Panning for Gold while Reading Propaganda: Missile Strike Kills 2+ in Poland
Missile Strike Kills 2+ in Poland
Published: 2022-11-17
Update 20022-11-19: two new sources are added, one from MoonOfAlabama and the other from M. K. Bhadrakumar.
Update 202-11-23: An Update section has been added. TDR: AP fired the journalist, no action taken against the editors who approved this one sentence single sourced stupidity.
A discussion of this article is available.
Background
A missile exploded in the Polish town of Przewodów which is about 5 Km (as the crow flies) from the Polish and Ukrainian border. Two persons are claimed to have been killed by the detonation of the missile. The image of the impact site shows a flat bed two axle four wheeled transport trolley still connected to the rear of a tractor. The impact crater implies a large explosive charge. It seems reasonable to assume that the tractor driver and another civilian were those who lost their lives.
[Image: from Reuters, published by the New York Times showing the crater caused by the explosion.]
One photograph of a component of the exploded missile is provided by a Reuters article. The caption for the photograph is:
[1/5] The debris, which locals claim to be that of a missile, is pictured at the site of an explosion in Przewodow, a village in eastern Poland near the border with Ukraine, in this photograph obtained by REUTERS on November 16, 2022.
[Image: a claimed fragment of the missile.]
This image is of a piece "claimed" by locals to be a part of the wreckage of the missile.
The "evidence" that this is a missile launched from an S-300 air defence system comes from a Polish official, Zbigniew Ziobro, their Minister of Justice, based on a twitter post.
This is supported by Jake Godin:
Thus, all evidence regarding the missile and its likely source are claims. All we really have is the photograph of the site under investigation. However, let us assume that the missile is from an S-300 type air defense system and see where that leads us.
S-300
Your author has found three sites which list details of the range of the missiles used by S-300 systems. It should be noted that the system is old (first released 1989) and has several variants. Thus, discrepancies about maximum distance for missiles issued by it are likely due to the S-300's evolution. The lowest maximum distance for missiles it can launch is 200 Km, with the highest maximum at 350 Km. The graphic which advertises this article is an approximation of these ranges based upon a Google maps image. This allows us to identify from where the missile may have originated.
[Image: map including scale (see bottom right corner).]
The geometry of the crater would provide investigators with more information on incoming trajectory and thus limit potential launch locations. The image does not come with compass readings, so these are not available to us remote observers.
All of this rather coarse data provides us with little information apart from the fact that if this missile was launched from an S-300 system it could not have been launched by countries including France, Spain, Brazil, Russia or New Zealand. It must have been launched in Eastern Europe from a country among Slovakia, Belarus, Moldova, Poland or Ukraine (among a few others).
In truth, nobody is going to fly missiles over neighbouring countries. There are only two launch countries, Poland or Ukraine.
The only real motive for the attack is for Ukraine or Poland to attempt to draw NATO into the conflict with Russia. Ukraine has by far the greater motive. However, a missile hitting a field and killing two farmers is a very poor way to create this outcome. Surely, one would wish to hit a hospital, shopping center, church or parliament to generate the sufficient outrage to achieve this result. Thus, this looks like an accident.
This conclusion makes sense in that Ukraine's S-300 systems are old and possibly poorly maintained. I have no knowledge of the level of skill of the Ukrainian operators of these systems. Any one of these factors could be at play: age, lack of maintenance or poor operation. The "lack of maintenance" or "poor operation" hypothesis is supported by the fact that missiles launched from S-300 systems are meant to self detonate soon after a failure to collide with a target. Obviously, if this missile was launched from an S-300 that did not happen. It detonated on impact with the ground, which is not a target for an S-300 missile. The S-300 is an air defence system, not a ground attack system.
With this basic analysis out of the way, let us consider the reaction to the event and what more can be learned from it.
Reaction
Conor Echols' article at Responsible Statecraft provides an excellent timeline based analysis of events and reactions.
To summarize, the Polish government convened an emergency meeting following their awareness of the missile impact. One and a half hours later Associated Press release a one sentence publication quoting one unnamed official which frames the guilt towards Russia.
From there people go mad and begin to talk about NATO's Article 5. Because of all of this stupidity various officials needed to step in to calm the situation. The comments themselves are interesting. NBC News quotes USA President Biden as saying:
“I don’t want to say that until we completely investigate, but it is unlikely ... that it was fired from Russia”
The article is published on November 15th, meaning that it is soon after the event occurred. Thus, President Biden has little detailed forensic information on which to base his response. Indeed, he calls for exactly that. He still attempts to downplay the "Russia" allegations.
The interest here is that western officials downplayed the incident, rather than beating it up. They have no intention of joining this "proxy war", though are very happy for the military industrial complex to make money and for Ukrainians and Russians to die as they condone the continuation of the conflict.
What can be learned?
Before exploring answers to this question a little background may be in order.
Media in the "west" are dominated by three "wire services", one British, one French and one USA based. They are, respectively, Reuters, Agence France-Presse, and Associated Press. The vast majority of news published in the west is derived from or purely republished from these sources. The emergence of the Internet forced a funding model change in news publishing. People wished less to carry around sheaves of dead trees and preferred electronic monitoring devices for their news. In response to the loss of income from "classified" advertisements news agencies had to cut their foreign bureau and investigative staff. This created a further concentration for these 3 wire services. They dominate western news.
Many lessons are on offer. The first is that the next international "hot war" will likely be launched by the media, which should give us all pause. Should this occur it will be one of these "big 3". When Jane Stanley reported on BBC World that Building 7 (the "Solomon Brothers" building) had "collapsed" on 2001-09-11 20 minutes before it actually was imploded, she was reading from a Reuters report.
The next lesson, as noted, is that NATO does not want to be directly involved in the conflict in Ukraine. This is good news, but also bad. They have yet to encourage, and have deliberately impeded, peace negotiations. Thus, we can confirm the already acknowledged purpose of this war: a slow grind designed to destabilize Russia and achieve "regime change".
Another lesson is the reduction in the precision of language. It is easy to declare that the media are misleading us (they are). There is a more subtle aspect occurring, the loosening of language. This is best demonstrated in describing the missile as an "S-300 missile". There is no "S-300 missiles". There are missiles used by the S-300 air defence system. They each have their own military nomenclature and identification. This criticism bleeds into the "dumbing down" of the population. The media believe that we are so stupid that they cannot afford to be precise, for we will become bored. This again reconnects to the emergence of the Internet and a change in media approach.
There is also the "silo-ization" of media as pioneered by Rupert Murdoch. All of these combined mean that one is provided by the "big 3" with controlled, dumbed down, silo-ized narratives which are designed to serve the interests of the wealthy and have little to do with either truth or information.
What should be done?
Who cares who wrote that one line article? The editor who approved it should be charged in whichever jurisdiction they reside as inciting a global war. If "warmongering" is not a crime, it should be, and this individual should be charged under that statue. This was not "sloppy reporting" it was "outrageously dangerous editing".
To counter the influence of the "big 3" governments could invest in the training of journalists and provide grants for new media outlets. Governments which support their own national media could assess the level of "reprint" from the "big 3" happening in their news organisation and advise changes to elevate other sources.
Would it not be wonderful to see articles from Consortium News, MintPress News, Multipolarista, The Dissenter and many others feature or be cited in national news organisations? Don’t get your hopes up.
An effort to force media organisations to use the technology available to them to better serve their role is required. The key concept is "citation". Large legacy media organisations are being challenged by small organisations and often single persons who report and provide references. If one looks at a large western media outlet and examines their sourcing those are dominantly back to their own previous articles. This is a response to the algorithms first defined by Google as a search engine. Linking to your own previous articles elevates search results but does not provide any validation to an article. Organisations who pray to the search algorithms undermine their own credibility. Since the “disinformation war” began the search algorithms are already manipulated in the favour of the legacy media, so their lack of citation now is not for “page raking” but a deliberate choice to not inform.
Thankfully, these dinosaurs are succumbing to a growing awareness in various communities. People see the misrepresentation, they wish for better reporting, they want integrity and credibility from their news authors and presenters. What they get from legacy media does not meet their expectations. This can be seen in the USA as "cord cutting". It is occurring throughout the west.
People are not annoyed by this idiocy. They don't even care.
They have just leave the room.
Update
Guess what? Somebody unknown demanded some “accountability” for this reckless piece of publication. I am shocked, I tell you, shocked. The buck stopped at the … reporter! How predictable. Caitlin Johnstone’s write up captures it all, including relevant sources, which is what journalists do.
Two editors consulted one another over whether to publish. One declared (you can’t make this shit up):
I can’t imagine a U.S. intelligence official would be wrong on this.
I mean, slap me in the teeth with a wet shovel. An editor at one of the three leading wire services actually said that, but the reporter was fired and we see no evidence of any accountability for the editors.
Thus, we learn:
One of these editors at AP is an incompetent, feckless idiot
It takes two editors to approve a one sentence article laying the claim of a single anonymous official
AP have no integrity, else the editors would be named and the idiot of the two immediately fired
AP is a stenographer for anonymous government officials
Actually, we haven’t learnt the last item, it is just re-confirmed for the umteenth time.
The reason that I don’t read legacy media is to preserve my sanity. After all the “we’re sorry, we’ll do better next time” following the 2003 “weapons of mass destruction” baseless manipulation, this is where the legacy media has found themselves.
Preserve your mental balance. Do not read legacy media. Identify reporters or commentators who you think are interesting or reliable and read their work.
Sources
How a lightly-sourced AP story almost set off World War III, Conor Echols, Responsible Statecraft, 2022-11-16
A senior U.S. intelligence official says Russian missiles crossed into NATO member Poland, killing two people, (unnamed), Associated Press, 2022-11-15
Biden says 'unlikely' missile that hit Poland was fired from Russia, Lauren Egan, NBC News, 2022-11-15
Journalistic Responsibility Vanishes When Reporting On US-Targeted Nations, Caitlin Johnstone, her newsletter, 2022-11-17
Another Ukrainian Missile Stunt, b., MoonOfAlabama, 2022-11-16
Endgame in Ukraine struggling to be born, M. K. Bhadrakumar, his website, 2022-11-19
S-300VM (Antey-2500) Anti-Ballistic Missile Defence System, Army Technology, 2014-08-24
Anti-aircraft missile system S-300V / S-300VM Antey-2500, Missilery.info, no date of publication (or author)
Polish president says missile that hit village was probably 'old' S-300 rocket, Reuters, 2022-11-16
Who Is Using the S-300 Missile Identified in Poland Strike?, Zoe Strozewski, Newsweek, 2022-11-16
A tiny Polish border village is the focus of global attention., By Monika Pronczuk and Ada Petriczko, New York Times, 2022-11-16
Here’s what we know about the S-300 missile, which was involved in the Poland blast., Lara Jakes, New York Times, 2022-11-16
Ukraine At Odds With Western Backers Over Missile That Hit Poland, (the ever reliable) Dave DeCamp, Anitwar, 2022-11-16
Poland, NATO Say Missile That Hit Poland Was Likely Ukrainian, Dave DeCamp, Antiwar, 2022-11-16
Saner Souls Prevail, Ray McGovern, his website, 2022-11-16
Factbox: What is the S-300 missile that is reported to have hit Poland?, Reuters, 2022-11-16
Poland missile strike highlights the risk of Ukraine war escalation, (no idea), Finacial Times, 2022-11-16
Paywalled
AP Editor Said She "Can't Imagine" A US Intelligence Official Being Wrong, Caitlin Johnstone, her newsletter, 2022-11-23
Missiles crash in Poland | Ukraine ramps up provocations | Report from Donetsk | Scott Ritter Show, Scott Ritter, Youtube, 2022-11-16
Poland WWIII scare shows why top US general wants peace (w/ Doug Macgregor), Aaron Mate interviews Douglas Macgregor, Pushback (The Grayzone), 2022-11-16
Culture
… awating inspiration
If you like what you read here, you can please the author by sharing it.
Notification
Subscription is optional. Subscribers can expect notifications for most articles. Better is to use RSS, or bookmark the "Archive" page and visit at leisure. If you use Twitter, following @YesXorNo1 is also an effective notifications strategy.
Copyright and Licensing
This work is copyright to the blog's author with CC BY-SA 4.0 licensing. Have fun, reuse, remix etc. but give credit and place no further restrictions. Lets build culture.
Neil Howe and William Strauss wrote 'The 4th Turning' in the mid 90s and 2019 was the ideal date for the next war that changes US history. We're overdue a big war/revolution/civil war and whoever said that 'the first casualty of war is truth' is turning out correct again.