No the cbc reported it, you do pay taxes.... you should write your MP and complain that the CBC reports false crap.
US Intelligence: No Evidence Russia Did It
- Thread starter Big Sleazy
- Start date
No they don't. They made an accurate report that the Russian Foreign ministry made an allegation that few outside Russia will believe.
Here is a New York Times Report about the Russian activity. The report notes that US officials accept the allegations of direct Russian involvement as accurate. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/26/w...illery-fires-into-ukraine-kiev-says.html?_r=1
KIEV, Ukraine — Russia has stepped up its direct involvement in fighting between the Ukranian military and separatist insurgents, unleashing artillery attacks from Russian territory and massing heavy weapons along the border, Ukrainian and American officials say.
Russia’s aim, the officials say, appears to be to stem and perhaps roll back gains made by government forces, who have been retaking rebel-held territory and trying to seal the border. They say Russia’s accelerated intervention raises the prospect of more direct and more heated fighting between Ukraine and Russia.
American officials, citing military intelligence, including satellite images, warned that Russia appeared to be preparing to arm the rebels with more high-powered weaponry than it has previously supplied, including tanks, armored vehicles and powerful Tornado multiple rocket launchers.
Among the gains of the Ukrainian forces, following days of intense fighting, was the recapture of Lysychansk. The city of more than 100,000 had been a rebel stronghold, posing a strategic obstacle to government troops pressing through the Luhansk region from the north and west. The Ukrainian military called in air support as its ground troops struggled to expel insurgents.
A NATO military officer, speaking on the condition of anonymity because the comments were about sensitive intelligence matters, said by telephone, “The United States has shared intelligence information with NATO today regarding strikes that are occurring from within Russian territory, firing into Ukraine territory.”
In Kiev, the Ukrainian capital, a military spokesman said on Friday that Ukrainian troops were coming under increased fire from the Russian side of the border, and that the Ukrainian military had recently shot down three Russian surveillance drones. One was used to target a Ukrainian base near the town of Amvrosiivka, which then quickly came under heavy rocket attack, the spokesman said.
The military spokesman, Andriy Lysenko, said Ukrainian forces were engaged in particularly heavy fighting near a border crossing at Chervona Zorya, not far from where two Ukrainian fighter jets were downed on Wednesday in what Ukrainian officials said was a missile attack from the Russian side of the border.
“We have facts of shelling of Ukrainian positions from the territory of Russian Federation,” Mr. Lysenko said. “We have facts on the violation of air border between Ukraine and Russia.”
Mr. Lysenko said some Russian soldiers had surrendered to Ukrainian forces. “We have information about weapons and mercenaries, who have respective skills for warfare, who have been passing over from the territory of Russian Federation,” he said.
If I had to make a choice between the accuracy of a report in the NY Times and the allegations of one of Putin's ass-kisser lackeys, I'll take the Times.
Crucifixion and other stories
Mr Putin has blamed the tragedy of MH17 on Ukraine, yet he is the author of its destruction. A high-court’s worth of circumstantial evidence points to the conclusion that pro-Russian separatists fired a surface-to-air missile out of their territory at what they probably thought was a Ukrainian military aircraft. Separatist leaders boasted about it on social media and lamented their error in messages intercepted by Ukrainian intelligence and authenticated by America (see article).
Russia’s president is implicated in their crime twice over. First, it looks as if the missile was supplied by Russia, its crew was trained by Russia, and after the strike the launcher was spirited back to Russia. Second, Mr Putin is implicated in a broader sense because this is his war. The linchpins of the self-styled Donetsk People’s Republic are not Ukrainian separatists but Russian citizens who are, or were, members of the intelligence services. Their former colleague, Mr Putin, has paid for the war and armed them with tanks, personnel carriers, artillery—and batteries of surface-to-air missiles. The separatists pulled the trigger, but Mr Putin pulled the strings.
The enormity of the destruction of flight MH17 should have led Mr Putin to draw back from his policy of fomenting war in eastern Ukraine. Yet he has persevered, for two reasons. First, in the society he has done so much to mould, lying is a first response. The disaster immediately drew forth a torrent of contradictory and implausible theories from his officials and their mouthpieces in the Russian media: Mr Putin’s own plane was the target; Ukrainian missile-launchers were in the vicinity. And the lies got more complex. The Russian fiction that a Ukrainian fighter jet had fired the missile ran into the problem that the jet could not fly at the altitude of MH17, so Russian hackers then changed a Wikipedia entry to say that the jets could briefly do so. That such clumsily Soviet efforts are easily laughed off does not defeat their purpose, for their aim is not to persuade but to cast enough doubt to make the truth a matter of opinion. In a world of liars, might not the West be lying, too?
Second, Mr Putin has become entangled in a web of his own lies, which any homespun moralist could have told him was bound to happen. When his hirelings concocted propaganda about fascists running Kiev and their crucifixion of a three-year-old boy, his approval ratings among Russian voters soared by almost 30 percentage points, to over 80%. Having roused his people with falsehoods, the tsar cannot suddenly wriggle free by telling them that, on consideration, Ukraine’s government is not too bad. Nor can he retreat from the idea that the West is a rival bent on Russia’s destruction, ready to resort to lies, bribery and violence just as readily as he does. In that way, his lies at home feed his abuses abroad.
Stop spinning
In Russia such doublespeak recalls the days of the Soviet Union when Pravda claimed to tell the truth. This mendocracy will end in the same way as that one did: the lies will eventually unravel, especially as it becomes obvious how much money Mr Putin and his friends have stolen from the Russian people, and he will fall. The sad novelty is that the West takes a different attitude this time round. In the old days it was usually prepared to stand up to the Soviet Union, and call out its falsehoods. With Mr Putin it looks the other way.
Take Ukraine. The West imposed fairly minor sanctions on Russia after it annexed Crimea, and threatened tougher ones if Mr Putin invaded eastern Ukraine. To all intents and purposes, he did just that: troops paid for by Russia, albeit not in Russian uniforms, control bits of the country. But the West found it convenient to go along with Mr Putin’s lie, and the sanctions eventually imposed were too light and too late. Similarly, when he continued to supply the rebels, under cover of a ceasefire that he claimed to have organised, Western leaders vacillated.
The West should face the uncomfortable truth that Mr Putin’s Russia is fundamentally antagonistic. Bridge-building and resets will not persuade him to behave as a normal leader. The West should impose tough sanctions now, pursue his corrupt friends and throw him out of every international talking shop that relies on telling the truth. Anything else is appeasement—and an insult to the innocents on MH17.
http://www.economist.com/news/leade...de&spv=xm&ah=9d7f7ab945510a56fa6d37c30b6f1709
This is an article in The Economist on why Putin's lies are sicker, bigger, more twisted and more dangerous than anything in the West. All governments lie, granted. The Russians however take lying to a whole new level of loathsome.
Well if that article is authentic then we know that Putin will soon have him killed and then start looking for a face saving exit to this adventure. The person that will engineer this for him is Angela Merkel who is probably the smartest leader in Europe right now. and probably the smartest leader of a major nation on the entire planet.
People only worry about how much is being stolen when their lives are not improving. As long as Putin can keep moving Russia forward, no one cares if he steals. Yeltsin stole a BOATLOAD. His net worth was once estimated at $28B . Gorbachev is worth a mere 128M ...
Sydney Morning Herald - by Deborah Gough - 6 days ago
Could this be the missile launcher that brought down the MH17 flight fleeing the Ukraine ... The video has not been independently verified.
http://www.smh.com.au/world/video-r...g-moved-to-russian-border-20140719-zuqfz.html
And you believe that nutjob? Please, that website is for conspiracy minded dummies.
Western lies allow you to live like you live today (including importing a beautiful Eastern European wife).
Russian lies allow Putin live like he lives today: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...nes-yachts-white-gold-watches-47k-toilet.html
Still cannot distinguish between lies?
I'm just pointing out the distinction between CBC reporting what a source says, versus the CBC being the source. As someone has said, they are reporting what the Russian government is saying, not reporting necessarily that it is true. If they had corroboration from other sources, they would mention that in their report. This is the basics of journalism.
This whole episode is bringing out some really illogical sides to people.
Strelkov will be killed eventually by either the SBU or the GRU. But right now, he is a Russian national hero and untouchable. And I'm sure he's not taking any walks late at night in dark alleys.
Putin has no face-saving exit from this adventure. That's what makes it so interesting. And scary.
He bet the bank on a series of high probables;
1. That he could bribe Akhmetov, the Donetsk oligarch and political boss into supporting a separatist puppet state in that region.
2. That Ukraine would collapse and fragment under pressure.
3. That Poroshenko would deal away Donetsk and Lugansk to get peace.
4. That the Uke army wouldn't fight.
5. That Merkel and the others would deal out without sanctions.
At least one of those probables should have come in as a done deal. But he rolled snake-eyes each time. Now the only roll he has left is an invasion of Ukraine. And that will get him sanctioned and isolated by every other developed nation for the next decade. And all he will get back from the deal is political credibility in Russia and the economic deadweight of Donetsk and Lugansk hanging from his balls. It's a loser's roll, but it's the only 1 he can make.
There is always a face saving exit, and the Germans and US had better grow up and help engineer one. Everyone assumes that the guy that replaces Putin will be better. How often has that played out. As long as the sanctions remain in place, Putin cannot change course, to do so would be to show weakness. So you have a hardening of positions. Since no one wants to fight a war with Russia, that seems pretty effin clear, the clowns needs to try harder to engineer a peace. I suspect the face saving exit will be something like this:
A new Federal structure for Ukraine,
A referendum at some undetermined time on separating from Ukraine
Enshrining the Russian language and protection of Ethnic Russian Ukrainians in the constitution.
Question is, how many more will die before we get there.
Yes but it happens in total war all of the time.
When the Nazis bombed London, the Allies bombed Dresden, etc. etc.
+1
though I would hope that the thought of Ukraine breaking apart would bring them to the table.
At least people aren't focusing on Ukraine's debt, because even if the come to an agreement with the russian ethnics, they are still broke. People are either not working or working and not getting paid.
Pre and post Western coup there is good evidence that the Germans tried, but the Americans have basically sabotaged this at every turn. The Americans, Europeans, and Russians sat dawn and cut a deal a couple of days before the coup, and at the goading and active involvement of the Americans, the coup rolled on. The Americans basically shrugged and said, "Facts on the ground." At the G-7 (was 8) basically the same thing happened. A deal was made on the pretense of the new post coup election President was going to be reasonable, and amenable to negotiating, and he immediately started a military offensive. At this point Putin knows he'll be the villain in the English language press no matter what happens, so he has no conceivable reason to abandon the separatists.
Putin's minimal solution is to keep the rebels in the game in the East, and to just wait for the Ukraine to go over the cliff from IMF austerity, paying market rates for gas, and because Ukraine's heavy industry is Russian oriented and won't see a dollar if it's under the thumb of the Kiev regime. Putin's more maximal solution would be to aide the rebels to the point where they take everything East of the Dnieper, the mostly Russian South out to Odessa (linking up with Transnistria), and maybe even have them grab Kiev (as the cradle of Russian civilization). That'd basically leave the US and EU with a rump, landlocked, shithole of a country.
Err, no.
What really happened is that Poroshenko was happy as hell that there was a cease-fire and a way out. But the separatist groups simply ignored the cease-fire. Some leaders paid lip service to the truce and kept fighting anyway. Others simply did not even verbally accept the truce. At the end of a week, there was a large casualty list of Ukrainian soldiers and the separatists had received a lot more Soviet equipment, so Poroshenko refused to play the game anymore and went back to war.
Sounds like you read way too much Russian propaganda. There is no real possibility that Putin will scoop the entire southern Ukraine. He'd be in guerilla war up to his ass. I'd look for a move forward into Ukraine to cover Lugansk and Donetsk.
Sounds like you don't read much about the conflict.
Poroshenko agreed to all 3 of your conditions. The separatists said fuck you and kept shooting.
At one time, it was hoped that the conflict could be negotiated down. Putin pretended to agree, but at the same time kept funnelling troops and armaments into Ukraine and telling the separatist leaders to refuse all negotiations. His intent is to destabilize Ukraine and keep the conflict going there. It was all a big game from the Russian side.
Anyone who thinks the West and Ukraine refused to compromise, simply hasn't done any reading on the topic.
WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Russian President Vladimir Putin appears to be doubling down on Ukraine, stepping up Russia's role in the fight between Ukraine's government and the rebels.
The U.S. and Ukraine are accusing Russia of firing artillery on Ukrainian troops from its Russian soil and preparing to move more heavy weapons over the border.
This marks a dangerous escalation in the most serious tensions between Russia and the west since the Cold War ended.
Not every video can be verified, but U.S. officials say that half a dozen times over the past two weeks Russia has fired barrages from its own territory into Ukraine. The shelling, which Russian soldiers have been bragging about on the Internet, lasts about a half an hour and appears to be aimed at Ukrainian military units fighting the separatist rebels.
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Martin Dempsey said Putin is showing no sign of being cowed by the international condemnation of Russia's alleged role in the shootdown of the Malaysian airliner.
"There may be some folks who could convince themselves that Putin would be looking for a reason to deescalate. He's actually taken a decision to escalate," Dempsey said Thursday.
The shelling began at the same time Russia increased the flow of weapons to the rebels in Ukraine, including tanks, artillery, multiple rocket launchers and apparently the surface-to-air missile which shot down the airliner.
The weapons are identical to those in the arsenals of the Ukrainian military, allowing the rebels to claim they captured them on the battlefield.
They are coming from a base in southern Russia, where a much larger caliber rocket launcher has been spotted in recent days. A comparison of satellite photos from June and July show how much the supply base has expanded in the past month.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/evidence-russia-opened-fire-on-ukraine/
The U.S. and Ukraine are accusing Russia of firing artillery on Ukrainian troops from its Russian soil and preparing to move more heavy weapons over the border.
This marks a dangerous escalation in the most serious tensions between Russia and the west since the Cold War ended.
Not every video can be verified, but U.S. officials say that half a dozen times over the past two weeks Russia has fired barrages from its own territory into Ukraine. The shelling, which Russian soldiers have been bragging about on the Internet, lasts about a half an hour and appears to be aimed at Ukrainian military units fighting the separatist rebels.
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Martin Dempsey said Putin is showing no sign of being cowed by the international condemnation of Russia's alleged role in the shootdown of the Malaysian airliner.
"There may be some folks who could convince themselves that Putin would be looking for a reason to deescalate. He's actually taken a decision to escalate," Dempsey said Thursday.
The shelling began at the same time Russia increased the flow of weapons to the rebels in Ukraine, including tanks, artillery, multiple rocket launchers and apparently the surface-to-air missile which shot down the airliner.
The weapons are identical to those in the arsenals of the Ukrainian military, allowing the rebels to claim they captured them on the battlefield.
They are coming from a base in southern Russia, where a much larger caliber rocket launcher has been spotted in recent days. A comparison of satellite photos from June and July show how much the supply base has expanded in the past month.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/evidence-russia-opened-fire-on-ukraine/
Founded in 2005, RT is billed as a counterweight to the bias of Western media outlets. In reality, the broadcast outlet is an unofficial house organ for President Vladimir Putin’s government. Under the guise of journalistic inquiry, it produces agitprop funded by the Russian state, and beams it around the world to nearly 650 million people in more than 100 countries. RT is Russia’s “propaganda bullhorn,” U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said recently, “deployed to promote President Putin’s fantasy about what is playing out on the ground.”
Firth was no dupe. She knew the politics of her paymasters. “We are lying every single day at RT,” she explained Monday afternoon in a phone interview from England. “There are a million different ways to lie, and I really learned that at RT.”
As the international media published reports indicating the plane was shot down by pro-Russian separatists, RT has suggested Ukraine was responsible, cast Moscow as a scapegoat and bemoaned the insensitivity of outlets focusing on the geopolitical consequences of the crime.
For Firth, the coverage was the last straw. She announced her resignation on July 18, as her employer broadcast a flurry of reports that read more like Kremlin press releases. She described a five-year fight to uphold the principles of journalistic integrity in a place where every reporting assignment comes with a “brief” outlining the story’s conclusion. “It’s mass information manipulation,” she says. “They have a very clear idea in their mind of what they’re trying to prove.”
In Russia, the domestic media have long been lapdogs, and reporters who bite their masters sometimes turn up dead. “The media in Russia are expected to be mouthpieces for power,” says Sarah Oates, a professor of journalism at the University of Maryland who studies the Russian media. “RT follows this model. They’ll mix a little bit of reality with a little bit of smearing, and they’ll steer the viewer into questioning things.”
In the aftermath of the crash last week, the RT machine kicked into overdrive, churning out a steady stream of strange reports. In an effort to implicitly assign blame on the Ukrainians, it noted the proximity of Putin’s own plane. It quoted a Russian defense ministry source asking why a Ukrainian air force jet was detected nearby. And it quoted another anonymous Russian official, who volunteered the juicy claim that a Ukrainian anti-aircraft missile was operational in the vicinity at the time of the incident. This is how RT works, explains Firth: by arranging facts to fit a fantasy.
“What they do is a very smart, slick way of manipulating reality,” she says. “In Ukraine, you’re taking a very small part of a much wider story, totally omitted the context of the story, and so what you wind up with on air is outright misinformation.”
Sometimes the end result is anything but slick. In March, a group of alumni and students from the Mohyla School of Journalism in Kiev, along with associated journalists, launched a fact-checking site to chronicle false reporting about the Ukrainian crisis. The site, Stopfake.org, features a long menu of whoppers from Russian media. Among the most egregious, the group’s founder told TIME, is the case of a blond actress who has cropped up in different roles over the course of conflict. The actress, Maria Tsypko, has been interviewed on state TV and identified as separatist camp organizer in Odessa, a political refugee in Sevastopol and an election monitor in Crimea, according to the site. The only thing that never changes is her affection for Mother Russia.
These outlandish flubs are a problem for the Russian propaganda effort, which forks out millions to cloak spin as truth-telling. It’s hard to maintain the illusion when the audience can see the strings and wires behind the scenes. “It’s been a particularly effective means of propaganda, and a very effective voice for the Russian state,” says Oates. “But if you’re going to engage in propaganda, you have to do it well. They have completely embarrassed themselves.” http://time.com/3014822/malaysia-airlines-ukraine-crash-rt-russian-television/
Expose of Russian propaganda and Russian news service, RT by Time Magazine.
Firth was no dupe. She knew the politics of her paymasters. “We are lying every single day at RT,” she explained Monday afternoon in a phone interview from England. “There are a million different ways to lie, and I really learned that at RT.”
As the international media published reports indicating the plane was shot down by pro-Russian separatists, RT has suggested Ukraine was responsible, cast Moscow as a scapegoat and bemoaned the insensitivity of outlets focusing on the geopolitical consequences of the crime.
For Firth, the coverage was the last straw. She announced her resignation on July 18, as her employer broadcast a flurry of reports that read more like Kremlin press releases. She described a five-year fight to uphold the principles of journalistic integrity in a place where every reporting assignment comes with a “brief” outlining the story’s conclusion. “It’s mass information manipulation,” she says. “They have a very clear idea in their mind of what they’re trying to prove.”
In Russia, the domestic media have long been lapdogs, and reporters who bite their masters sometimes turn up dead. “The media in Russia are expected to be mouthpieces for power,” says Sarah Oates, a professor of journalism at the University of Maryland who studies the Russian media. “RT follows this model. They’ll mix a little bit of reality with a little bit of smearing, and they’ll steer the viewer into questioning things.”
In the aftermath of the crash last week, the RT machine kicked into overdrive, churning out a steady stream of strange reports. In an effort to implicitly assign blame on the Ukrainians, it noted the proximity of Putin’s own plane. It quoted a Russian defense ministry source asking why a Ukrainian air force jet was detected nearby. And it quoted another anonymous Russian official, who volunteered the juicy claim that a Ukrainian anti-aircraft missile was operational in the vicinity at the time of the incident. This is how RT works, explains Firth: by arranging facts to fit a fantasy.
“What they do is a very smart, slick way of manipulating reality,” she says. “In Ukraine, you’re taking a very small part of a much wider story, totally omitted the context of the story, and so what you wind up with on air is outright misinformation.”
Sometimes the end result is anything but slick. In March, a group of alumni and students from the Mohyla School of Journalism in Kiev, along with associated journalists, launched a fact-checking site to chronicle false reporting about the Ukrainian crisis. The site, Stopfake.org, features a long menu of whoppers from Russian media. Among the most egregious, the group’s founder told TIME, is the case of a blond actress who has cropped up in different roles over the course of conflict. The actress, Maria Tsypko, has been interviewed on state TV and identified as separatist camp organizer in Odessa, a political refugee in Sevastopol and an election monitor in Crimea, according to the site. The only thing that never changes is her affection for Mother Russia.
These outlandish flubs are a problem for the Russian propaganda effort, which forks out millions to cloak spin as truth-telling. It’s hard to maintain the illusion when the audience can see the strings and wires behind the scenes. “It’s been a particularly effective means of propaganda, and a very effective voice for the Russian state,” says Oates. “But if you’re going to engage in propaganda, you have to do it well. They have completely embarrassed themselves.” http://time.com/3014822/malaysia-airlines-ukraine-crash-rt-russian-television/
Expose of Russian propaganda and Russian news service, RT by Time Magazine.
