- Joined
- Apr 24, 2014
- Messages
- 8,761
- Reaction score
- 3,312
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
Robert Parry is highly respected. He's worked the beats at Newsweek, Bloomberg, PBS, AP and NY Times.
How can I maintain an open mind *about a video* that says in its title what I mentioned in the edit to the last part of my post above? We may have crossed messages. Please re-read the last part starting with "you want more proof?" where I addressed the title of the video. It is CLEARLY biased to give the impression that it's been established that Ukrainians shot down MH17.
Now, do I know whether or not Ukrainians or pro-Russian separatists shot down the plane? No.
But I wouldn't let a CLEARLY BIASED AND DISHONEST video be my guide.
See the difference?
Highly respected by whom? Certainly his biased coverage didn't earn *my* respect. Could he be a "has been" who can no longer get employment at Newsweek, Bloomberg, PBS, AP, and NY Times and is now a disgruntled blogger who keeps whining and bashing the mainstream media? Because that's the tone of the blog articles by him I've read in your links.
1st... you haven't read him in ANY of my links.
2nd.. He left each of those places on his own accord and if he wanted to work in the MSM today, he'd be hired in a heart beat. He's an old school journo who doesn't fluff stories and actually investigates. He was at the forefront of starting emags and enews. He hits both sides of the political spectrum as seen here. Where he bashed Libertarianism/Tea Party. Even calling out 9/11 Truthers.
He ranks up there with Edward R. Murrow, Veronica Guerin and Anna Politikovskaya.
His tone is that of a MSM that has long stopped questioning talking points. You may not like it because it doesn't fix your narrative of how "Evil" Russia is. Parry goes for the facts and doesn't pull punches. If Journalism in the MSM was like that today.. MSNBC wouldn't be kow towing to the left, Fox News wouldn't be kow towing to the right and CNN wouldn't be spending 24 hours a day talking about a celebrity.
Ah another avid viewer of Faux News. A mind is a terrible thing to waste. Even my dog knows that the world was revolted by the dunce cowboy, and all the wars he got us into -- not to mention the economy his administration tanked -- that effected the rest of the world.
I meant Lord of Planar's links.
You may have a point. Indeed current MSM journalism in the US is a joke - both sides of the spectrum.
Back to the matter at hand, I wonder what the rebels have to hide:
'Industrial scale' tampering of evidence at MH17 site: Australia
Interesting; the Australian prime minister is actually a right wing guy who up to recently was a Putin sympathizer... Now he talks of a cover-up and tampering with evidence.
I think Putin is guilty. Ukraine seems to have damning evidence.
Ah another avid viewer of Faux News. A mind is a terrible thing to waste. Even my dog knows that the world was revolted by the dunce cowboy, and all the wars he got us into -- not to mention the economy his administration tanked -- that effected the rest of the world.
Huh? Damning evidence.. please show cause this is news. Btw, Russia released all their information yesterday.. might want to read up on it.
I meant Lord of Planar's links.
You may have a point. Indeed current MSM journalism in the US is a joke - both sides of the spectrum.
Back to the matter at hand, I wonder what the rebels have to hide:
'Industrial scale' tampering of evidence at MH17 site: Australia
Interesting; the Australian prime minister is actually a right wing guy who up to recently was a Putin sympathizer... Now he talks of a cover-up and tampering with evidence.
Was it a lie that Reagan didn't say anything for 4 days?
LOL
What is it with you Obamabots that you think that things happening today can be excused by simply finding something 30 years ago and equating it to that? You must not think much of the leadership of the goof in office today when you have to make so many excuses for him constantly.
Was reacting to people posting that Obama didn't react fast enough. Sorry you missed it.
But...last time the russians shot down a jet, this is what happened.
The last time an airliner was shot down by Russia, we didn't give Russia chance after chance to come clean, and ask pretty please either....When we spoke we led from the front....Not this pansy ass way of talking today...
You're saying this airliner was shot down by Russia?? I'd say you're hate for Obama has galvanised your bias.
The last time an airliner was shot down by Russia, we didn't give Russia chance after chance to come clean, and ask pretty please either....When we spoke we led from the front....Not this pansy ass way of talking today...
You're saying this airliner was shot down by Russia?? I'd say you're hate for Obama has galvanised your bias.
If not by Russia directly, than with support of Russia, yes...These systems are not something that can just be walked up to and push a button and away you go....It takes training and support.
Are you sure the Ukrainians don;t have any?But he's right.
The shrapnel impact patterns on the aircraft skin proves it was a anti-aircraft missile, and who in the area has / had those types of systems? Russia.
We also know that it takes 6 months of training to operate the system, which the Rebels don't have, and we also know that there are ex-Russian Military and ex-Russian intelligence officers as part of the rebel forces (probably assigned there by Putin).
So what more do you want to know about all this before reaching a conclusion? How much more evidence and logic do you need?
The link I posted shows it was likely a SA-11 with a fragmentary-warhead. If the article is correct, it is plausible the shrapnel took out the pilots, and not the plane. It could have flown unpiloted for a hundred miles or more before impact. It could have been shot down over the Ukraine controlled area...
I see you have already assigned motive to the removal. What if they are just preparing it for shipment to be examined?I think the removal of evidence is troubling, and shows that the rebels don't want to be scrutinized...
Are you sure the Ukrainians don;t have any?
What makes you so positive?
If not by Russia directly, than with support of Russia, yes...These systems are not something that can just be walked up to and push a button and away you go....It takes training and support.
But he's right.
The shrapnel impact patterns on the aircraft skin proves it was a anti-aircraft missile, and who in the area has / had those types of systems? Russia.
We also know that it takes 6 months of training to operate the system, which the Rebels don't have, and we also know that there are ex-Russian Military and ex-Russian intelligence officers as part of the rebel forces (probably assigned there by Putin).
So what more do you want to know about all this before reaching a conclusion? How much more evidence and logic do you need?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?