Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site ucbvax.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!harpo!eagle!mhuxi!houxm!ihnp4!cbosgd!ucbvax!daemon From: daemon@ucbvax.UUCP Newsgroups: fa.arms-d Subject: Arms-Discussion Digest V1 #58 Message-ID: <53@ucbvax.UUCP> Date: Thu, 6-Oct-83 12:46:24 EDT Article-I.D.: ucbvax.53 Posted: Thu Oct 6 12:46:24 1983 Date-Received: Fri, 14-Oct-83 21:03:21 EDT Sender: daemon@ucbvax.UUCP Organization: U. C. Berkeley Computer Science Lines: 117 >From @MIT-ML:ARMS-D@MIT-MC Thu Oct 6 09:43:59 1983 Arms-Discussion Digest Volume 1 : Issue 58 Today's Topics: The Massacre ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 26 September 1983 03:47 EDT From: James A. Cox Subject: The Massacre Date: 12 September 1983 10:03 edt From: Jong.RELBULDOC at M.BILLERICA.HONEYWELL Alright, I'm totally confused. The Soviet account of what happened reveals the paranoia of their thinking ("Russian soil is sacred") and the incomptetence of their air defense system (Flight 007 crosses the Kamchitka [sic] Penninsula, then flies off; scrambling Soviet fighters are airborne 30 minutes later). The facts are that a civilian plane intruded into Soviet airspace. The Soviets detected it and followed it for some hours while they decided what to do. As it was about to leave Soviet airspace, they made up their minds and issued the orders. Two missiles were dispatched, and, as the entire world heard the Soviet pilot report, "the target [was] destroyed." For the sake of the West, I hope they do not manifest similar "incompetence" in all their activities. But the U.S. account seems fantastic: Well, let's examine your justification. 1) What was that aircraft doing so far off course? Pilot error seems the most reasonable explanation. From what I have heard, the error could be explained by a simple mistake in transposing the coordinates entered into the navigation computers. That the pilot deliberately overflew Soviet territory seems unlikely in the extreme. 2) This morning (9/12/83) we hear that a "new translation" of the tapes tells of warning shots being fired. Why didn't the pilot report that he was being followed? It is my understanding that there is often difficulty in translating intercepted message from Soviet aircraft, due to the idiomatic jargon employed by pilots. It is entirely conceivable (to me) that a later translation, made after more careful consideration, might reveal new evidence. It now seems likely that the pilot of Flight 007 never knew he was being followed by Soviet fighters. He made a routine request to Tokyo control to increase his altitude just minutes before his plane was shot down. Stress analyses on the recording of his voice showed no evidence that he was conscious of any danger. 3) Do the Koreans indulge in espionage using commercial aircraft? Highly unlikely. First of all, I know of no reason to believe that the South Koreans are callous enough to risk 270 people, including many Americans, among them a U.S. Congressman, by sending a civilian aircraft into Soviet airspace. Second, what would they have to gain? 4) If this was a spy flight, was the pilot under orders not to land under any circumstances? In 1978, a Korean plane strayed/intruded into Soviet airspace and was shot down; given that, wouldn't it be suicidal to try the same subterfuge again? Any accurate information about U.S. or Korean spy flights would be most illuminating. Assuming the Koreans were sending civilian planes on spy missions, it would be suicidal to "try the same subterfuge again" after 1978. But I think it ridiculous to even consider the possibility that either Flight 007 or the earlier Korean plan was on a spy mission. If the earlier plane had been on such a mission, why didn't the Soviets produce any spy equipment, which they certainly would have found during their examination of that plane after it had been forced down? And the U.S. would certainly have no reason to countenance such an operation, then or now. What possible intelligence could be gathered by a civilian plane that could not be gotten better and safer by satellites or true reconnaissance planes like the SR-71? Right now, one gets the feeling that the Soviets are indeed barbarians, but that the U.S. is doing the lying. The facts are so damaging to the Soviets that the U.S. has no need to lie. Instead, any appraisal less biased than yours would certainly conclude that the Soviets are the liars. On one point, the evidence for that is quite clear. The Soviets claimed, and still claim, that the plane was flying without navigation lights. But on the tape of Japanese-intercepted communications, the Soviet pilot says clearly that he saw the plane's navigation lights on. Further, the Soviets claim that their pilot attempted to signal the Korean plane to land, using internationally-recognized visual signals. But the intercepted communications provide no evidence for this. Nor did the Korean pilot ever report seeing any other planes. Let's call a spade a spade. This was not the "Korean airliner incident," as the media have named it; it was the Korean airliner massacre. The Soviets are not merely "barbarians," as you acknowledge, they are murderers. Worse, they are unrepentant murderers, denying everything at first, then deciding that their fighters had fired warning shots at the plane but making no mention of its fate, and finally admitting that the flight had been "stopped," but claiming that it was on a spy mission, a claim which all objective observers acknowledge as ludicrous. Unfortunately, the Soviets know, as did Goebbels, that if a lie is repeated often enough it will eventually be mistaken for the truth. Your comments show that, in some cases, the process occurrs far more rapidly than one could imagine. ------------------------------ [End of ARMS-D Digest]