Just when you thought things couldn't get stranger...
The Beasties say ISIS was not known to have this capability. Apparently you have to be very capable. Couldn't have gotten that capable in a couple weeks.
The Quasis don't go that far in their text but their lede leaves out ISIS entirely, seeming to suggest that even the cause, a bomb, is still unsolved, not just who the responsible party was. Isn't that somethin'?
The Times says the Russian announcement was "highly orchestrated," notes that Russia immediately resumed and intensified its bombing in Syria, and says Putin is heard on the announcement telling a Russian naval commander to work closely with "our French allies;" notes that this was an awfully sudden switch by Russia, who had said previously that determining a cause could take months. The Times directly states that the Russians may be attempting to piggy-back onto the worldwide sympathy for France in order to justify its air strikes and to reintegrate itself in good-standing into the West.
Putin and the Russians would be capable of something like that.
I note that ISIS' initial claim of responsibility was unusual in wording, ("We'll tell you how we did it when we're good and ready.") and was disregarded.
And then you have President Obama on Friday, just a day before the Paris attacks, saying, and repeating when challenged, that ISIS' responsibility for the downing of KGL9268 was only a "possibility." And the White House has not said anything about the Russian announcement, has it?
I see said the blind man!
No. I don't believe the doubting Timeses and Beasties. I don't trust the Americans here. My God, there is too much evidence the other way. There is such hatred between Official America and Official Russia, has been going back to the Ukraine invasion, the propaganda flew furiously from both sides over Ukraine. I think this is an American attempt to discredit Russia in that spirit of animosity, for the sake of discrediting Russia. It was the Americans who first got the world to focus on a terrorist act, with the "heat flash" seen by satellite, as opposed to structural failure due to the plane's previous "tailstrike;" there was congratulatory "chatter" within ISIS that was picked up after the downing; the black boxes provided data that was a signature of sudden bomb-caused destruction; ISIS had motive and opportunity-in Sinai. The Obamas certainly have an interest in ISIS not being responsible, and The New York Times is a "quasi-official" arm of Official America, which plants stories in the Times repeatedly.
On this evidence, in this context, it is up to the doubters to point the finger directly elsewhere as to cause and perpetrator-and to back it up with evidence-not just to cast doubt.
The Beasties say ISIS was not known to have this capability. Apparently you have to be very capable. Couldn't have gotten that capable in a couple weeks.
The Quasis don't go that far in their text but their lede leaves out ISIS entirely, seeming to suggest that even the cause, a bomb, is still unsolved, not just who the responsible party was. Isn't that somethin'?
The Times says the Russian announcement was "highly orchestrated," notes that Russia immediately resumed and intensified its bombing in Syria, and says Putin is heard on the announcement telling a Russian naval commander to work closely with "our French allies;" notes that this was an awfully sudden switch by Russia, who had said previously that determining a cause could take months. The Times directly states that the Russians may be attempting to piggy-back onto the worldwide sympathy for France in order to justify its air strikes and to reintegrate itself in good-standing into the West.
Putin and the Russians would be capable of something like that.
I note that ISIS' initial claim of responsibility was unusual in wording, ("We'll tell you how we did it when we're good and ready.") and was disregarded.
And then you have President Obama on Friday, just a day before the Paris attacks, saying, and repeating when challenged, that ISIS' responsibility for the downing of KGL9268 was only a "possibility." And the White House has not said anything about the Russian announcement, has it?
I see said the blind man!
No. I don't believe the doubting Timeses and Beasties. I don't trust the Americans here. My God, there is too much evidence the other way. There is such hatred between Official America and Official Russia, has been going back to the Ukraine invasion, the propaganda flew furiously from both sides over Ukraine. I think this is an American attempt to discredit Russia in that spirit of animosity, for the sake of discrediting Russia. It was the Americans who first got the world to focus on a terrorist act, with the "heat flash" seen by satellite, as opposed to structural failure due to the plane's previous "tailstrike;" there was congratulatory "chatter" within ISIS that was picked up after the downing; the black boxes provided data that was a signature of sudden bomb-caused destruction; ISIS had motive and opportunity-in Sinai. The Obamas certainly have an interest in ISIS not being responsible, and The New York Times is a "quasi-official" arm of Official America, which plants stories in the Times repeatedly.
On this evidence, in this context, it is up to the doubters to point the finger directly elsewhere as to cause and perpetrator-and to back it up with evidence-not just to cast doubt.
