarosh, is the leader of a party called the Right Sector which, according to historian Timothy Stanley, "flies the old flag of the Ukrainian Nazi collaborators at its rallies."

The highest-ranking right-wing extremist is Deputy Prime Minister Oleksandr Sych, also a member of Svoboda, who believes that women should "lead the kind of lifestyle to avoid the risk of rape, including refraining from drinking alcohol and being in controversial company." This is the philosophy underlying one of his "legal initiatives," according to the Kyiv Post, "to ban all abortions, even for pregnancies that occurred during rape."

The Svoboda party has tapped into Nazi symbolism including the "wolf's angel" rune, which resembles a swastika and was worn by members of the Waffen-SS, a panzer division that was declared a criminal organization at Nuremberg. A report from Tel-Aviv University describes the Svoboda party as "an extremist, right-wing, nationalist organization which emphasizes its identification with the ideology of German National Socialism."

more...

[geek tragedy]

47. There are a small number of fascists in Ukraine's government.

They fared quite poorly in the recent election.


As opposed to Russia, which is a fascist state run by a fascist hyper nationalist. Indeed, the fascist right in Europe supports Putin in his fight against the 'decadent west.'

[Karmadillo]

51. That must be a record for the abandonment of the 0.0% Nazi rule.

[geek tragedy]

54. I don't cite to Svoboda to back up my arguments.

The core of the article you posted was based on 'analysis' from a psychotic fascist holocaust denier.

You cite deranged loons like Lambert at your own risk (and to think he was a Hillary cheerleader back when Mark Penn ran her campaign)

What kind of nutjob goes from backing Hillary to backing Putin just because Obama beat her?

[Karmadillo]

57. Sound reasoning from start to finish. Kudos.

[stevenleser]

92. There are also fascists in Russia's government. Why do you always gloss over that point? nt

[grasswire]

130. shame on you

The attempts to destroy Robert Parry currently on DU are nothing but disgusting and ignorant.

Do you have ANY IDEA of the history of Robert Parry??????????

Shame, shame, shame!!!

[jeff47]

34. Tip: When your defense is "This reporter isn't as bad as Judith Miller"

you really should reevaluate what you are doing.

[geek tragedy]

37. The OP had a thread hidden earlier for

citing analysis from a Russian holocaust denial site to point the finger for MH17 at . . . the Ukrainians.

While Parry is a worthless hack, he's a step up from holocaust deniers.

[grasswire]

132. a WORTHLESS HACK?

Outrageous.

Simply outrageous.

And coming from you, a keyboard "warrior".

Disgusting.

[geek tragedy]

166. Yes, a worthless sellout of a hack who is so obviously

in the tank for the Putin regime that it's painful.

A hack who hasn't done anything of merit in decades.

A less-accomplished version of Judy Miller.

Try googling "robert parry putin" and see how often he's even attempted to be critical of something Putin has done, or has taken the US's side in a dispute with Putin.

Parry is not a sacred figure.

[Octafish]

167. Calling Robert Parry ''a worthless hack'' shows what you know.

Here's what a REAL journalist -- one who's interested in the TRUTH -- has to say:

America's Debt to Journalist Gary Webb

By Robert Parry
December 13, 2004

In 1996, journalist Gary Webb wrote a series of articles that forced a long-overdue investigation of a very dark chapter of recent U.S. foreign policy – the Reagan-Bush administration’s protection of cocaine traffickers who operated under the cover of the Nicaraguan contra war in the 1980s.

For his brave reporting at the San Jose Mercury News, Webb paid a high price. He was attacked by journalistic colleagues at the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times, the American Journalism Review and even the Nation magazine. Under this media pressure, his editor Jerry Ceppos sold out the story and demoted Webb, causing him to quit the Mercury News. Even Webb’s marriage broke up.

On Friday, Dec. 10, Gary Webb, 49, died of an apparent suicide, a gunshot wound to the head.

Whatever the details of Webb’s death, American history owes him a huge debt. Though denigrated by much of the national news media, Webb’s contra-cocaine series prompted internal investigations by the Central Intelligence Agency and the Justice Department, probes that confirmed that scores of contra units and contra-connected individuals were implicated in the drug trade. The probes also showed that the Reagan-Bush administration frustrated investigations into those crimes for geopolitical reasons.

Failed Media

Unintentionally, Webb also exposed the cowardice and unprofessional behavior that had become the new trademarks of the major U.S. news media by the mid-1990s. The big news outlets were always hot on the trail of some titillating scandal – the O.J. Simpson case or the Monica Lewinsky scandal – but the major media could no longer grapple with serious crimes of state.

CONTINUED...

http://www.consortiumnews.com/2004/121304.html

Normally I'm not surprised by how little another person knows. It is particularly disappointing, however, to read a DUer smear one of the best investigative reporters and writers around. That shows more than ignorance.

BTW: What have you written that's worth knowing, geek tragedy?

[Karmadillo]

41. Tip: That's not my defense.

[jeff47]

42. Which is why you keep bringing up Iraq....Oh wait, that makes no sense. (nt)

[Karmadillo]

45. See post 29 and actually read post 29 and you will have a clearer

idea of the point I was trying to make.

[jeff47]

48. No, I got the point. Your claim is your favored media is not as awful as

the people who lied about Iraq.

Not exactly a strong argument for your favored media.

[Karmadillo]

50. You obviously didn't get the point.

[jeff47]

52. The fact that your argument has massive holes in it

does not mean I didn't get the point. It means your argument has massive holes in it.

Instead of writing posts demanding other people blindly follow you, get better at making your arguments.

The track record of the media that cheerleaded for the Iraq invasion isn't a reason to blindly trust other media sources. Especially media sources that have a bad recent track record regarding Syria.

So instead of trying to make your argument based on media competency, choose a different argument.

[Karmadillo]

56. I will try to be better and use you as a model, in fact. You nailed it, except

for that part about saying I was demanding people blindly follow me (I didn't make that argument). And also, that part about blindly trusting other media sources (I''m not advocating anyone trust any media source blindly--in fact, if you read (I know, I know, that's an issue for you) my original post, you'll note I put in "if true" because I have no idea if Mr. Parry's source is credible. I do know his suggestion we not jump to conclusions is historically a sound one and, in the real world that exists outside of this thread, does not mean an embrace of "Team Putin". And, finally, the media competency thing is kind of essential to the not jumping to conclusions thing because if the US media did us wrong by cheerleading us to disaster last time, they might be doing the same thing this time. As George W Bush once said, fool me once, shame--nevermind. Other than those few quibbles, your post was an excellent one and I really will take your admonishment to heart.

[jeff47]

58. Keep spinning

You nailed it, except for that part about saying I was demanding people blindly follow me (I didn't make that argument).

You did when you insisted other people are not reading your posts.

And also, that part about blindly trusting other media sources (I''m not advocating anyone trust any media source blindly--in fact, if you read (I know, I know, that's an issue for you) my original post, you'll note I put in "if true" because I have no idea if Mr. Parry's source is credible.

Except a single disclaimer doesn't do it when you spend the rest of the thread talking as if it was true, and talking about what a great source the author in the OP is.

I do know his suggestion we not jump to conclusions is historically a sound one and, in the real world that exists outside of this thread, does not mean an embrace of "Team Putin".

Except those demanding we wait longer are utterly ignoring things like laws of physics, and what the relevant parties are doing in public after the shoot-down.

We don't need to wait and see if the sun will rise in the East tomorrow.

And, finally, the media competency thing is kind of essential to the not jumping to conclusions thing because if the US media did us wrong by cheerleading us to disaster last time, they might be doing the same thing this time

And here you assume anyone who disagrees with you only watches US media. Again. And is utterly incapable of thinking for themselves. Again. And yet your reply started claiming it wasn't about US media.

So tell me how much you just want to wait and see, and just want to ask questions while insisting that everyone who disagrees with you is an idiot who does whatever US media tells them to do.

[KittyWampus]

25. When ANY supposed news source becomes the equivalent of Baghdad Bob they lose credibility.

[geek tragedy]

26. Team Putin is standing by their man. nt

[KittyWampus]

27. They did after Syria, too. Weird.

[geek tragedy]

28. Putin, Assad , Gaddafhi.

The common thread is that they support fascists.

[betterdemsonly]

136. Strange how Isis, the group we funded to fight Assad

is creating an Islamic Fundamentist Caliphate, in Syria and Iraq? I mean who could have predicted that?

[freshwest]

43. Sarah Palin stands by her man, thus, Putin and Palin in 2016!

'Journalistic integrity' because she reads magazines, too!

So there's always that...

[Mojorabbit]

81. I am sick to death of the "Team Putin" phrase. nt

[geek tragedy]

94. How then would you describe the phenomenon

of those who are predictable in their tendency to support/agree with the Russian state when it is in open disagreement or conflict with the Obama administration?

[Mojorabbit]

138. I would say it is mostly imagined. nt

[geek tragedy]

110. Nice Nazi website. Do you realize what it says

about you that you cite a Holocaust denial site in order to shift blame from fascists who use poison gas on civilians?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Free_Press

The American Free Press is a weekly newspaper published in the United States.

According to one former correspondent, the newspaper's direct ancestor was the publication The Spotlight,[1] which ceased publication in 2001 when its parent company, Liberty Lobby, was forced into bankruptcy. Like The Spotlight and Liberty Lobby, Willis Carto, one of America's most influential political racial theorists known for his promotion of antisemitic conspiracy theories and Holocaust denial, was one of its founders.

...

Writers for the newspaper include Michael Collins Piper, whose work has been characterized as anti-semitic,[3] and James P. Tucker, Jr., a longtime Spotlight reporter whose focus is the Bilderberg Group. Articles by Carto also appear occasionally. James Edwards, who now hosts The Political Cesspool (broadcast as a service of the neo-Nazi Stormfront) was also a former writer for the newspaper.

The newspaper also runs columns by Joe Sobran, James Traficant, Paul Craig Roberts, Ron Paul, and others. The newspaper's podcast series has featured mainstream guests including Brian Baird, Philip Giraldi, Dean Baker, and others.[4]

Attendees of the 2006 American Free Press / The Barnes Review conference included [5] Arthur Jones, former member Nationalist Socialist White People's Party [6] and USS Liberty investigator Tito Howard. Dr. Hesham Tillawi whose show has been called "a megaphone for Holocaust deniers and white supremacists seeking to broadcast their hatred and anti-Semitism into American homes"[by whom?] also was a speaker.

Some authors of the American Free Press such as Michael Collins Piper and Carto-affiliated institutions such as the Institute for Historical Review have published books which have been published in paper and electronic format on the America First Books website America First Books.[7][8] William B. Fox is the publisher. It promotes nationalist viewpoints similar to those of the American Free Press and its authors. On its website it is explained why "supporting nationalism, to include even certain forms of 'white nationalism' makes good long term business sense"

[geek tragedy]

114. You are advocating that people read a NAZI, white supremacist

website. One that denies the Holocaust and spreads hate speech.

You recommend that people read such filth to inform themselves on world events.

That says EVERYTHING one needs to know about your purpose here.

So, no I will not give NAZIS web traffic. Because I do not find Holocaust deniers and Nazis to be credible sources.

You obviously find Nazis and Holocaust deniers to be perfectly credible. One can draw their own inferences from that.

[muriel_volestrangler]

117. You don't get to tell people to 'grow up' when you're adovcating the use of anti-semitic sites

American Free Press, the anti-Semitic weekly that bills itself as “America’s Last Real Newspaper,” insists that it is battling a mainstream media secretly in the thrall of powerful globalists.

http://www.splcenter.org/blog/2010/05/06/anti-semitic-weekly/

You need education - now. Do not tell us to read anti-semitic sites.

http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-files/profiles/willis-carto

http://archive.adl.org/learn/ext_us/carto.html

[TM99]

120. Read my other post, and quit the fucking pile-on.

OK? Thanks.

[muriel_volestrangler]

122. You haven't self-deleted your link to the anti-semitic site yet

The pile-on on will continue until you do. That site is on a par with the KKK and Stormfront. You could plead ignorance when you first linked to it, but not now.

[TM99]

124. Sorry, I have never had to self-delete a post.

I am doing it now.

[muriel_volestrangler]

126. Thank you (nt)

[geek tragedy]

113. Jury results (jury says Nazi websites ok to use)

On Mon Jul 21, 2014, 11:33 AM you sent an alert on the following post:

You mean when they correctly predicted that US intelligence
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5270040

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

YOUR COMMENTS

American Free Press is a holocaust denial site run by the American Nazi party. Citing it to deny proven usage of poison gas is grotesquely ironic.

JURY RESULTS

A randomly-selected Jury of DU members completed their review of this alert at Mon Jul 21, 2014, 11:45 AM, and voted 3-4 to LEAVE IT ALONE.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Hiding, on the Nazi source.
Juror #4 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Members should start being banned for posting shit like this.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I agree that the site is not the best place to cite information from, however the poster may just be honestly mistaken. He didn't seem like a troll in other posts. I suggest asking him to use a different source, explaining the site he is using as not the best place to go for. Relatively new members don't always know where to go for sources, and it is easy to be mislead doing a google search.
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Untrustworthy site indeed.
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given

[TM99]

115. Relax and take a deep breath.

Here, read this link instead:

http://www.lrb.co.uk/v36/n08/seymour-m-hersh/the-red-line-and-the-rat-line

There, do you feel better now?

I will link to a variety of different sites (some approved and some not) if it provides a counter-voice to the insanity here that I am seeing on DU. I came here to escape this kind of thinking back in the Bush/Iraq War days. Now I see the same knee-jerk reactions, hasty acceptance of government authorities and MSM propoganda, and baseless attacks at anyone who questions the 'official' statements and simply want more evidence and a thorough investigation before something stupid is done on a grand enough scale that matters are made worse for all and not better.

[TM99]

119. For pity's sake, will you fucking chill.

I linked to the first hit while searching for Hersh's book review. Back off. I am sorry it was a damned 'Nazi' site.

[geek tragedy]

121. no, I won't 'chill' at the idea of Nazi propaganda being mainstreamed here.

As far as Hersh is concerned, nothing more than rumor-mongering--the UN report contains more than enough evidence to show Syrian army used sarin

P.S. you need to remove that link from your post, pronto.

Still waiting.

[TM99]

125. Hersh is highly respected, and his writings are hardly rumor-

mongering.

The UN report does not contain enough evidence of what was claimed by US intelligence that nearly led to unavoidable escalations in combat in Syria.

[grasswire]

135. Hersh, Parry...

.....DU is the world turned upside down today!

Disgusting attacks on investigative journalists.

[MattSh]

118. When people claim a news source has lost all credibility...

I as them for a credible source. So then, who's credible?

You might also want to comment on Robert Parry and if he's a credible source.

[Hissyspit]

30. Apparently everyone in Ukraine is drunk.

On all sides.

[moondust]

32. Buk fired from rebel territory.

According to President Obama.

Trajectory of Buk missile probably determined by satellite and/or telemetry and/or other signals intelligence.

What would the Ukrainian military be doing in rebel-held territory with a Buk when rebels don't have any airpower to shoot down?

Fairly detailed background material at CNN: http://www.cnn.com/2014/07/20/world/europe/ukraine-rebels-weapons/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

[geek tragedy]

33. Hey, Robert Parry knows a guy who knows a guy

who knows a guy. Who's going to have a better idea what spy satellites show?

[itsrobert]

49. What the hell is wrong with you?

Making sense in this thread.

[moondust]

55. *gulp*

[MannyGoldstein]

62. This is one of the big problems with the Executive branch's embrace of lying

We don't know if they're telling the truth.

[KittyWampus]

66. If we accept basic physical science and empirical evidence we do know they're telling the truth.

[MattSh]

123. But they haven't supplied any physical science and empirical evidence.

It only "we know what happened." Trust us.

[moondust]

67. Other countries

probably have similar tracking data. Possibly some private companies as well. For example, Immarsat supplied tracking data for the MH370 lost plane search. If somebody has data that conflicts with what the President has said, we'll probably hear about it.

*crickets*

[geek tragedy]

68. Except Obama is far from the only one

pinning this on the separatists. To put a sharper point on it, the only ones pushing the "Ukrainians shot it down" theory are Putin apologists like Parry.

The evidence says it was the separatists. All of it points one way.

[MannyGoldstein]

70. I tend to think they did.

I also tended to think Iraq had WMD. But tending to think is a lot different than knowing, as we (should) have learned by now.

FYI - which credible sources, not known to lie or to have a conflict of interest, buttress your certainty?

[geek tragedy]

71. The rebels bragging about it on their

own social media page. Complete with photo of the plane going down .

Of course, when they realized it was a passenger jet, they erased those posts .

That, and common sense. Only one side was shooting at airplanes. And that side had been shooting a bunch down in the days before this happened.

Neither of those facts are derived from the US government, the Ukrainian government, the dreaded corporate media, etc.

[MannyGoldstein]

72. what's your source for the bragging

that was deleted?

I thought we learned to wage war based on provable facts, not best guesses.

[geek tragedy]

74. How have you managed to miss this?

Try googling it, strelkov vk.com mh17

We are not going to war over this . We are talking about it at DU.

[MannyGoldstein]

75. Strobe Talbot, Putin Apologist

http://twitchy.com/2014/07/17/strobe-talbott-claims-that-russian-backed-separatist-has-admitted-shooting-down-mh17/

You really should stop accusing anyone who doesn't 100% agree with your inadequately-researched conclusions of being a scumbag.

[geek tragedy]

77. Twitchy? Interesting to see where you get

your information.

http://michellemalkin.com/2012/03/07/announcing-twitchy-com/

The website had a photo of the wreckage. Inside rebel territory.

Go ahead and ignore the most salient fact--that only Team Moscow had ever shot at planes in that area, and that they were shooting down a bunch of them.

P.S. I never thought Saddam had WMDs in 2003. You'll catch up with me on this too, eventually.

[MannyGoldstein]

78. So is Strobe Talbot is a Putin apologist

for rescinding his accusation and saying that your known fact may well be BS?

Really, you should cut out your half-cocked witch hunt. Or do some research before making terrible accusations.

[geek tragedy]

79. A separatist-run website did boast of the attack

complete with video and photos. In real time. Whether it was Strelkin or one of his underlings, what does it matter?

100% of the evidence in this case points in one direction. Sorry if that imbalance inconveniences you.

[MannyGoldstein]

80. Strobe Talbot isn't sure of your "facts"

is he a Putin apologist?

Or are you refusing to answer?

[muriel_volestrangler]

82. ITAR-TASS also had the same news

Donetsk People’s Republic militia downs another Ukraine’s An-26 plane — eyewitnesses
World
July 17, 20:01 UTC+4

DONETSK, July 17. /ITAR-TASS/. Militiamen of the self-proclaimed Donetsk People’s Republic (DPR) brought down a military transport Antonov-26 (An-26) plane of the Ukrainian Air Force on the outskirts of the town of Torez, eyewitnesses said.

A missile hit the An-26, it fell on the ground and caught blaze, they said.

On July 14, militiamen of the self-proclaimed Luhansk People’s Republic downed another An-26 of the Ukrainian Air Force.

http://en.itar-tass.com/world/741164

It's plain that some of the rebel militia said they had shot down an An-26 at that location, at that time. But no sign of an An-26 has been found on the ground. What they have found there is the MH17 airliner.

[MannyGoldstein]

86. That story doesn't credit the separatists as the source

It just says "eyewitnesses". In particular, it doesn't mention the web page being discussed.

I guess of even Clinton's former Secretary of State is admitting that things are "murky" with regard to evidence, why should we claim that anyone who feels the same is a Putin defender. I looked a little last night, and did not see a statement from any European country other than our English lapdogs that blames the separatists yet. Not even from the Netherlands. Are *they* Putin defenders?

(Their are statements deservedly condemning the separatists for the terrible situation at the crash scene.)

[geek tragedy]

95. Things were 'murky' about which separatist wrote

the messages. He did not write that the evidence in totality is murky, because it is not.

For someone very angry about suggestions that there are people who favor Putin, you demonstrate a great deal of anger towards those blaming Putin, smearing the British as our lapdogs because they blame Putin.

[MannyGoldstein]

102. That's clearly not what Talbot wrote

"INTERFAX & other pro-RU sources deny Strelkov role in shootdown. This thing is as murky as it is horrendous. But answer & blame will emerge."

See the role in shootdown part? That would usually mean the role in shootdown.

Since you won't answer my question except for playing games, I'll assume that you've pegged Strobe Talbot as a Putin Defender. Let me know if that's incorrect.

[geek tragedy]

107. "This thing" is ambiguous. Many facts have

emerged since then--all of them point to one rational conclusion.

[muriel_volestrangler]

97. Exactly - it corroborates what the web page said, from a different source

All Talbott did was report that Russians were denying Strelkov had a role. He called that 'murky'. He didn't call the evidence 'murky'. He also, after that, tweeted:

@Steven_Pifer & @HannahThoburn credit Strelkov boast on VKontakte of "AN-26" shootdown at time & place of MH crash. http://brook.gs/1niELXY

https://twitter.com/strobetalbott/status/490115596408061952

And then:

Analysis of disputed Strelkov's post on "bird drop" with "no civilian casualties" before he knew it was wrong bird. http://www.interpretermag.com/was-col-strelkovs-dispatch-about-a-downed-ukrainian-plane-authentic/ …

https://twitter.com/strobetalbott/status/490118794115678208

Then:

Further evidence to blame Russians/separatists: NATO sources believe all SAMs in Ukr arsenal are accounted for. Also, Kyiv had no motive.

https://twitter.com/strobetalbott/status/490162962850938880

then:

Latest report on Buk SAMs, instrument of MH17's destruction: They're back in E. Ukr after brief trip home to Russia. This thing ain't over.

https://twitter.com/strobetalbott/status/490868816919158784

and:

Putin won't back off. He'll double down, with more supervision of targeting. There's nothing more offensive than his ilk on the defensive.

https://twitter.com/strobetalbott/status/490869943018471425

and:

“@stengel: "This is moment of truth for Russia." @JohnKerry on the #MH17 downing" - That means Putin acknowledging truth. Glasnost is dead.

https://twitter.com/strobetalbott/status/490885549079937025

[MannyGoldstein]

103. Talbot clearly said responsibility for the downing was murky

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5269963

Corroboration by unnamed sources? I'm not sure that really qualifies as much of anything.

[muriel_volestrangler]

105. He CLEARLY did NOT talk about responsibility

Just read your post. He said Russians were denying it, and said 'this thing is as murky as it is horrendous. But answer & blame will emerge.' And then, as I've shown, he listed a slew of reasons for believing it was the rebels, armed by the Russians.

Corroboration by an eyewitness - reported by the Russian news agency? It qualifies as a damn good reason for believing the rebels were claiming they'd shot down a plane there, that day.

[MannyGoldstein]

131. "This thing is as murky as it is horrendous. But answer & blame will emerge."

I think it's pretty clear.

Where does the Tass article state that the the militia itself made that claim? Be specific please, because I don't see that. The root of this subthread is Geek's contention that everyone knows the rebels have claimed they shot down a plane at that time, yet, as I showed, even former Secretary of State Strobe Talbot now says that's not known, whether or not one interprets his tweet as applying to just the seperatists claiming a kill or applying to general responsibility for the shoot-down.

[geek tragedy]

111. He said no such thing, you only wish he did.

Muriel showed you were not making a factually accurate statement. Have the decency to avoid doubling down on falsehoods.

[MannyGoldstein]

133. Uh... No.

But let's see if there's any hope whatsoever of you and I reaching any agreement, or are engaging in targeted wanking.

Upthread, you claimed, as fact, that the separatists bragged about downing the plane on their site. Will you now agree with me (and Strobe Talbot) that is not at all clear? If we can't agree on something this obvious, then continuing conversation is pointless.

[geek tragedy]

164. It's clear someone in rebel territory posted

that. That's where the footage was shot.

Btw, Russia has confirmed that Buk missiles were in rebel- controlled territory when the attack happened, just like Obama and Kerry said they were. Per the notorious neocon publication, Russia Today:

The question that has to be answered is why the missile system appeared in the area controlled by the local militia forces shortly before the catastrophe, he stated.

http://rt.com/news/174412-malaysia-plane-russia-ukraine/

[The Magistrate]

169. Your No.97 Pretty Well Nailed It, Sir

This link in particular is devastating....

http://www.interpretermag.com/was-col-strelkovs-dispatch-about-a-downed-ukrainian-plane-authentic/

Anyone trying to argue point after that is just whistling past a graveyard.

[Peregrine]

36. Those images are highly classified and compartmentalized

The powers that be have to decide if providing evidence of the capabilities of our satellites is justified in this crisis or not. Doubt if there are any reliable leakers (or as DU prefers to call them "whistleblowers" and heroes) of the data due to the level of classification.

[DeSwiss]

39. ....

''Paradigm shift underway. Drive carefully.''

~DeSwiss

[DallasNE]

59. "if True" Indeed

When I see phrases like "Ukraine Regime" I think I know where the bias in this article is pointing.

Also, the Ukrainian military is not operating in this region so that also drives a stake through the heart of this story. Still, let's allow this story to play out as more facts are gathered.

[ColesCountyDem]

60. Well, my neighbor's grandson's wife's hairdresser, who's normally a reliable source...

What a bunch of crap!

[napi21]

61. I have no way of knowing for sure what happened either, but

are they saying the satellite imagery actually showed beer bottles? If tha't true, it had to have shown detailed uniforms, and even faces!

[snooper2]

63. I guess we all place our bets when we post the stupid eh?

[zappaman]

64. Well, at least there is transparency with the RECS

No surprises there

[geek tragedy]

69. Nope, it's the group who always seem

to take Putin's side in these things, but doesn't exist apparently.

[Amonester]

73. Flags in Amsterdam!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/113730016

Must be why Pooty Poot did it...


OP=

[Gravitycollapse]

76. I would honestly be surprised if even the most advanced satellites could resolve beer bottles.

But I'm not an expert so maybe I'm wrong.

[The Magistrate]

83. Mr. Parry,Sir, Has Now Officially Given Up ANY Pretense Of Being A Journalist

And is shopping resumes for an op-ed slot with Jones or Beck or Sorcha Fal....

[SidDithers]

93. Sorcha Faal!...

Wonder what she, and her "sources within the Russian government" have got to say about MH17.

I may have to go look.

Edit: ROFL!!

She's blaming it on the Canadians!!

The Main Directorate of the General Staff of the Armed Forces (GRU) is reporting today that within 5-minutes of President Putin warning his US counterpart, President Obama, that “war games” being carried out by NATO member Royal Canadian Air Force (RCAF) forces over Romania could lead to a “potential catastrophe”, Malaysia Airlines flight MH17 was destroyed over the eastern conflict region of Ukraine.

According to this report, Putin was in flight during his call to Obama returning to Moscow aboard his presidential aircraft from Brazil when he was notified that there were a number of “critical radar anomalies” occurring over EUROCONTROL zones in Central Europe.

snip

As to the exact and tragic destruction of Malaysia Airlines MH17 yesterday, this report concludes, the “electronic war games” being conducted by the RCAF in some way altered the course of this civilian plane [photo bottom left] putting it on a flight path it had never taken before in its previous 10 flights to the Russian Air Base in Morozovsk located in the Rostov Oblast close to the border with Ukraine, and which in normalized times was the accepted route to this destination for Russian military flights.

To if the Ukrainian forces working in concert with the RCAF deliberately attempted to confuse the radar of what they believed was a Russian military flight causing it to over fly this conflict region this report doesn’t say. But then again, with the world being the way it is, anything is possible.

Wow. That's some serious crazy.

Sid

[Caretha]

96. Strawman Alert!

Strawman Alert!

Sid Sid Sid (shakes head)

[SidDithers]

99. If you're not familiar with Sorcha Faal, you really should check her out...

her website is whatdoesitmean.com.

She writes the most crazy, outlandish, stupefying conspiracy bullshit on the internet. And that's saying something. She's the Weekly World News of internet conspiracy theorists.

If you are familiar with her work, and are actually defending her. Well, I have no idea what to say to that.



Sid

[Caretha]

101. Really Sid

you do underestimate me. And I see what you did there

I just loves me some Red Herring times mixed in a bit with Straw men and smokey mirrors.

[stonecutter357]

145. .

[muriel_volestrangler]

98. Damn, that needs a copyright suit from South Park:

[SidDithers]

100. Sorcha Faal can always be counted on to bring the Crazy...

especially when it comes to Russia / US geopolitics.

I'm sorry I didn't think to check out her take on MH17 earlier. Glad The Magistrate brought her up.



Sid

[Caretha]

85. I haven't read

the complete article by Robert Parry, but became curious about his credentials after several posters maligned his reputation and hurled every insult they could think of at him.

So if anyone else is reading this thread and wondering the same thing I was, here is a wiki link to this man's past journalist history. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Parry_%28journalist%29) Mighty damn impressive!

That is journalism we are sorely lacking in the US, and what has led us down the path to perdition many many times in our past and recent past.

Now I'm also curious about the posters here in this thread, who have done lick spittle in their personal lives even close to what Robert Parry has accomplished, and what their real agenda is and why they don't want anyone to read this journalist's views or articles.

[KoKo]

90. Thanks...Some who criticize him know his background

....which is puzzling why now they suddenly criticize him. Thanks for adding his background. I forget there are new DU'ers who don't know his background and others who need to be reminded that he has done excellent reporting and was a DU Favorite during the Bush years.

It's sad to see him maligned by those who know who he is...but, hopefully your link will help those who don't know not be swayed by comments insinuating that he now works for Alex Jones and is a Conspiracy Theorist--so should be ignored.

[grasswire]

137. allegiance to Dear Leader apparently trumps all.

Who is next to be assigned to the ossuary? Bill Moyers?

I am nauseated by the ignorant attacks today on Robert Parry.

[stonecutter357]

146. they failed in hiding your post 5 / 2

make sure you put the Dear Leader lovers on your Jury Blacklist .

[grasswire]

147. thanks

want to PM me the jury results?

Stupid crybaby alert.

[stonecutter357]

149. Message Sent.

[stonecutter357]

148. Just in case!

they failed in hiding your post 5 / 2

make sure you put the Dear Leader lovers on your Jury Blacklist .

[Caretha]

150. Not so much "ignorant"

Substitute "purposeful" and you will be closer to the truth. That is why several posters on this thread are waving their arms and yelling "Hey you! Look over Here! Look over Here! Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain"l.

[grasswire]

155. yes, I was being generous. nt

[MisterP]

176. he was a major Iran-Contra investigator and is a DAMN straight arrow

but his reporting doesn't always lock up 100% with the designated One we're supposed to support without regard to what they're actually doing, so ...

[sofa king]

87. How many of us can build a rocket?

How many of us can build a semi-autonomous missile the size of a telephone pole that can reach a target as small as an airplane at thirty-three thousand feet?

So it's a government that supplied the SAM, and probably also the training to use it, if not the operators themselves. We don't need a spy satellite to know that much.

[WinkyDink]

88. Please. US satellites, which can see ticks on a dog, never saw MH370, never saw MH17, never saw....

anything we don't "want" to see for public consumption. And we "see" what we DO want, for public gullibility.

~~~Signed, Your Travelling Biological Warfare Truck, WMD's, and Yellow-Cake Family Band.

[stevenleser]

106. It helps if you understand the technology. It's good, but it isn't magical. nt

[WinkyDink]

173. It's better than "good."

[stevenleser]

174. No question. I've seen it with my own eyes. Albeit the version from 23 years ago. nt

[SidDithers]

89. And if my Aunt had balls, she'd be my Uncle...

Sid

[redqueen]

108. Jesus Fucking Christ

[nilesobek]

109. I would have to say, based on neo-con domination of our foreign

policy, that we shouldn't trust a single thing anyone tells us until it is confirmed in concrete. I'm taking a wait and see attitude on this. Its a good thing the neo-cons didn't get a hold of those black boxes, then they could dictate the debate. Now they cannot and we might get actual facts instead lies which cost trillions of dollars and hundreds of thousands of lives. As long as PBO keeps a heavy neo-con element inside then media reports cannot be trusted.

Hey American media, if you are listening: You lost the American public with your lies and propaganda. You don't get our trust back by more lies and further propaganda. You have to earn your way back and you haven't done it. This message is especially meant for Scott Pelley.

[MineralMan]

127. "What I’ve been told by one source..."

Code for, "I heard this third-hand from someone or read it somewhere, and it fits my ideas."

Since the source is unnamed and unverified, this is not news but rumor-mongering. That is all. I'll wait. Looking at consortiumnews.com, I'll definitely wait for more information. I don't consider it a reliable source, frankly.

[grasswire]

139. ignorant

Robert Parry has sources you could only dream of. Do you know who he is?

Sheesh.

[MineralMan]

140. I rarely dream of sources. More often, I dream

of finding myself naked in a public place.

[grasswire]

142. that explains a lot, and it's icky. nt

[MineralMan]

143. You should start your own OP, I guess.

[treestar]

172. Apparently he is somebody we are supposed to believe no matter what

I guess he is the one who is the Dear Leader.

[betterdemsonly]

129. You mean this might be another neocon wargasm, and the conservadems are pandering to them again? n/t

[conservaphobe]

144. Who left the asylum door unlocked this time?

[stonecutter357]

151. http://enenews.com/

[conservaphobe]

153. LOL

We're going to need a bigger lock...

[840high]

160. k/r good read

[stevenleser]

171. Sure, if you like fiction. nt