CIA does a major walk-back on Russia being at fault
POSTED BY: SIGNYM
UPDATED: Saturday, July 26, 2014 11:49
VIEWED: 8322
PAGE 2 of 7
GEEZER
Quote:Trained and supplied with BUK anti-aircraft rockets? Or just generally "trained and supplied"? Because, in the same breath, they go on to say that there will never be "a Perry Mason moment" and "we may never know for sure". Apparently, they're willing to make very definitive-sounding statements, which seem to be rather carefully crafted to avoid saying anything definitive at all. So which is it? Do they know for sure? Or not?
The Obama administration, detailing what it called evidence of Russian complicity in the downing of a Malaysian airliner, on Tuesday released satellite images and other sensitive intelligence that officials say show Moscow had trained and equipped rebels in Ukraine responsible for the attack.
Quote:For those not familiar with geography, Rostov-On-Don is a Russian city which about 120 miles from Donetsk, or about 60 miles to the Ukrainian border. Would be interested to know how they came up with THAT conclusion. Satellite photos?
The officials also for the first time identified a sprawling Russian military installation near the city of Rostov
G, are you being simple on purpose?
Quote:The USA press follows the WH line, The WH has every reason to pin this on Russia, because they want the EU to impose bloody SANCTIONS, damnit! Undercutting their own case means that this statement has to be taken more seriously than the usual propaganda that they spit out.
Just to clarify: I was speaking of Signym having a watershed moment. She used to say how the Western press was bought and paid for by the Gov., and yet to make her point in this case, she's fine quoting some pretty tired, main stream western press outlets. Now they're bad, now they're fine - eh?
Let me frame this in a way that even you might understand:
Russia has been making a case all along it wasn't them. They have thrown all kinds of chaff into the air, so to speak: it was a Ukraine jet fighter, it was Ukraine shooting at what they thought was Putin's plane. Even their very official, Defense-Ministry statements are circumspect: Ukraine had BUK missiles in the region, Ukraine's missile radar went active before and during the incident, a radar screen grab showed a military jet in the same horizontal flight path as MH17. There have been no DEFINITIVE statements that Ukraine did it, just circumstantial ones. I think you would agree that Russia has a POV which it intends to promulgate in it's press. (You may think I'm not sensitive to Russian propaganda, but I am. I note very carefully the exact borders of a nation's definitive statements, and those that are made by innuendo. The most important information is almost always the information that's left out.)
Now, if RUSSIA were to come out and flatly say... we have ruled out Kiev's involvement because of such and such data *... that would be counter to what they have been suggesting all along. And because it is RUSSIAN administration that is saying it -not the WH which has every reason to make that statement- then it has more credibility.
If THAT kind of statement came from Russia, would you not trust it more than the USA absolving Kiev, which it's been doing all along?
I've tried to made this pellucidly clear. Do you understand now how different statements from the same outlet may be given more or less credibility?
Select to view spoiler:
*Not an exact analogy, because an exact analogy would be Russia accusing the USA of supplying a government which is killing its own civilians, and fostering a climate of violence, while Kiev is merely the trigger finger. But I don't want to confuse the issue by making an exact analogy, just to point out that the first example isn't a 1:1 representation
Am I being snarky??? YOU BETCHA! For someone who likes to think of themselves as a superior intellect, this should not have been past your capabilities. But apparently, it was.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Trained and supplied with BUK anti-aircraft rockets? Or just generally "trained and supplied"?
Considering that the U.S. can identify what type of missile was used and where it was fired from by its radar emissions and the damage to the aircraft, seems that they can say that... and they have.
Of course if they don't repeat every specific thing they've released in every single one of their news releases or reports, you look for anything that was left out of one report as evidence that it wasn't reported at all.
"When your heart breaks, you choose what to fill the cracks with. Love or hate. But hate won't ever heal. Only love can do that."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
For those not familiar with geography, Rostov-On-Don is a Russian city which about 120 miles from Donetsk, or about 60 miles to the Ukrainian border. Would be interested to know how they came up with THAT conclusion. Satellite photos?
Wow!! 60 whole miles from the border!! Why that'd take a truck two whole hours, if it was slow. [sarcasm]Obviously it'd be impossible for a Russian-made truck to get a Buk-1 into or out of eastern Ukraine.[/sarcasm]
Not sure what you're trying to prove with this statement, SignyM, except that you have no idea how quickly modern mechanized forces can move on hard-surface roads.
"When your heart breaks, you choose what to fill the cracks with. Love or hate. But hate won't ever heal. Only love can do that."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by G:Quote:
Originally posted by BYTEMITE:Quote:
Originally posted by G:
Are you saying The Western Media (whoever that is) is not on a short gov leash? I thought that was one of your things? This might be a watershed moment.
Does the media still even have watershed moments? I thought they stopped doing that when journalistic integrity died.
I mean there was a lovely funeral, with clowns and everything, Rupert Murdoch and Piers Morgan had a brawl in the lobby, they served little cakes afterward.
As for all of this, I dunno. I've no doubt the American media is manipulating us, but at the same time, Putin really is a scumbag and he's been leading his country into somewhat questionable actions with Ukraine. And that's even with me thinking that Crimea might be somewhat possibly legitimate due to all the ethnic Russians there.
This is one of those things where I don't think it's going to be possible to know who to believe and we may never know for sure. Probably time to visit the fringe sites and start piecing together our own narrative.
Just to clarify: I was speaking of Signym having a watershed moment. She used to say how the Western press was bought and paid for by the Gov., and yet to make her point in this case, she's fine quoting some pretty tired, main stream western press outlets. Now they're bad, now they're fine - eh?
I agree with the problem of Eastern Ukraine and Crimea, in terms of ethnic Russians who want to live under Russian rule. Isn't there another way to solve that problem without tanks and rockets?
I'm not convinced at all that they do. Polls earlier this year showed that a majority of Russian speakers, while wary of the new authorities in Kiev, favoured a united Ukraine. The separatist movement started out with quite small protests in a few cities. Then it changed to small groups of suspiciously well-armed and well-trained men attacking police stations. I see no evidence that the separatist movement represents the population at large.
It's not personal. It's just war.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Please, the Rappy impression is getting old.
Or is just an impression-?
Some of you here need to broaden your horizons. You think there are two types in the world, You and rappy. If you only had a brain. Hey, maybe the wizard will give you one. You know Mal4prez. Both of you show very little nuance in your understanding of what makes people tick and what it is to be an individual. The two of you like to clump everyone into very small groups, one or the other. It shows you guys to be very limited.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Funny how reichwingers will breathlessly post articles thinking they're proving a point no one made.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
What's a 'kingdom' or 'realm' winger again?
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Here you go Sig, let me make a contribution to your thread. How's this?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
So, I looked through all the major US news sources: NYTimes, WaPo, CNN, NBC, and ABC and the only site that carried the US retraction of evidence up front was NBC. I have to say their coverage has been thorough, airing all vital info. Also searched google news and didn't find it within the first couple dozen or so links.
But it was quite a spectacular retraction.
http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/ukraine-plane-crash/u-s-finds-no-dire
ct-link-russia-downing-mh17-n162426
U.S. Finds No Direct Link to Russia in Downing of MH17
The United States has found no direct link between the Russian government and the downing of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 last week, three senior intelligence officials said Tuesday.
The officials repeated their BELIEF that pro-Russian separatists fired the missile that took out the jetliner over Ukraine, killing 298 people, but they said they could not say definitively that the separatists did it.
“There’s not going to be a Perry Mason moment,” one U.S. official said. “We don’t know who pulled the trigger.”
The White House stressed that it was not backing off what President Barack Obama, Secretary of State John Kerry and U.N. Ambassador Samantha Power have said for days — that Russia provided training and support for the separatists who PROBABLY shot down the plane, and therefore bore some responsibility.
Instead, the intelligence officials were “just saying that we don’t know if Russians pulled the trigger,” one administration official said. “That doesn’t absolve Russia.”
The officials cited several reasons they could not make a final determination about who fired. One was that U.S. officials have yet to see the plane wreckage in person.
The disclosures came a day after Russian officials challenged the United States to back up its finger-pointing with evidence.
The intelligence officials, summarizing the findings of American intelligence five days after the crash, said the most likely explanation was that the separatists hit the passenger jet by mistake. Separatists had boasted about shooting down Ukrainian military aircraft.
Andrea Mitchell of NBC News contributed to this report.
Compare that with Obama's earlier statement that they had 'confidence' the missile came from separatist-controlled areas: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-07-17/malaysia-jet-shot-down-in-ukr
aine-near-russia-ifx-says.html starting @~ 10:15
And then there's the infamous video:
I read that the billboard was for a car dealership just a kilometer or two down the road in a town NOT controlled by the separatists. And it's not something I could hope to verify in YEARS - assuming I made it my life's work. But it seems to me there are many people who could, by tomorrow. That's what I find so frustrating. Is the video valid, or not? It seems simple enough to determine. Shouldn't somebody be on it?
SAGAN: We are releasing vast quantities of carbon dioxide, increasing the greenhouse effect. It may not take much to destabilize the Earth's climate, to convert this heaven, our only home in the cosmos, into a kind of hell.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I just gotta ask 1kiki, did you watch the video above your post or the story I posted by the associated press with the rebel leader? Both the video and news story goes a long way to show everything said about the shoot down was correct. Watch the video.
Some might even see it as a confession.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME