Skip to comments.Ukraine crisis: What the 'Russian soldier' photos say ('Russian' soldier photos appear to be fake
Posted on 04/24/2014 8:04:16 AM PDT by Laissez-faire capitalist
Theses photos [at URL] purport to show the same bearded Russian soldier (circled) in operation in Georgia in 2008 and Kramatorsk and Sloviansk in 2014
Photos released by the Ukranian government as "proof" of Russian soldiers on the ground in Donetsk leave many questions to be answered...
The low-quality, annotated images were handed to the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe on 16 April, as evidence that Russian "sabotage-reconnaissance groups" had been working with separatists in the Donetsk towns of Kramatorsk and Sloviansk.
According to a NYT article, the photos and their descriptions were "endorsed by the Obama administration".
However, the BBC has been unable to verify the pictures and there was no immediate response from the Russian government...
The Ukranian press release says the photos show the same heavily bearded gunman taking part in militant operations in Kramatorsk and Sloviansk this year, and in an operation in Georgia in 2008...
This would be damning evidence indeed but in the 2014 photos, the man's greying beard apppears to be black while in Georgia six years ago, the slimmer-looking man shown has a reddish beard.
The Ukranian government highlights a Russian special forces badge on the sleeve of the gunman in Georgia but such badges can be bought on the internet for less than $5.
Another set of photos purports to show the same masked gunman in both Crimea earlier and in the Donetsk region this month. However, while a similar uniform is worn in both photos, the masks are different, as is the way the pistol is worn on his belt. Is this really the same gunman?
Apart from the photo said to have been taken in Georgia, all of the images seem to be recent and there is nothing to suggest any of them were taken outside Ukraine.
(Excerpt) Read more at bbc.com ...
Wow, are the McCainiacs and the Obama administration, as well as the interventionist globalists, looking for yet another Serbia, another Lybia --- another Egypt to mess around with/in?
2 years after the overthrow of Mubarak - Morsi and the Muslim brotherhood (the so-called "largely secular" group) that the Obama administration threw its support behind - were overthrown and Kerry said that this ouster was now the restoration of democracy in Egypt. WT? Only in Obama World...
The Arab Spring has been said to have been a disaster for Israel and the U.S. - perhaps this is why Netanyahu and Israel are remaining neutral on this and have voted to do so...
Brand new Russian special forces gear doesn’t fall off a cabbage truck. Don’t be a commie dupe, FRiend.
“Brand new Russian special forces gear doesnt fall off a cabbage truck. Dont be a commie dupe, FRiend”
I can buy the latest US Special Forces kit, brand new, at my local Army-Navy Surplus store, or on EBAY.
I have no reason to think it would be any different in Russia. They buy from EBAY, too.
The Russian spies and their Ukrainian ethnic-Russian separatist terrorists are now using Kindergarten children as human shields just as Putin suggested, and all you can do is look for excuses to trash the actions of anyone, friend or domestic foe, who would dare to defend against these barbaric Russian war crimes. Then you expect the est of us to accept your vile propaganda.
If the BBC is looking for proof that could stand up in a court-of-law they aren’t going to find that. It’s beyond question that Russia is coordinating these groups. I mean look at a bleeping map why don’t you? These are planned moves, not random.
So yes, it’s reasonable to assume that ‘some’ of the ethnic Russians that are toting guns are indeed Russian Special Forces. All you need is an adviser and an encrypted sat-link back to the Russian General Staff.
Maybe a few A-Teams to run a military refresher for some ex-military grunts. That would probably happen on Russian territory away from prying eyes.
The uber-interventionst RINOs at FR can’t seem to learn from the Arab Spring and what that did to Israel.
Fior one of many, Egypt is now closer to Russia now, and farther from the U.S. —— a complete turnaround from when Mubarak was in power. And the Muslim Brotherhood were bigger thugs than Mubarak, to boot.
“Putin is a thug, but nonetheless we need to stay out of this.”
Putin is putting everyone in the world into the middle of this crisis in one way or another no matter how much we dislike it and no matter how much some people want to find a cowardly excuse to shrink from their civic duty to confront the Russian menace to worldwide peace and security. Associating yourself with the effort of forestalling the defense of the Ukraine and other former Soviet republics only makes you an accomplice to the Russian war crimes, crimes against peace, and crimes against humanity.
There, fixed it.
I have said repeatedlty that Putin is a thug - just like Mubarak - just like Assad - all thugs.
But would you rather have Assad in power or Al Qaeda in power in Syria? That is what could easily have happened had we intervened when Obama wanted to.
Again, why do we have to interevene in Ukraine? Huh? Where in the Constitution says we have to?
And please don’t attack me personally anymore. I am tired of it.
Understanding something. The BBC is an islamo-communist news outlet for the UK. Cameron’s religious advisor is Muslim Brotherhood. In fact he’s the grand son of the Founder of the MB. UK relies on oil shipments from Russia, via Ukraine. If those pipelines are cut, they are on an island and are in serious trouble. The UK is not an oil rich nation.
Secondarily, most of the RT/Pravda broadcasters are in fact British. That includes their ‘investigative’ journalists in the field clapping as Russian tanks roll through Ukraine. If you are on this site, then you are smart enough not to trust a GOVERNMENT OWNED NEWS ORGANIZATION. Whether it’s RT/Pravda or the BBC. If you do- you don’t belong here.
Please, do not even go down the road that was used against those that were opposed to the war in Iraq. I supported the war in Iraq, and yet I was opposed to the same sort of language that YOU are using - the same language used against the left who were opposed to Bush.
Your ad homs and words that imply that I am an accomplice are desperation at its finest. You lose.
Was Alan Colmes, Juan Williams, and many others at Fox News an accomplice to Saddam? Huh? Give it a rest...
Next you will say that all who were opposed to Obama intervening win Syria when he wanted to were accomplices to Assad. Geesh. Grow up...
Yes, and the BBC is also controlled by inter-galactic aliens wjho in turn control the islamio-communist outlets -— all over the world in fact!!! /sarcasm.
Give me a break.
I notice that you say NOTHING about the New York Times “according to the NYT, the photos were “endorsed by the Obama administration.” That is quite telling. Perhaps you don’t belong here...
BTW, if I am not mistaken, it was the BBC who reported that Qaddafi was going to nationalize oil reserves (a potential disaaster for UK) in Lybia - just a little while later they reported that war broke out and the UK was involved. Quite telling.
And it undermines your hypothesis that you purport.
I can buy the latest US Special Forces kit, brand new, at my local Army-Navy Surplus store, or on EBAY.
You can’t buy advanced military weapons on eBay. There is photographic evidence of terrorists toting the latest Russian military weaponry in Ukraine. Rocket launchers, assault rifles, etc. That type of stuff does not fall off a turnip truck. Only state sponsored actors would have access to it. Unless of course Ukrainian “separatists” invaded Russia and stole it.
No. You can buy high quality gear. But you can’t buy the latest.
Also, East Ukraine is dirt poor and there are arm restrictions in Ukraine.
Please attack the veracity of the article, FRiend. Thanks. that is what you are supposed to do.
Thanks for the advice. How about you remove your editorializing from the article? Nowhere does the BBC article say the photos are fake. That is your day dream, FRiend.
“That type of stuff does not fall off a turnip truck.”
No, But it can be purchased from the Ukrainian/Russian mobs. Also, those photos of the AK-12 turned out to be an older version, not the latest.
“Brand new Russian special forces gear doesnt fall off a cabbage truck. Dont be a commie dupe, FRiend.”
“Please, do not even go down the road that was used against those that were opposed to the war in Iraq. I supported the war in Iraq, and yet I was opposed to the same sort of language that YOU are using - the same language used against the left who were opposed to Bush.”
You fail to understand the difference between honest disagreements versus deliberate and negligent deceptions and lies used as false propaganda and disinformation. Yes, there will always be some measure of honest disagreements about policies and about the quality and reliability of information. Such free speech is to be defended, even when it is in disagreement over issues of war and humanitarianism. What makes a person an accomplice to a crime or a regime committing war crimes is when the speaker deliberately disseminates the war criminals false propaganda or the speaker’s own false propaganda in defense of the party committing the war crimes, and then proceeds to omit and/or falsely dismiss the vixtim’s complaints about the war crimes of the aggressor. It is at the point where the speaker adopts the false propaganda that the speaker in effect becomes an accomplice to the war criminal and the war crimes.
Your citing the misdeeds of the Obama Administration and then in effect assert the Ukraine has thereby forfeited the right to have its territorial integrity respected by Russia is a non-sequitur, a falsehood, and the adoption of the Russian false propaganda against the rightful defense of the Ukraine. You have every right to disagree about the Obama Administration’s policies with respect to Libya, Syria, Egypt, and elsewhere without necessarily becoming an accomplice to the crimes of either side of the conflict. Saddam Hussein’s Iraqi regime, Serbia, and Russia are different, because in each case there is an indisputable case of those regimes being in criminal breach of a variety of international laws on a scale justifying the types of criminal prosecutions we witnessed in the International Military Tribunal (IMT-Nuremberg). There is aleady a body of precedent international law that prohibits the dissemination of false war propaganda in the commission of the types of the crimes prosecuted with regard to the IMT of the Second World War, the Serbian war crimes, and the Rwandan war crimes. The tribunals and courts recognize that false propaganda defending those prosecuted crimes was sufficient to bring indictments against the authors of the false propaganda as accomplices to those crimes.
I am NOT suggesitng anything you have written constitutes the level of culpability countenanced by those tribunals and courts, so don’t react as if I did so. Nonetheless, take note it is reasonable and not unreasonable for the readers to look at what any speaker has to say and judge whether or not the author is in effect associating such speech with the false propaganda of war criminals and thereby becoming an accomplice to those war crimes to some extent.
Note, I do not exempt American officials from such definitions, regardless of what political persuasion they may assert.