Murder, plain and simple (Bernard Goldberg, listen up)

Bernie Goldberg used his position as a sports analyst on Bryant Gumbel’s Real Sports last week to announce that the Russians had shot down Malaysian Flight MH17 on July 17, 2014. Goldberg had no evidence to support his view. Why he felt the need to interject it into a panel discussions on sports injuries is unknown, but prior to doing so, you can see his eyes darting to off-screen sources – he seems nervous. His use of that platform to advance the theory that the Russians did it was rude, calculated, and dishonest. It begins at 5:20 in the video that follows:


_____________________
On August 8th, Ukraine, The Netherlands, Belgium and Australia signed an agreement allowing the disclosure of information regarding the investigation of July 17 the crash of MH17 only at the consent of all parties involved. In other words, built into that investigation is a conflict of interest, for it turns out that the Kiev government was responsible for the shoot down, as evidence that follows demonstrates to be highly possible, then that government, which Vladimir Putin refers to as a “putsch,” has the power to quash the release of the information.

Air-to-air cannon shots were directed at the cockpit to kill the crew. The attacking aircraft then went behind the 777 to destroy its guidance systems with an air-to-air rocket.

Air-to-air cannon shots were directed at the cockpit to kill the crew. The attacking aircraft then went behind the 777 to destroy its guidance systems with an air-to-air rocket.

The following are the conclusions of a group of experts from the Russian Union of Engineers that was gathered to analyze the loss of Malaysian Airlines Flight MH17 on July 17, 2014.

The expert group included retired AA officers, who had combat experience with surface-to-air missile systems, as well as pilots experienced in using air-to-air weapons. The problem was also discussed at the meeting of the Academy of Geopolitical Affairs, where many different versions were tested and discussed once again. In the course of the analysis, the experts used materials received from open sources published in mass media. The situation was also analyzed with the help of the Su-25 aircraft flight simulator.

The conclusions are detailed by Ivan A. Andrievskii, First Vice-President of the All-Russian Public Organization Russian Union of Engineers, Chairman of the Board of Engineering Company “2К”. See the entire report at Voltaire Network.

Malaysia Airlines Boeing 777 was conducting the flight Amsterdam-Kuala-Lumpur, on 17.07.2014, according to the tunnel set by the air traffic controllers. It is most probable that manual steering was offline and the airplane was flying in autopilot mode, performing horizontal flight following the route which was laid out on the ground and adjusted by Ukrainian air traffic controllers.

At 17.17–17.20 the Boeing 777 was in Ukrainian airspace, in Donetsk area, at the altitude of 10100m. An unidentified fighter aircraft (presumably Su-25 or MiG-29), which was previously at a lower echelon, on a head-on course in a layer of clouds, ascended rapidly, unexpectedly emerging in front of the passenger plane out of the clouds and opened fire at the control cabin (cockpit), using 30mm or smaller cannon armament. The targeting could have been performed not only by the pilot of a fighter aircraft in “free hunt” conditions (using the aircraft radar), but also by a navigation officer on the ground, using the airspace data received from ground-based radars.

The cockpit of the airliner was damaged in the result of numerous rounds hitting the aircraft fuselage. The control cabin was depressurized, which caused the instant death of the crew, due to mechanical influences and decompression. The attack was quite unexpected and lasted only a fraction of a second. Due to the surprise situation, the crew was unable to give any alarm signals intended for such situations, as the flight was following its scheduled route and the attack was unexpected for everyone.

As neither the engines, nor the hydraulic system, nor other devices crucial to the continuation of the flight, were set out of operation, the Boeing 777 continued its horizontal flight in autopilot mode (which is a standard situation), perhaps gradually losing altitude.

After that, the pilot of the unidentified fighter aircraft maneuvered and repositioned himself into the rear hemisphere of the Boeing 777. He entered an engagement course, performed the targeting using onboard target tracking equipment, and launched a R-60 or R-73 air-to-air missile (one or multiple).

As a result of the missile impact, the entire cabin was depressurized, the flight control system was incapacitated, the autopilot was switched off, the plane ceased its horizontal flight and went into a tail-spin. The created g-forces caused a mechanical disruption of the airframe at high altitude.

As indicated by the available flight recorder data, the plane fell apart in the air, but this is possible mainly in the case of vertical falling from a 10000m altitude, which can typically happen only in a case of exceeding the maximum allowed g-force. As a rule, such a tail-spin can be explained by the inability of the crew to control the airplane as a result of some emergency case in the cabin and subsequent instant depressurization of the cockpit and passenger compartment. The destruction of the airplane took place at a high altitude, which explains the fact that the wreckage of the plane was dissimilated over a territory over 15 km².

Finally,

On 17.07.2014 the armed forces of the self-proclaimed Donetsk People’s Republic possessed neither appropriate fighter aircraft capable of engaging an air target similar to the Boeing 777, nor an airfield network, nor radar detection devices, targeting and guidance equipment.

Fighter aircraft of the Russian Federation Armed Forces did not violate the airspace of Ukraine, which is confirmed by both the Ukrainian side and by third parties performing space-based reconnaissance over the territory of Ukraine and its airspace.

About Mark Tokarski

Just a man who likes to read, argue, and occasionally be surprised.
This entry was posted in False flaggery. Bookmark the permalink.

9 Responses to Murder, plain and simple (Bernard Goldberg, listen up)

  1. lizard19 says:

    tweet a link to this post again, but this time cc James Conner.

    Like

    • Not in the NY Times. End of story.

      Like

    • Steve W says:

      In th video Frank Difort is the closest to honest of any of the sports panel.

      Mr propaganda about the Russians is blaming Americans for having short attention spans. Apparently they already forgot that the evidence suggests pretty well that Ukraine shot down the airliner. Apparently it’s the American public’s fault.

      James Conner has forgotten about the air- liner and about the assassinations of the Kennedy’s and of Malcom, Martin, and about our NATO allies Turkey supplying nerve gas to terrorists that was used in an attack on civilians.

      James Conner is an illusion. He’s afraid of his own shadow.

      Like

      • I don’t know what Conner has done to bring his name up twice here – but I find it odd that he, along with Pogie, each run web sites that put out a never ending chunks of intellectually bankrupt tripe, and have cordoned themselves off so that legitimate bitching about their vapid writing does not penetrate Democrat circles. Cowgirl, when it wants to strap a megaphone on Conner, refers to him as the Flathead Memo, as if it were an organization rather than one lonely voice.

        I wonder if what we are dealing here, with Pogie and Conner the last standing soldiers, is the MT Democrat Party’s effort to control the blogs and prevent normally curious Democrats from being contaminated with truthful reporting about that party’s corruption. Notice that Pogie, Conner and Cowgirl have all taken steps to seal off offensive blogs, first removing links, then banning commenters.

        I have long suspected that Pogie would not put out that endless stream of mindless drivel about “Democrats good Republicans bad” if he were not paid to do so. How can a man be so shallow, trivial and serious at once without a paycheck? Conner I know less well, but his demeanor and behavior too speak of a paycheck. The intellectual dishonesty is disgusting, but speaks to a financial extension of the corruption of that party.

        Like

  2. steve kelly says:

    Of course, identity politics involves construction and presentation of personae—caricatures, even
    “stereotypes” if you like—imagining and portraying particular individuals in terms of certain general traits. Needless to say, they distort “reality.” And they are often prefabricated. But so what? That,
    as they say, is life.” Five Theses on Identity Politic, Richard D. Parker,
    http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Vol29_No1_Parker.pdf

    If by “paycheck” you mean cash payment for services, I seriously doubt it. I have no evidence to back that up, however. A common method used by ideological totalists is the control of communication within their designed environment — in this case “Democrats.” Anyone within this controlled environment who expresses individual autonomy becomes a threat to the group. Today’s lessen at Flathead Memo warns us about journalistic prejudice and failing to report on possibly limiting U.S. House debates to Zinke and Lewis (excluding Limbetarian, Fellows), not as a matter of principle or equal justice, but because:
    “Fellows may well draw three to six percent of the vote, virtually all of it from Zinke, so whether he’s in the debate is important.”

    Which takes me back to a question of personal interest: Who’s votes are they anyway? The individual’s, or the (pick 1 of 2) Party’s.

    Like

    • There’s so little talent, so little imagination in their work, as if they were ordered to check their personalities at the door. To do that for pay, I can see, but to volunteer such repetitive and mediocre offerings day in and day out for free puzzles me. Where’s the psychic reward?

      Like

      • JC says:

        The psychic reward comes when pogie and/or cowgirl mention them on their site (and vice versa — there’s a lot of circle-jerking going on in party blogging circles). Like when we call our faithful dogs and skritch them behind the ears and they walk away, tails wagging having been validated as a “good dog.”

        Like

  3. steve kelly says:

    Status? I dunno’. Big fish, little pond? Lately, more like a puddle. Now I’m just fishing.

    FYI. Poll: 70% of troops say no more boots on the ground in Iraq http://www.armytimes.com/interactive/article/20140927/NEWS/309270032/Poll-70-troops-say-no-more-boots-ground-Iraq Thanks Don Bacon, a commenter over at BoA.

    Like

Comments are closed.