|
Kerry Lies, Repeats Debunked State Department Claim
The Russian President Vladimir Putin once famously called John Kerry a "liar". Kerry now again confirmed Putin's claim.
In Remarks on Ukraine U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry yesterday asserted:
Some of the individual special operations personnel, who were active on Russia’s behalf in Chechnya, Georgia, and Crimea have been photographed in Slovyansk, Donetsk, and Luhansk.
Pictures allegedly proving that some protesters in east-Ukraine were Russian "special operation personal" were "reported" on on page 1 of Monday's New York Times. The pictures were distributed by the State Department but originally from the Ukrainian coup-government.
With a little open source research Internet commentators at Reddit immediately found that some of those pictures:
- allegedly taken in Russia were actually taken in Ukraine
- showing allegedly the same person were of two different ones
- were intentionally lowered in resolution to disguise them while high resolution copies were available elsewhere
- showing "Russian equipment" were of Ukrainian weapons and U.S./EU sourced equipment.
On Wednesday the New York Times somewhat retracted and corrected the story but now only on page 9 of its print edition.
Veteran journalist Robert Parry compared the NYT behavior with the NYT distributed lies about "Saddam's centrifuges":
Many of the flaws in the photographic evidence were there to see before Monday’s front-page article, but the newspaper was apparently blinded by its anti-Russian bias.
For instance, the article devoted much attention to the Russian skill at “masking” the presence of its troops, but that claim would seem to be contradicted by these allegedly secret warriors posing for public photos.
Parry was interviewed on The Real News.
TIME magazine talked with one of the Russian "special operations personal" in east-Ukraine who had been depicted as having served with Russia in the war with Georgia and found him to be a Cossack petty criminal under indictment in Russia:
His men then gathered around to laugh at the photos of Mozhaev and the man in Georgia, slapping Mozhaev on the back as he learned that he was not only famous, but a famous Russian special-forces agent. “That guy looks more like Osama bin Laden than our Babay,” one of the gunmen remarked.
Yesterday the New York Times Public Editor criticized the paper's handling of the story:
It all feels rather familiar – the rushed publication of something exciting, often based on an executive branch leak. And then, afterward, with a kind of “morning after” feeling, here comes a more sober, less prominently displayed followup story, to deal with objections while not clarifying much of anything.
The pictures from the coup government in Ukraine distributed through the U.S. State Department are obviously fakery and purely anti-Russian propaganda. The story of Russian "special operations personnel" in east-Ukraine is a lie. It has been debunked as such in several U.S. publications. Despite that Kerry yesterday repeated it proving himself to be exactly what Putin had claimed, a liar.
Once again, if one goes to Parry’s site to read all of his work done on just how f*cking absurd the propaganda concerning Ukraine is but especially his recent piece on Michael R. Gordon everyone will just be regaled with how great of fucking journo Parry is in re-exposing these tawdry propagandists whores for their recent work as it so closely hews to their previous war crime commission concerning Iraq in 2002.
HOWEVER, if Parry were HALF the fucking the journalist that he would like us all to believe and TWICE the man that I’m sure he thinks he is, then why does he stop his scathing analysis in 2002? Why doesn’t Parry speak to THIS NYT article that Gordon wrote on September 12, 2001 and which is an AMAZINGLY complete and succinct – almost official sounding, huh? – descriptive narrative of had occurred the day before. I will not waste everyone’s time going over a point by point rebuttal of what Gordon prints as every thinking person should do their own work but let’s just have a little taste of what Gordo dished out a mere 24 hours or so after 9/11 as he admonishes the world onto war:
They [the terrorists] took over civilian airliners on domestic flights, which have less security than those on international routes. The flights originated from several cities and involved different airplanes. So this was not a simple inside job. Indeed, it is likely that the terrorists had the skills to fly the aircraft, at least for the final seconds that were needed to put them on their suicide courses.
In another reflection of careful planning, the structures hit, while symbols of the United States might, were soft targets. The Pentagon, a vast and essentially undefended office building, sits astride a major airline route and highway. It has barriers to stop truck bomb attacks, and metal protectors and bomb detection machines at its entrances. Like the World Trade Center in New York, it had no protection from the air.
So, let me get this straight, once again, Bobbie!! Gordon’s pieces on Ukraine? Obvious propaganda horseshite. Gordon’s pieces on Iraq? Obvious propaganda horseshit. Gordon’s pieces on 9/11? The GOD’S HONEST TRUTH!!!
Here’s Gordon on September 13th, 2001 laying out the entire blueprint for the now decade+ long GWOT – 48 hours after the attack:
It is certainly wrong to think that the threat of terrorism can be addressed through military force alone. There is a role for diplomacy in marshaling international pressure against regimes that shelter terrorists. There is also a need for improved security at home. But it seems certain that the Pentagon will develop plans to punish state sponsors of terrorism with air strikes, air and sea embargoes and, in extreme cases, the use of ground troops.
Punishing terrorist groups in the remote terrain of distant countries like Afghanistan will require rapid military operations to maintain some element of surprise. It may require repeated raids as they move from country to country.
Gee, isn’t 48 hours the same amount of time it took people to verify if some fucking Ukrainians in a newspaper photo were Russian soldiers or not? No matter, Parry tells us to trust Gordon and his ilk just two days after the most singular and spectacular “terrorist” event had taken place? Why come so fucking stupid?
Here’s a Gordon piece from Sept 17th:
Administration officials indicated that military action against Afghanistan need not be an urgent matter without the element of surprise. Indeed, the Pentagon will need time to position its forces if it decides to carry out a major attack in a distant region like Afghanistan, far from American bases.
But administration officials also know that politically it will be easier to take action while world outrage over the terrorist attacks against the World Trade Center and the Pentagon is still fresh.
The military action being planned for Afghanistan is part of a broader diplomatic as well as military policy of holding nations accountable that provide aid and comfort to terrorists.
The administration’s goal is clear: it wants to rip apart the terrorists’ networks. But since the terrorists are hard to find, Washington is focusing not just on them but on the governments that back them. Certainly capturing a terrorist or enemy leader is one of the most difficult of military tasks.
snip
In other cases, political, economic and limited military pressure may be applied. The Bush administration has certainly not committed itself to invading all the nations on the State Department’s list of those found to help terrorists — Iran, Iraq, Syria, Sudan, Libya, Cuba and North Korea.
Nice, huh? So, Michael R. Gordon who is an evil fucking war criminal pig who – Parry tells us – is once again trying to help create more murderous bloodshed was was really really busy right after the false flag event and lead up to the beginning of the GWOT but Parry just somehow fails to mention that. Oopsie!
So, Bobbie, what was that other war criminal you mention – y’know, Judith Miller – yeah, what was SHE writing about right after September 11, 2001? Why, her job was to create the official OBL profile in the MSM!! From her September 14th NYT piece:
His [OBL’s] goal has been consistent for a decade: victory in a self-proclaimed jihad, or Islamic holy war, against the United States and its allies. Now he is suspected of having added thousands of new deaths to an already impressive terrorist toll.
As he has done before, Mr. bin Laden summoned Arab reporters on Wednesday to a compound in Afghanistan to deny responsibility for the stunning strikes while praising those who conducted them.
American intelligence officials now dismiss such denials. While they once debated Mr. bin Laden’s specific connection to the terrorism his networks have spawned, they now acknowledge that this frail, squeaky- voiced Saudi has mobilized hundreds of Muslims in far-flung countries to fight and die for his embittered vision of Islam, if not for him.
So, Judith Fucking Miller – just 3 days after said event – was relaying the message to the world that even though the chimerical – although she does a nice job of character creation, doesn’t she? – OBL DENIED being involved in the 9/11 attacks unnamed US intelligence officials – sound familiar, Bobby, you fuck? – say that his denials are just no believable.
Why isn’t that just fucking adorable, Bobbie? No really, keep up the good work, you effing gatekeeper.
Posted by: JSorrentine | Apr 25 2014 16:31 utc | 28
|
