Featured US Embassy report offers strong evidence Russian-backed forces behind airplane strike

Evidence is starting to pile up. In response to this crisis Obama should probably draw a red line.

 

Interesting color choice...

http://youtu.be/XsFR8DbSRQE

 

Only yesterday, I wrote an article entitled “6 Reasons To Question The Official Story Of The Malaysian Flight Over Ukraine” where, as the title suggests, I briefly discussed a number of reasons the story presented by Western media outlets blaming Ukrainian separatists and even the Russian government for shooting down the plane were both contradictory and dubious.

Now, on the day after the crash of the flight, more information has emerged regarding the details surrounding what actually brought the flight down. Yet, as is typical in international incidents, the Western press reports simply add more questions to the pile.

First, it is important to point out the deceptive nature of many of the Western reports so it can be demonstrated that the credibility of all future reports should be viewed as highly questionable.

For instance, in the late hours of the evening, a volley of reports emerged suggesting that a Ukrainian separatist leader had Tweeted a statement gloating over shooting down the Malaysian flight before subsequently deleting the Tweet. In reality, the Twitter statement suggested that the separatists had downed an AN-26, a much smaller cargo transport plane, not the Malaysian flight. If those controlling the Twitter account had fired upon the plane, it seems unlikely that they would have confused the aircraft since there is such a difference in their size.

It was subsequently revealed that the Twitter account being reported upon was not actually run by the commander but that it was a “fan page.” The latter has been curiously left out of later reports.

Read More At: http://www.globalresearch.ca/western-media-deception-new-information-and-questions-about-malaysian-flight-mh-17/5392095

Read, React, Blame.

Doesn't take much thinking does it?

Wonder how long before hear "Putin gassed his own people"?

Cui Bono?

 

Your article comes from one of the most desperate conspiracy-theory peddlers in the world, Brandon Turbeville. His "reasons" for questioning the events in eastern Ukraine are an epic fail. He wrote the piece less than a day, perhaps just hours, after the shoot down. He had no facts upon which to base his "article," just wild-eyed suppositions made from bias rather than information. He relied on Russian news agency ITAR-TASS and badly misinformed liberal media to make "factual statements" which proved, less than 24 hours after he posted this garbage, to be false, such as Ukraine moving its lone BUK system to the east, when in fact it still sits in defense of the capitol in Kiev, and that the FAA "ordered" airlines not to fly over the war zone. That also ignores that the FAA has only U.S. carrier authority, plus the fact there never was any such order until after the shootdown.

Then he leaps to the almost-laughable conclusion that the plane shot down Thursday was really the "return" of disappeared Malaysian Airlines Flight 370 -- not really crashed but saved for this day to "embarrass Russia." I say "almost laughable" because the incredible disrespect for the dead and/or missing from both flights such an "informed opinion" requires disqualifies the writer as believable. It almost disqualifies him as human.

You've got to be kidding me. This is one of the "informed sources" you rely on for your constant rejection of the truth? I remind you of this post, Poncho, for which you had no reply then, and will have none now.

 

And here is how these shysters make their "arguments":

Given the track record of the United States, NATO, and governments in general throughout history, one must at least wonder whether or not the recent shootdown of the Malaysian flight over Ukraine was not simply a false flag..

Notice the leading, unsupported allegation, "Given the track record of the US..." as if it's an established fact that the U.S. constantly engages in this sort of activity, followed by innuendo and the leading statement, "one must at least wonder whether or not...."

The style of persuasion used by these hacks is so predictable it's laughable.

 

The thing about conspiracy theorists is their never happy with the accepted and credible explanation. Everything must be what it doesn't appear.

It's worse than arguing with a drunk and a fool. For the former will inevitably sober up and the fool will be caught in their idiocy. The hard-core conspiracy theorist creates a moving target that they think will justify their intellectual malfeasance.

Just the other day I saw a link to a story about the Twin Towers on 9-11 that said no planes ever flew into the towers. Well, I know for a fact they did. Yet my credible testimony means nothing to this conspiracy theorist.

Take this Malaysian Airline incident: no one in the world with any credibility doubts this happened. There are families from across the world who have lost loved ones. There is a field strew with the remnants of a plane. No one is doubting that something happened here. Yet the conspiracy theorists takes the immoral route of questioning it all for the sheer joy of flustering the process and eliciting some overreaction from sensible people.

It is a kind of social thuggery that belies a dishonest person and holds us captive to their whims and delights.

 

Good one!

I think that the Russians themselves did it.

 

One thing the conspiracy theorist loves to say is Cui Bono? (to whose benefit?), as if that explains something. It's just another leading question laden with innuendo. They have used this phrase on just about every major incident that they believe is being covered up or falsely reported.

Well, I guess I should ask--who benefits if the Russian separatists block off investigators from inspecting the crash site? Who benefits if the Russian separatists say they have the black boxes, then say they don't have the black boxes, then they turn them over---four days later?

Funny how when the West threatens new sanctions on Russia, to take effect on Tuesday, that suddenly the separatists are instantly cooperative.

 

For those who are interested in a reasoned assessment on this situation, you might take a look at this:
http://www.activistpost.com/2014/07/mh17-show-and-tell-its-wests-turn.html#!bjoCK0

"The Wall Street Journal reported in its article, "Russia Presents Its Account of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 Crash," that:

"Russia's Defense Ministry on Monday presented its first detailed account of the final moments of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17, saying Russian radar had spotted a second aircraft in the vicinity shortly before the crash and that satellite imagery showed Ukraine had moved missile systems into the area before the incident.

"At a news conference, air force chief Igor Makushev didn't say who the ministry thought had fired the missile that apparently brought down the airliner on Thursday."

Note:
Here we have factual information, not mere accusation.
The exact opposite of venues like Fox News and the rest of the sabre rattlers.

A lie flies swiftly around the world while the truth is putting its shoes on.
The US is determined to prop up the oligarchical Kiev powers that they themselves placed.

Eventually all this will become evident - to the majority of world opinion, if not to some of the diehard tools on this board.

 

No, what we have is a he said, she said situation. The West says one thing, the Russians say another. I'm not totally sold on the idea that the Russian separatists fired the missile, but their actions since the plane was downed is highly suspicious. Also, the fact that the Russians will not come out and accuse Ukraine is interesting.

 

This is the same conspiracy-theory site that Ponch's article came from. I suppose it was possible for someone on that site to at least sound reasonable, but don't be misled regarding the Russian media response. They are very much under control of the Russian government.

Today, for example, they are reporting several different "theories" regarding the shoot-down:

For one, theRussian media claims a Vladimir Putin assassination attempt is to blame for the MH17 shoot-down. Among the many claims Russian media is making are:

The shoot-down was an assassination attempt aimed at Russian President Vladimir Putin. Popular TV anchor Yekaterina Andreyeva told viewers that Putin, flying home from Brazil, used the same flight-path as the Malaysian passenger jet less than one hour before it was hit, leading to her "conclusion" that Putin was the target.

State-owned Rossiya TV revealed another "theory" that Ukraine had "just hours before" the shoot-down deployed a BUK missile launcher in the area near the aviation attack. The the red, white, and blue of the Malaysia Airlines logo being similar to the Russian tricolor led Rossiya to "conclude" the disaster was really the result of a Ukrainian attempt to blow up a Russian passenger jet.

Russia's widely-circulated tabloid, Komsomolskaya Pravda, published a hair-brained story that Ukrainian air traffic controllers purposefully redirected the plane over the war zone. The story even included "screenshots from flight-tracking websites" in an effort to "prove" some fluctuation in MH17's route.​

There's a few problems with all these hair-brained theories.

• Putin returned from Brazil a week before the shoot-down, not an hour.
• Ukraine has one BUK missile system, and it still sits in defense of the capitol of Kiev. The rest of its anti-aircraft defenses are European and American made.
• Pravada's story is just plain stupid. The "fluctuations" in MH17's flight path are not duplicated on actual radar images saved for analysis by western aviation agencies.

One thing you can't accuse Russian media of is having no imagination. Their problem is they sound an awful lot like the old nonsense published by Soviet media so many years ago, the ones that sent most Americans into stitches over their morning coffee, bacon and eggs, when they read what the Russians were claiming about similar incidents.

You and Ponch can claim with all the reasonableness you can muster that there are open questions to be answered. There aren't. Putin wants a return to Soviet-era power, and that involves reclaiming the old satellite states. In attempting to foment revolution in Ukraine, Russia sent Spetsnaz forces to train the rebels and the rebels shot down a civilian airliner by mistake. End of story.

 

There's one way for you who are making matter of fact claims to prove that your "claims" are true.

Show us the proof!

Until then you're just acting like a bunch of emotionally unstable easily manipulated squawking parrots repeating the words of proven liars and unrepentant warmongers. Once again.

Show us the proof! If you have it.

Why is it always the same people that scream "conspiracy theory" the loudest that make matter of fact claims they cannot back up with solid evidence? And why is it always the same people who make the matter of fact claims with no proof the same ones who claim to be the only one's with any credibility? And why are they also the very same ones who DEMAND everyone else prove every word and statement they make?

What's so special about these guys that they can claim exemptions from the rules they make up and try to enforce on everyone else?

Seems a bit odd to me.

I'd use the "H" word but I'd probably be rewarded with another 10 points for pointing out the blatantly obvious nature of these people again.


< snip>

Let's add up Washington, the western media and certain BB members proof so far . . .

Anger. Outrage. Insinuation. Opinion. Hatred. Paranoia. Slanderous remarks. Overworked cliches. Debunked recordings. Unsubstantiated claims by un-named "officials". Youtube clips and "matter of fact claims" made by those who continually hold themselves out as being the most credible people on BB.

In other words . . . none.

Show us the proof!

http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=94497

 

The Russian military themselves did this.

Obama is not going to do anything.

 

So, where is this pile of evidence that proves your claim?

I've seen none of you posting any of it. If you have a pile of evidence and aren't showing it you must be hiding it. Why are you hiding it?

Show it to us already.

 

Aah, the truth is coming out, slowly but surely.
http://consortiumnews.com/2014/07/22/the-mystery-of-a-ukrainian-army-defector/

 

Neither one of you two conspiracy advocates would know the truth or the evidence if you fell face-first into it.

You'd rather believe state-controlled foreign media and wild-eyed nonsense pumpers than the facts.

 

Mmm...I think using "given the track record of the United States..." is actually a great way to lead into something, though granted, what you say after should be credible.
Good grief people. Who is this guy everyone is calling President and allowing to be in control? Look at the sins, the abominations we allow rampant in our country that so many call good, and progress. Look at the corruption. Look at the government tearing apart families, state agencies taking children into government custody right and left with lies and lack of due process. Look how money buys judges.
Yes, look at the track record when you want to know what the United States is capable of. Rejection of G-d, the murder of babies and innocents, profiting off the weak, lies and corruption. And worse, there are moneychangers in her temples, those who profess the truth but work hand in hand with the government for favors and grants, such as BCFS. And this you hold up as good and trustworthy?
I disagree, with much nausea and disgust.

 

I can agree that the conduct of the current administration does not foster confidence in its statements, on this or any other issue. However, post #11 would seem to support belief in the Russian statements while discounting those from Western sources. What makes the Russian info so credible?