Malaysian airliner crashes in E. Ukraine

[Storm Shadow]

http://rt.com/news/176120-fake-ukraine-images-defence/

'Fake': Russian Defence Min rebuffs US sat image claims

Russia’s Defense Ministry has stated that “fake” satellite images of alleged shelling of Ukraine from Russian territory were created by US counselors “with close links to Ukraine’s Security Council.”
The authenticity of the images is impossible to prove, the ministry added.
The Defense Ministry stated that the images posted by the US ambassador Geoffrey Pyatt on his Twitter account, allegedly proving the shelling of Ukraine from Russian territory, are “fake,” ITAR-TASS reports.

“These materials were posted to Twitter not by accident, as their authenticity is impossible to prove – due to the absence of the attribution to the exact area, and an extremely low resolution. Let alone using them as ‘photographic evidence’,” Igor Konashenkov, the official representative of the ministry, stated.

“Pictures” like this, the general continued, “have also been provided by Kiev representatives as an excuse for the usage of heavy artillery and other weaponry by the Ukrainian army – against the country’s civilian population.”
“Last Friday, Ukrainian Defense Minister Valery Geletey again tried to add a sensational side to photo collages like this in the Ukrainian media – in vain. But on Sunday, the US ambassador to the Ukraine joined in, posting those satellite images on his Twitter page, which secured him the attention of the loyal Ukrainian media,” the Russian ministry said.

This scheme is called “an informational merry-go-round,” Konashenkov added, using an expression commonly uttered in Russia relating to feeding the information to the media.

“It’s no secret to anyone that fakes like this are made by a group of US counselors staying in the Kiev building of the Security Council, led by General Randy Kee,” he noted.
The general outlined the cycle as follows: the US counselors in the Kiev feed the disinformation to the Ukrainian media, with the news being taken by the Washington official representatives and presented as statements.
Afterwards, the Ukrainian media cite the US authorities and publish articles like as “objective.”

 

[armedoldhippy]

if the authenticity is impossible to prove, then it is ALSO going to be impossible to DISPROVE that they ARE real... no one in their right mind expects Russia or their apologists to admit that they have done anything at all. when the US accidentally shot down the Iranian jetliner, they apologized & paid over $50 million in damages. in 1983, a Russian MIG shot down Korea flight 007 KNOWING it was a civilian plane (per the pilots admission in an interview after the Soviet Union collapsed of its own inefficiency) but they have never publicly apologized, much less paid damages.

 

[gaiusmarius]

is that the image you were referring to armedoldhipy? i'm no expert on satellite images, have no idea what would make it fake or not.

can you explain what i'm seeing? how do we know from where the shells came and who is being shelled, nor is it visible where it actually is. time and date is also missing.

are those blobs all over the second pic smoke from shell impacts etc? damn imprecise who ever is doing the shooting, more then half the shells seem to have missed the target area, just think of all those poor civilians getting killed by all this stray ordinance flying around their heads. those could well be the results of grad rockets, very imprecise weapon according to HRW.

seriously though are you not disappointed in the quality of the evidence so far? i still do not understand how the best surveillance system on the planet is not able to show us real satellite images with the time, date and enough in the pic to show where it is. whats the point of spending all these billions on all this spy infrastructure, when you never seem to have pics of the important stuff in the important moments.

thing about this image is that it doesn't move us forward with the plane shoot down.

before i forget, the same applies to the pics of these columns of men, tanks and modern rocket launchers crossing in to Ukraine. US gov should show these pics, or folks will remain doubtful about this claim.

the rebels have been steadily getting kicked out of one town after the other, some places they gave up and left in the hopes of saving the civilians from too much collateral damage. but many towns they lost and left, till now when they have only a quite small area left under their control. so either these men and weapons sent to the rebels from Russia stories are bs, or they are getting all this great gear and extra man power, but they don't know how to make the most of it, or it's just not helping them enough to be able to hold territory.

if anyone has some really convincing evidence about the Russians sending supplies to the rebels i'd like to see it. from what i understand the rebels are being supplied by private doner's, not state actors, but also a lot of equipment is what they looted in the beginning when they occupied gov buildings and stormed police stations and army depots. some equipment came over with defecting groups of Ukranian Soldiers.

i imagine that lots of small arms are smuggled across the border and lots of bullets too. but i don't see the Russians doing the Buk thing with the rebels. or tanks for that matter, despite that you tube video Kiev tried to palm off as Russian tanks crossing the border in to Ukraine a few months back, when in fact the local people immediately made it clear that the footage was shot in Russian territory of Russian tanks maneuvering on their own side of the border.

may i ask AOH, do you see Russia as the same as it was in the Soviet Union times? just out of interest?

 

[watts]

I doubt we will ever see proof that will satisfy you. These governments do what they want,always have and always will. They are all evil.

 

[armedoldhippy]

satellites do not sit still, you only get a few shots as they pass over. if we had drones circling the area, the pictures would be better, but their mere presence would probably add to the tension in the area. yes, I AM unhappy with the offered evidence so far...from both sides. someone on here earlier said that the US spy satellites could read an autos VIN number. I have seen (and read) admissions from unnamed intelligence spooks that say our satellites can read an autos tag number if it is in the right position. I have seen a picture taken from one in which they identified the Cubans in Africa because of their lighter skin; one apparently looked up at the wrong time. as I said earlier, even if the US has photo proof of its claims, they may not disclose it because they do not want anyone to realize the capabilities. even if they showed all of their cards, some folks are gonna yell "false flag! bullshit! they are FAKES..." so why bother? people are going to believe what they want to believe, and I do not give a fuck if I don't convince anyone anyway, LOL!

 

[armedoldhippy]

do I see Russia the same as I did during the Soviet days? absolutely not. I was in school during the Cuban missile crisis, which was (hopefully) the closest that the world ever gets to nuclear mayhem. I believe, however, that Putin & many others in Russia miss those days, & would do many things to regain that "status". older (MUCH older) people in Great Britain miss being an "empire" & having most of the world quake before them. I do not doubt that the US has more than its share of witless assholes that want us to be an empire too. personally, I would LOVE to visit Russia; they have done a vastly superior job of preserving their natural wonders. maybe I should say "they used to". from what I read these days, they are having many of the same problems with rich cocksuckers raping the natural wonders they were blessed with. ever listen to old Beatles music? "the Ukraine girls really knock me out..." pretty girls are pretty girls...

 

[gaiusmarius]

satellites do not sit still, you only get a few shots as they pass over. if we had drones circling the area, the pictures would be better, but their mere presence would probably add to the tension in the area. yes, I AM unhappy with the offered evidence so far...from both sides. someone on here earlier said that the US spy satellites could read an autos VIN number. I have seen (and read) admissions from unnamed intelligence spooks that say our satellites can read an autos tag number if it is in the right position. I have seen a picture taken from one in which they identified the Cubans in Africa because of their lighter skin; one apparently looked up at the wrong time. as I said earlier, even if the US has photo proof of its claims, they may not disclose it because they do not want anyone to realize the capabilities. even if they showed all of their cards, some folks are gonna yell "false flag! bullshit! they are FAKES..." so why bother? people are going to believe what they want to believe, and I do not give a fuck if I don't convince anyone anyway, LOL!

it's not that i'm saying this image is fake, it looks genuine enough for what it is. it's about what it shows, or does not show. can you tell me how that proves the Russians shelled the Ukrainians? where on the pic is the border, and how do we know those shells came from across the border?

as for why they should bother showing decent proof, well for the sake of showing the world who the guilty party is. then they can be made to pay the price and the innocent can get on with their lives. i mean Kiev is friends with the US administration at the moment so why not help them prove their innocence. show the footage from the missile observing satellite that was in place at the time and all arguments would be moot. yes some will always argue, but they will really be a tinny minority, all depends on the quality of the proof and what the hell are surveillance satellites for if not situations like this.

mind you, the Russian images of those buk systems are also pretty blurry, you'd think they could do better, even if not at the level of the nsa, lol.

 

[Elmer Bud]

G`day AOH

You know about Khrushchev and Cuban missiles, do you know about operation North Woods ?

Operation Northwoods

The plan for False Flag Attacks on US soil to start a war in Cuba .

Thanks for sharin

EB .

 

[JKD]

Gaius: This link leads to the complete "four page document"

http://www.npr.org/assets/news/2014/07/Evidence-of-Russian-Firing-into-Ukraine.pdf

I have not been able to locate this document on the State Departments website.

When Russia shot down Korea Air 007 on September 1st 1983:

- @ 1045 Sep 1st US released some details of intercepted Soviet communications.
- Sep 6th US presented audio tapes of the Soviet pilots radio conversations to the UN Security Council.
- Sep 7th US/Japan released a transcript of Soviet communications intercepted at Wakkanai to the UN Security Council.

What is different now?

- The Cold War has ended... (Well the first one anyway...)
- US Spying on Allies scandal.
- Russia not an adversary of the US.
- START agreement.
- Global trade with Russia.
- New alliances.

 

[resinryder]

Will not say what line of work I used to do but I've seen sat photos so clear you could read Marlboro on a pack of cigarettes a co worker had. That was back in the mid 80's. So i can only imagine what they are capable of seeing even more clearly today.

 

[armedoldhippy]

G`day AOH

You know about Khrushchev and Cuban missiles, do you know about operation North Woods ?
Operation Northwoods
The plan for False Flag Attacks on US soil to start a war in Cuba .
Thanks for sharin
EB .

there is no need to start a war & take Cuba. once the Russian missiles were gone, it was left to rot on the vine. when both of the Castros have passed, the Cuban people themselves will see to it that they are free. it has only been the presence of Fidel (and Russian money) that has held it together as long as it has. it is another country that I would love to visit before I die. I want to walk on the beach with a Cuban rum & Coke in one hand & a big-ass blunt made from a Cuban cigar in the other hand, watching the sun slide into the ocean. i'll bet the climate there would grow some VICIOUS sativas, LOL!

 

[armedoldhippy]

surveillance satellites are for seeing the missiles coming off of the ground that are headed YOUR direction, not for settling squabbles like this. I doubt very seriously that we will EVER see just how high-definition that either sides cameras are, as it is not in either ones best self-interest to let the other side see the cards they hold. just...not...gonna...happen! that is my opinion, your actual mileage may vary...

 

[Hubbleman]

They say ukranian army had beer bottles on the ground by those buk SAMs, i wonder what beer they drunk ?

 

[gaiusmarius]

Gaius: This link leads to the complete "four page document"

http://www.npr.org/assets/news/2014/07/Evidence-of-Russian-Firing-into-Ukraine.pdf

I have not been able to locate this document on the State Departments website.

When Russia shot down Korea Air 007 on September 1st 1983:

- @ 1045 Sep 1st US released some details of intercepted Soviet communications.
- Sep 6th US presented audio tapes of the Soviet pilots radio conversations to the UN Security Council.
- Sep 7th US/Japan released a transcript of Soviet communications intercepted at Wakkanai to the UN Security Council.

What is different now?

- The Cold War has ended... (Well the first one anyway...)
- US Spying on Allies scandal.
- Russia not an adversary of the US.
- START agreement.
- Global trade with Russia.
- New alliances.

thanks for the link, i do not think this is from the US state department, rather it's probably Ukrainian. the biggest problem i can see is that you have to take their word for it that the expanded segments really contain whats shown. the Russians had better distancing that allowed you to make out what they were talking about in both expanded segments as well as in the normal view. while the pics linked above you can't see shit in the normal view.

there is also no actual launchers to be seen, whether Russian or Ukrainian. so no proof about who actually did the shooting.

mind you maybe the Russians decided it was time to get more active. i don't completely rule it out, could be after even more sanctions they decided to just go ahead and make a difference to their side. maybe they lost hope that they will be given a fair hearing in the west? maybe?

 

[gaiusmarius]

surveillance satellites are for seeing the missiles coming off of the ground that are headed YOUR direction, not for settling squabbles like this. I doubt very seriously that we will EVER see just how high-definition that either sides cameras are, as it is not in either ones best self-interest to let the other side see the cards they hold. just...not...gonna...happen! that is my opinion, your actual mileage may vary...

thing is, they could zoom out a bit showing enough without showing their full capabilities.

if that Satellite with the special missile observation tech is actually supposed to be watching for missiles heading to the US, then why was it pointed at the war zone in Ukraine?

 

[armedoldhippy]

satellites orbits can be altered as needed. if you think about it just a little, any satellite passing over the Ukraine is ALSO going to pass over Russia....right?

 

[armedoldhippy]

They say ukranian army had beer bottles on the ground by those buk SAMs, i wonder what beer they drunk ?

cold, I would assume, LOL! I feel sorry for folks that drink room-temperature beer.

 

[gaiusmarius]

i know i know, you all had enough of this story, but i just had to share this:

Deleted BBC Report. “Ukrainian Fighter Jet Shot Down MHI7″, Donetsk Eyewitnesses

http://www.globalresearch.ca/delete...t-shot-down-mhi7-donetsk-eyewitnesses/5393631

The Catastrophe of #MH17: #BBC in the Search of the “#BUK” – The Video Report Deleted by @BBC

The original BBC Video Report was published by BBC Russian Service on July 23, 2014.

In a bitter irony, The BBC is censoring its own news productions.

Why did BBC delete this report by Olga Ivshina?

Is it because the BBC team was unable to find any evidence that a rocket was launched in the area that the Ukrainian Security Service (“SBU”) alleges to be the place from which the Novorossiya Militia launched a “BUK” missile?

Or is it because every eyewitness interviewed by the BBC team specifically indicated the presence of a Ukrainian military aircraft right beside the Malaysian Airlines Boeing MH17 at the time that it was shot down?

Or is it because of eyewitness accounts confirming that the Ukrainian air force regularly used civilian aircraft flying over Novorossiya as human shields to protect its military aircraft conducting strikes against the civilian population from the Militia’s anti-aircraft units?

Highlights of Witness statements (see complete transcript below)

Eyewitness #1: There were two explosions in the air. And this is how it broke apart. And [the fragments] blew apart like this, to the sides. And when …

Eyewitness #2: … And there was another aircraft, a military one, beside it. Everybody saw it.

Eyewitness #1: Yes, yes. It was flying under it, because it could be seen. It was proceeding underneath, below the civilian one.

Eyewitness #3: There were sounds of an explosion. But they were in the sky. They came from the sky. Then this plane made a sharp turn-around like this. It changed its trajectory and headed in that direction [indicating the direction with her hands].


Video: The Catastrophe of #MH17: #BBC in the Search of the “#BUK”
Introductory Paragraphs to the BBC Video Report

by slavyangrad.wordpress.com

Intro of BBC Report (For Full Transcript see below)

The “black boxes” of the crashed Malaysian Boeing have finally been transferred into the hands of the experts. However, how much can they tell us?

The recorders logged the coordinates and the heading of the aircraft at the time of the incident and may have recorded the sound of the explosion. However, they will not tell us what exactly caused the explosion.

The inhabitants of the nearby villages are certain that they saw military aircraft in the sky shortly prior to the catastrophe. According to them, it actually was the jet fighters that brought down the Boeing.

The Ukrainian government rejects this version of events. They believe that the Boeing was shot down using a missile from a “BUK” complex that came in from Russia.

The Ukrainian Security Service has published photographs and a video, which, in its opinion, prove that the Boeing was shot down with a “BUK” missile.

BBC reporter Olga Ivshina and producer Oksana Vozhdayeva decided to find the place from which the missile was allegedly launched.

[YOUTUBEIF]zUvK5m2vxro[/YOUTUBEIF]

Original BBC Video Report: Preserved by Google Web-cache
Transcript of the BBC Video Report

DPR Representative: Here it is.

Olga Ivshina, BBC: The black boxes from the crashed Boeing are finally being transferred into the hands of the experts. However, how much can they tell us?

The recorders logged the coordinates and the heading of the aircraft at the time of the incident and may have recorded the sound of the explosion. However, they will not tell us what exactly caused the explosion.

The inhabitants of the nearby villages are certain that they saw military aircraft in the sky shortly prior to the catastrophe. According to them, it actually was the jet fighters that brought down the Boeing.

Eyewitness #1: There were two explosions in the air. And this is how it broke apart. And [the fragments] blew apart like this, to the sides. And when …

Eyewitness #2: … And there was another aircraft, a military one, beside it. Everybody saw it.

Eyewitness #1: Yes, yes. It was flying under it, because it could be seen. It was proceeding underneath, below the civilian one.

Eyewitness #3: There were sounds of an explosion. But they were in the sky. They came from the sky. Then this plane made a sharp turn-around like this. It changed its trajectory and headed in that direction [indicating the direction with her hands].

Olga Ivshina, BBC: The Ukrainian government rejects this version of events. They believe that the Boeing was shot down using a missile from a “BUK” complex that came in from the direction of Russia.

Vitaliy Naida, Department of Counterintelligence of SBU [Ukrainian Security Service]: This was a BUK M1 system from which the aircraft was shot down. It came to Ukraine early in the morning on the 17th of July. It was delivered by a tow truck to the city of Donetsk. After that, it was redeployed from Donetsk, as part of a column of military equipment, to the area of the city of Torez, to the area of Snezhnoye, to the area of Pervomaisk.

Olga Ivshina, BBC: The Ukrainian Security Service has published photographs and a video, which, in its opinion, prove that the Boeing was shot down with a “BUK” missile. We attempted to verify these photographs and information at the location.

One of the photographs showed a landscape not far from the city of Torez, on which smoke could be seen coming from the presumed location of the missile’s launch. We attempted to find this location, and it appears that we were successful.

We are now on the outskirts of the city of Torez. Behind me, approximately five kilometres away, is the city of Snezhnoye. And the landscape here matches the landscape that we can see on the photograph published by the Ukrainian Security Service.

To find the place from which the smoke was allegedly coming from, we adopted as markers these three poplars and the group of trees. Presumably, this is the place that can be seen on the photograph published by the SBU. And here are our markers: the three solitary poplars and the small group of trees in the distance.

The smoke that can be seen on the photograph came from somewhere over there [pointing behind her], behind my back. The SBU believes that this is a trace coming from the launch of a “BUK” missile.

However, it must be noted that there are here, approximately in the same place, the Saur-Mogila memorial, near which the fighting continues almost unabated, and a coalmine. It turns out that the smoke with the same degree of probability could have been coming from any of these locations.

Having circled around the nearby fields, we were unable to find any traces of a missile launch. Nor did the local inhabitants that we encountered see any “BUK” either.

At the ruins of an apartment building in the city of Snezhnoye, the topic of the jet fighters that may have been escorting civilian aircraft comes up again. A bomb dropped from above took away the lives of eleven civilians here.

Sergey Godovanets, Commander of the Militia of the city of Snezhnoye: They use these civilian aircraft to hide behind them. It is only now that they stopped flying over us – but, usually, civilian aircraft would always fly above us. And they hide [behind them]. [The experience in] Slavyansk had demonstrated that they would fly out from behind a civilian aircraft, bomb away, and then hide, once again, behind the civilian aircraft and fly away.

Olga Ivshina, BBC: The commander of the local militia emphasizes that they have no weaponry capable of shooting down a jet fighter [flying] at a significant height. However, he says that if such weaponry were to appear, they would have tried to.

Sergey Godovanets: If we know that it is not a civilian aircraft, but a military one, then – yes.

Olga Ivshina, BBC: So, could the Boeing have been shot down by the militias that had mistaken it for a military aircraft? There is as yet no unequivocal confirmation of either this or any other version [of what took place]. The international experts are just beginning their work with the information obtained from the crashed airliner. It now appears that it is difficult to overstate the importance of this investigation. Olga Ivshina, BBC.

The Catastrophe of #MH17:

#BBC in the Search of the “BUK” – The Video Report Deleted by BBC

Translation by: Valentina Lisitsa
http://slavyangrad.wordpress.com

 

[armedoldhippy]

well, apparently the Ukrainian govt hasn't collapsed as reported. the parliament has refused to accept Premier Yatseniuks resignation, & has voted to ratify the legislation he was pushing for.

 

[gaiusmarius]

more food for thought

more food for thought

i know Prison Planet blah blah, just read it, in this case the message means much more then the messenger. just think about it, if you are sitting in a bar and Alex Jones stands there and tells you your house is on fire, you wouldn't say, oh this is Alex Jones saying it i'll just ignore it. no you'd go and check it out for yourself.

anyway this is written by former employees of the intelligence industry and interestingly enough they seem to see things in a similar way to myself, i.e. show real evidence or stop with the accusations, put up or shut up.

Veteran US Intelligence Analysts to Obama: Provide Evidence or Stop Lying About Malaysia Plane Crash

http://www.prisonplanet.com/veteran...or-stop-lying-about-malaysia-plane-crash.html

Prison Planet.com
Aug 1, 2014

MEMORANDUM FOR: The President

FROM: Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS)

SUBJECT: Intelligence on Shoot-Down of Malaysian Plane

Executive Summary

U.S.–Russian intensions are building in a precarious way over Ukraine, and we are far from certain that your advisers fully appreciate the danger of escalation. The New York Times and other media outlets are treating sensitive issues in dispute as flat-fact, taking their cue from U.S. government sources.

Twelve days after the shoot-down of Malaysian Airlines Flight 17, your administration still has issued no coordinated intelligence assessment summarizing what evidence exists to determine who was responsible – much less to convincingly support repeated claims that the plane was downed by a Russian-supplied missile in the hands of Ukrainian separatists.

Your administration has not provided any satellite imagery showing that the separatists had such weaponry, and there are several other “dogs that have not barked.” Washington’s credibility, and your own, will continue to erode, should you be unwilling – or unable – to present more tangible evidence behind administration claims. In what follows, we put this in the perspective of former intelligence professionals with a cumulative total of 260 years in various parts of U.S. intelligence:

A d v e r t i s e m e n t

We, the undersigned former intelligence officers want to share with you our concern about the evidence adduced so far to blame Russia for the July 17 downing of Malaysian Airlines Flight 17. We are retired from government service and none of us is on the payroll of CNN, Fox News, or any other outlet. We intend this memorandum to provide a fresh, different perspective.

As veteran intelligence analysts accustomed to waiting, except in emergency circumstances, for conclusive information before rushing to judgment, we believe that the charges against Russia should be rooted in solid, far more convincing evidence. And that goes in spades with respect to inflammatory incidents like the shoot-down of an airliner. We are also troubled by the amateurish manner in which fuzzy and flimsy evidence has been served up – some it via “social media.”

As intelligence professionals we are embarrassed by the unprofessional use of partial intelligence information. As Americans, we find ourselves hoping that, if you indeed have more conclusive evidence, you will find a way to make it public without further delay. In charging Russia with being directly or indirectly responsible, Secretary of State John Kerry has been particularly definitive. Not so the evidence. His statements seem premature and bear earmarks of an attempt to “poison the jury pool.”

Painting Russia Black

We see an eerie resemblance to an earlier exercise in U.S. “public diplomacy” from which valuable lessons can be learned by those more interested in the truth than in exploiting tragic incidents for propaganda advantage. We refer to the behavior of the Reagan administration in the immediate aftermath of the shoot-down of Korean Airlines Flight 007 over Siberia on August 30, 1983. We sketch out below a short summary of that tragic affair, since we suspect you have not been adequately briefed on it. The parallels will be obvious to you.

An advantage of our long tenure as intelligence officers is that we remember what we have witnessed first hand; seldom do we forget key events in which we played an analyst or other role. To put it another way, most of us “know exactly where we were” when a Soviet fighter aircraft shot down Korean Airlines passenger flight 007 over Siberia on August 30, 1983, over 30 years ago. At the time, we were intelligence officers on “active duty.” You were 21; many of those around you today were still younger.

Thus, it seems possible that you may be learning how the KAL007 affair went down, so to speak, for the first time; that you may now become more aware of the serious implications for U.S.-Russian relations regarding how the downing of Flight 17 goes down; and that you will come to see merit in preventing ties with Moscow from falling into a state of complete disrepair. In our view, the strategic danger here dwarfs all other considerations.

Hours after the tragic shoot-down on Aug. 30, 1983, the Reagan administration used its very accomplished propaganda machine to twist the available intelligence on Soviet culpability for the killing of all 269 people aboard KAL007. The airliner was shot down after it strayed hundreds of miles off course and penetrated Russia’s airspace over sensitive military facilities in Kamchatka and Sakhalin Island. The Soviet pilot tried to signal the plane to land, but the KAL pilots did not respond to the repeated warnings. Amid confusion about the plane’s identity – a U.S. spy plane had been in the vicinity hours earlier – Soviet ground control ordered the pilot to fire.

The Soviets soon realized they had made a horrendous mistake. U.S. intelligence also knew from sensitive intercepts that the tragedy had resulted from a blunder, not from a willful act of murder (much as on July 3, 1988, the USS Vincennes shot down an Iranian civilian airliner over the Persian Gulf, killing 290 people, an act which President Ronald Reagan dismissively explained as an “understandable accident”).

To make the very blackest case against Moscow for shooting down the KAL airliner, the Reagan administration suppressed exculpatory evidence from U.S. electronic intercepts. Washington’s mantra became “Moscow’s deliberate downing of a civilian passenger plane.” Newsweek ran a cover emblazoned with the headline “Murder in the Sky.” (Apparently, not much has changed;Time’s cover this week features “Cold War II” and “Putin’s dangerous game.” The cover story by Simon Shuster, “In Russia, Crime Without Punishment,” would merit an A-plus in William Randolph Hearst’s course “Yellow Journalism 101.”)

When KAL007 was shot down, Alvin A. Snyder, director of the U.S. Information Agency’s television and film division, was enlisted in a concerted effort to “heap as much abuse on the Soviet Union as possible,” as Snyder writes in his 1995 book, “Warriors of Disinformation.”

He and his colleagues also earned an A-plus for bringing the “mainstream media” along. For example, ABC’s Ted Koppel noted with patriotic pride, “This has been one of those occasions when there is very little difference between what is churned out by the U.S. government propaganda organs and by the commercial broadcasting networks.”

“Fixing” the Intelligence Around the Policy

“The perception we wanted to convey was that the Soviet Union had cold-bloodedly carried out a barbaric act,” wrote Snyder, adding that the Reagan administration went so far as to present a doctored transcript of the intercepts to the United Nations Security Council on September 6, 1983.

Only a decade later, when Snyder saw the complete transcripts — including the portions that the Reagan administration had hidden — would he fully realize how many of the central elements of the U.S. presentation were false.

The intercepts showed that the Soviet fighter pilot believed he was pursuing a U.S. spy aircraft and that he was having trouble in the dark identifying the plane. Per instructions from ground control, the pilot had circled the KAL airliner and tilted his wings to order the aircraft to land. The pilot said he fired warning shots, as well. This information “was not on the tape we were provided,” Snyder wrote.

It became abundantly clear to Snyder that, in smearing the Soviets, the Reagan administration had presented false accusations to the United Nations, as well as to the people of the United States and the world. In his book, Snyder acknowledged his own role in the deception, but drew a cynical conclusion. He wrote, “The moral of the story is that all governments, including our own, lie when it suits their purposes. The key is to lie first.”

The tortured attempts by your administration and stenographers in the media to blame Russia for the downing of Flight 17, together with John Kerry’s unenviable record for credibility, lead us to the reluctant conclusion that the syndrome Snyder describes may also be at work in your own administration; that is, that an ethos of “getting your own lie out first” has replaced “ye shall know the truth.” At a minimum, we believe Secretary Kerry displayed unseemly haste in his determination to be first out of the starting gate.

Both Sides Cannot Be Telling the Truth

We have always taken pride in not shooting from the hip, but rather in doing intelligence analysis that is evidence-based. The evidence released to date does not bear close scrutiny; it does not permit a judgment as to which side is lying about the shoot-down of Flight 17. Our entire professional experience would incline us to suspect the Russians – almost instinctively. Our more recent experience, particularly observing Secretary Kerry injudiciousness in latching onto one spurious report after another as “evidence,” has gone a long way toward balancing our earlier predispositions.

It seems that whenever Kerry does cite supposed “evidence” that can be checked – like the forged anti-Semitic fliers distributed in eastern Ukraine or the photos of alleged Russian special forces soldiers who allegedly slipped into Ukraine – the “proof” goes “poof” as Kerry once said in a different context. Still, these misrepresentations seem small peccadillos compared with bigger whoppers like the claim Kerry made on Aug. 30, 2013, no fewer than 35 times, that “we know” the government of Bashar al-Assad was responsible for the chemical incidents near Damascus nine days before.

On September 3, 2013 – following your decision to call off the attack on Syria in order to await Congressional authorization – Kerry was still pushing for an attack in testimony before a thoroughly sympathetic Senate Foreign Affairs Committee. On the following day Kerry drew highly unusual personal criticism from President Putin, who said: “He is lying, and he knows he is lying. It is sad.”

Equally serious, during the first week of September 2013, as you and President Vladimir Putin were putting the final touches to the deal whereby Syrian chemical weapons would be given up for destruction, John Kerry said something that puzzles us to this day. On September 9, 2013, Kerry was in London, still promoting a U.S. attack on Syria for having crossed the “Red Line” you had set against Syria’s using chemical weapons.

At a formal press conference, Kerry abruptly dismissed the possibility that Bashar al-Assad would ever give up his chemical weapons, saying, “He isn’t about to do that; it can’t be done.” Just a few hours later, the Russians and Syrians announced Syria’s agreement to do precisely what Kerry had ruled out as impossible. You sent him back to Geneva to sign the agreement, and it was formally concluded on September 14.

Regarding the Malaysia Airlines shoot-down of July 17, we believe Kerry has typically rushed to judgment and that his incredible record for credibility poses a huge disadvantage in the diplomatic and propaganda maneuvering vis-a-vis Russia. We suggest you call a halt to this misbegotten “public diplomacy” offensive. If, however, you decide to press on anyway, we suggest you try to find a less tarnished statesman or woman.

A Choice Between Two

If the intelligence on the shoot-down is as weak as it appears judging from the fuzzy scraps that have been released, we strongly suggest you call off the propaganda war and await the findings of those charged with investigating the shoot-down. If, on the other hand, your administration has more concrete, probative intelligence, we strongly suggest that you consider approving it for release, even if there may be some risk of damage to “sources and methods.” Too often this consideration is used to prevent information from entering the public domain where, as in this case, it belongs.

There have been critical junctures in the past in which presidents have recognized the need to waive secrecy in order to show what one might call “a decent respect for the opinions of mankind” or even to justify military action.

As senior CIA veteran Milton Bearden has put it, there are occasions when more damage is done to U.S. national security by “protecting” sources and methods than by revealing them. For instance, Bearden noted that Ronald Reagan exposed a sensitive intelligence source in showing a skeptical world the reason for the U.S. attack on Libya in retaliation for the April 5, 1986 bombing at the La Belle Disco in West Berlin. That bombing killed two U.S. servicemen and a Turkish woman, and injured over 200 people, including 79 U.S. servicemen.

Intercepted messages between Tripoli and agents in Europe made it clear that Libya was behind the attack. Here’s an excerpt: “At 1:30 in the morning one of the acts was carried out with success, without leaving a trace behind.”

Ten days after the bombing the U.S. retaliated, sending over 60 Air Force fighters to strike the Libyan capital of Tripoli and the city of Benghazi. The operation was widely seen as an attempt to kill Colonel Muammar Gaddafi, who survived, but his adopted 15-month-old daughter was killed in the bombing, along with at least 15 other civilians.

Three decades ago, there was more shame attached to the killing of children. As world abhorrence grew after the U.S. bombing strikes, the Reagan administration produced the intercepted, decoded message sent by the Libyan Peoples Bureau in East Berlin acknowledging the “success” of the attack on the disco, and adding the ironically inaccurate boast “without leaving a trace behind.”

The Reagan administration made the decision to give up a highly sensitive intelligence source, its ability to intercept and decipher Libyan communications. But once the rest of the world absorbed this evidence, international grumbling subsided and many considered the retaliation against Tripoli justified.

If You’ve Got the Goods…

If the U.S. has more convincing evidence than what has so far been adduced concerning responsibility for shooting down Flight 17, we believe it would be best to find a way to make that intelligence public – even at the risk of compromising “sources and methods.” Moreover, we suggest you instruct your subordinates not to cheapen U.S. credibility by releasing key information via social medialike Twitter and Facebook.

The reputation of the messenger for credibility is also key in this area of “public diplomacy.” As is by now clear to you, in our view Secretary Kerry is more liability than asset in this regard. Similarly, with regard to Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, his March 12, 2013 Congressional testimony under oath to what he later admitted were “clearly erroneous” things regarding NSA collection should disqualify him. Clapper should be kept at far remove from the Flight 17 affair.

What is needed, if you’ve got the goods, is an Interagency Intelligence Assessment – the genre used in the past to lay out the intelligence. We are hearing indirectly from some of our former colleagues that what Secretary Kerry is peddling does not square with the real intelligence. Such was the case late last August, when Kerry created a unique vehicle he called a “Government (not Intelligence) Assessment” blaming, with no verifiable evidence, Bashar al-Assad for the chemical attacks near Damascus, as honest intelligence analysts refused to go along and, instead, held their noses.

We believe you need to seek out honest intelligence analysts now and hear them out. Then, you may be persuaded to take steps to curb the risk that relations with Russia might escalate from “Cold War II” into an armed confrontation. In all candor, we see little reason to believe that Secretary Kerry and your other advisers appreciate the enormity of that danger.

In our most recent (May 4) memorandum to you, Mr. President, we cautioned that if the U.S. wished “to stop a bloody civil war between east and west Ukraine and avert Russian military intervention in eastern Ukraine, you may be able to do so before the violence hurtles completely out of control.” On July 17, you joined the top leaders of Germany, France, and Russia in calling for a ceasefire. Most informed observers believe you have it in your power to get Ukrainian leaders to agree. The longer Kiev continues its offensive against separatists in eastern Ukraine, the more such U.S. statements appear hypocritical.

We reiterate our recommendations of May 4, that you remove the seeds of this confrontation by publicly disavowing any wish to incorporate Ukraine into NATO and that you make it clear that you are prepared to meet personally with Russian President Putin without delay to discuss ways to defuse the crisis and recognize the legitimate interests of the various parties. The suggestion of an early summit got extraordinary resonance in controlled and independent Russian media. Not so in “mainstream” media in the U.S. Nor did we hear back from you.

The courtesy of a reply is requested.

Prepared by VIPS Steering Group

William Binney, former Technical Director, World Geopolitical & Military Analysis, NSA; co-founder, SIGINT Automation Research Center (ret.)

Larry Johnson, CIA & State Department (ret.)

Edward Loomis, NSA, Cryptologic Computer Scientist (ret.)

David MacMichael, National Intelligence Council (ret.)

Ray McGovern, former US Army infantry/intelligence officer & CIA analyst (ret.)

Elizabeth Murray, Deputy National Intelligence Officer for Middle East (ret.)

Coleen Rowley, Division Counsel & Special Agent, FBI (ret.)

Peter Van Buren, U.S. Department of State, Foreign Service Officer (ret)

Ann Wright, Col., US Army (ret); Foreign Service Officer (ret.)