* Ukrainian Troops sponsored by the USA / NATO
The Time the United States Blew Up a Passenger Plane …
Via Freedom Outpost
Robert Parry, award winning former Associated Press reporter and author of America’s Stolen Narrative: From Washington and Madison to Nixon, Reagan and the Bushes to Obama , recently reported on his blog that while media outlets are pointing the finger at either Ukrainian rebels or the Russians for the downing of Flight MH17, his source says that the US is in possession of satellite imagery that indicates that the Ukrainian government itself may be to blame. On Tuesday, the Obama State Department was challenged by an AP reporter to provide “forensic evidence” that Russian-backed rebels were to blame for the downed jet. Spokesperson Marie Harf said they basically were relying on YouTube videos and social media posts… no, really.
What I’ve been told by one source, who has provided accurate information on similar matters in the past, is that U.S. intelligence agencies do have detailed satellite images of the likely missile battery that launched the fateful missile, but the battery appears to have been under the control of Ukrainian government troops dressed in what look like Ukrainian uniforms.
The source said CIA analysts were still not ruling out the possibility that the troops were actually eastern Ukrainian rebels in similar uniforms but the initial assessment was that the troops were Ukrainian soldiers. There also was the suggestion that the soldiers involved were undisciplined and possibly drunk, since the imagery showed what looked like beer bottles scattered around the site, the source said.
AP reporter Matt Lee engaged US State Department Deputy spokesperson Marie Harf in back and forth that ultimately led to Harf admitting, “we know, we saw in social media afterwards….of the pro-Russian separatists bragging about shooting down an aircraft.”
“How is it exactly that you know it was fired from separatist held territory?” asked Lee.
Harf responded that the evidence is based on “communications posted on YouTube by the Ukrainian government.”
Lee asked, “Is there anything other… than social media?”
While Harf did mention an assessment, she continued her talking points by blaming the Ukrainian rebels due to social media and YouTube videos.
“All you’re willing to present publicly what backs up your version of the story, which may well be the correct version of the story?” Lee asked.
“May well be,” said Harf.
“I haven’t seen your evidence that shows that the missile was launched from rebel held territory,” Lee added. “The only thing you’re willing to put out publicly is the social media accounts.”
Harf then proceeded to chastise those that believe their assessment is superior to the State Department’s, which is based on social media posts, is illogical. However, Lee would have none of it and retorted that “evidence” could not stand the scrutiny of an international investigation.
“The Russians have said we’ve put out our radar images which show this Ukrainian plane near at least, why don’t you put out your…,” Lee said before Harf began to speak over him.
My guess is that Matt Lee won’t be in the State Department press meetings much longer. He’s exposing the ridiculousness of a federal agency that is relying on social media and YouTube videos more than they are actual intelligence to determine the cause of the downing of Flight MH17.
It’s true that there has been a lot of finger pointing regarding who shot down the Malaysian Airlines flight. However, this is always an issue when it comes to getting to the truth with our federal government, isnt’ it? Just like the assassination of JFK , 9/11 and other tragedies, our government claims “national security” as the mantra for keeping alleged “evidence” hidden from the American people. To them, we are small, ignorant children who are unable to handle the truth.
While the Russian evidence could be manufactured, at least there is something being put out there that should be taken seriously. The State Department is claiming social media posts and YouTube videos are enough to support their claim. It isn’t.