Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Game Changer (if true): What Did US Spy Satellites See in Ukraine? [View all]geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)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 Poroshenkos 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 dont 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 isnt dispositive, but its nice to be clear. For myself, Id 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 Sakers 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, thats an interesting point of view, isnt it? If its no longer a local conflict, just what kind of a conflict is it?
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 Poroshenkos 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 dont 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 isnt dispositive, but its nice to be clear. For myself, Id 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 Sakers 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, thats an interesting point of view, isnt it? If its 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.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
176 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Game Changer (if true): What Did US Spy Satellites See in Ukraine? [View all]
Karmadillo
Jul 2014
OP
Two excellent journalists both of whom have been right far more often than the MSM
sabrina 1
Jul 2014
#6
Agree. Over at conservativecrackpots.com they really hate Parry and Escobar. nt
bananas
Jul 2014
#84
Well what are they going to do about the teenager and the farmer who say they saw the missiles being
kelliekat44
Jul 2014
#152
10 cm (4-inches) is probably the maximum for any existing - in ideal conditions.
ThoughtCriminal
Jul 2014
#10
They absolutely have that ability. But there is a serious flaw in the OP article.
stevenleser
Jul 2014
#11
Well , let me be clear, I was in AF Space Command and had friends who dealt with those satellites.
stevenleser
Jul 2014
#22
Even if they can identify the uniforms, they can't identify them as definitively Ukrainian
Spider Jerusalem
Jul 2014
#53
Even more to your point, nothing is to say the rebels didn't steal and are using Ukrainian uniforms.
stevenleser
Jul 2014
#91
There is actually a law of optics that talks about the relationship between resolution and viewing
stevenleser
Jul 2014
#159
Street level google is almost that good. I used to have an atlas of China made by CIA satellite pix.
freshwest
Feb 2015
#175
If I'm not mistaken, both Russia and the separatists have denied firing the missile.
Karmadillo
Jul 2014
#35
I love how everyone on DU has suddenly become an expert on spy satellite imagery.
former9thward
Jul 2014
#141
Consortium News lost all credibility after Syria. But DU's diehards will keep searching f/this crap
KittyWampus
Jul 2014
#20
There are also fascists in Russia's government. Why do you always gloss over that point? nt
stevenleser
Jul 2014
#92
I will try to be better and use you as a model, in fact. You nailed it, except
Karmadillo
Jul 2014
#56
When ANY supposed news source becomes the equivalent of Baghdad Bob they lose credibility.
KittyWampus
Jul 2014
#25
You don't get to tell people to 'grow up' when you're adovcating the use of anti-semitic sites
muriel_volestrangler
Jul 2014
#117
no, I won't 'chill' at the idea of Nazi propaganda being mainstreamed here.
geek tragedy
Jul 2014
#121
This is one of the big problems with the Executive branch's embrace of lying
MannyGoldstein
Jul 2014
#62
If we accept basic physical science and empirical evidence we do know they're telling the truth.
KittyWampus
Jul 2014
#66
Exactly - it corroborates what the web page said, from a different source
muriel_volestrangler
Jul 2014
#97
"This thing is as murky as it is horrendous. But answer & blame will emerge."
MannyGoldstein
Jul 2014
#131
Well, my neighbor's grandson's wife's hairdresser, who's normally a reliable source...
ColesCountyDem
Jul 2014
#60
I would honestly be surprised if even the most advanced satellites could resolve beer bottles.
Gravitycollapse
Jul 2014
#76
Mr. Parry,Sir, Has Now Officially Given Up ANY Pretense Of Being A Journalist
The Magistrate
Jul 2014
#83
Please. US satellites, which can see ticks on a dog, never saw MH370, never saw MH17, never saw....
WinkyDink
Jul 2014
#88
It helps if you understand the technology. It's good, but it isn't magical. nt
stevenleser
Jul 2014
#106
No question. I've seen it with my own eyes. Albeit the version from 23 years ago. nt
stevenleser
Jul 2014
#174
You mean this might be another neocon wargasm, and the conservadems are pandering to them again? n/t
betterdemsonly
Jul 2014
#129