Malaysian airline MH-17 discussion thread

KomradeBishop

There's been a huge amount of dubious claims about who downed the plane, and there hasn't been any conclusive evidence presented - the recording that you cite there, is said to be from the downing of a different plane, and the social media website you cite, is said to be contributed to by locals in the area - i.e. locals see a plane get shot down, they post it up on the social media website (does not mean they were involved with shooting it down, or know anything about who did it).

It is possible that such counter-claims are covering up after the fact, but they create enough reasonable doubt to discard both of those things as evidence.

Extraordinary claims (with far-reaching consequences if they are correct), require extraordinary evidence - and there's a severe lack of that when it comes to MH-17.

Peist2007

Grayson wrote: »

Put that along with the fact that multiple planes had been shot down in that area by separatists in the preceding weeks and I'd say you have a lot of compelling evidence against the separatists.

Grayson wrote: »

So besides the written and spoken confessions, there's not that much evidence.

Yep

With the length of time required to properly investigate this incident which has potentially huge ramifications for us all; makes you wonder why one side was being vehemently blamed with all sorts of wild claims about "irrefutable" evidence within 2 hours of it happening. Funny, isnt it?

Gatling

S.R. wrote: »

Who "we"?
"When" ))))))) Yeah, when?

The mad barking of anti Vlad club just 3 hours after catastrophe is not better than this video. In fact it's worse. So relax and wait forever for your "when".

The normal people

Gatling

S.R. wrote: »

Dear members of anti Vlad cub, please find differences between pictures of Russian proof that Ukranians shot down plane and pictures of American proof of Vlad's invasion of Ukraine:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2707650/Proof-Russia-firing-Ukrainian-troops-U-S-State-Department-publishes-satellite-images-says-Russian-artillery-used-pro-Kremlin-rebels.html

The russian picture's a piss poor fake they claim a Mig 29 is clearly visible in the picture well here's the problem the "Fake Aircraft " image is not a Mig 29 several months they claimed they had radar proof and several eyewitnesses who claimed to have seen 2 x Ukrainian SU 25 jets following and then engaging MH17 with machine guns repeatedly before it blew up and crashed ,all despite heavy cloud cover in the region on the day .,
Now its a Mig 29 that engaged MH17 head on with 20mm canon fire aiming at the crews abdomen so they couldn't scream ,
Then used a heat seeking missile to blow up an engine .

That wouldnt even happen in a straight to bargin bin dvd

Aidric

Events at the G20 make me nervous that Putin will become even more entrenched.

Elmer Blooker

Aidric wrote: »

Events at the G20 make me nervous that Putin will become even more entrenched.

As Noam Chomsky said recently - ".... the official mission of NATO became to control the international global energy system and pipelines, that means to control the world"
Ukraine means nothing to the USA, they could all freeze and starve to death this winter and no one in Washington would bat an eyelid, the Ukrainians are mere pawns in the USA's game to bring down Putin.
The Russians are good at chess too lets not forget.

Elmer Blooker

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

The Russians are good at chess too lets not forget.

Both are hackers though :P

Gatling

Aidric wrote: »

Events at the G20 make me nervous that Putin will become even more entrenched.

Apparently he's decided to bugger off early from G20 ukraine too much on the agenda for him

Aidric

Gatling wrote: »

Apparently he's decided to bugger off early from G20 ukraine too much on the agenda for him

Mixed reports on that front. Nothing definitive as yet.

S.R.

"The competent authorities of the Netherlands leading the investigation into the crash of the Malaysian "Boeing 777", was sent to Moscow an official request for international legal assistance."

In particular, the investigators asked to provide the Russian Federation documents that could confirm the information on the presence of Ukrainian military aircraft close to Boeing at the time of the disaster, said "Interfax" a source familiar with the situation.

http://www.ntv.ru/novosti/1262163/#sel=7:2,8:3

gandalf

LOL I guess they won't be getting any documents off the Russians so

BoJack Horseman

S.R. wrote: »

In particular, the investigators asked to provide the Russian Federation documents that could confirm the information on the presence of Ukrainian military aircraft close to Boeing at the time of the disaster,

Let's hope the Kremlin provide more than this pathetic effort!

S.R.

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

Let's hope the Kremlin provide more than this pathetic effort!

Well, the Kremlin is excellent student.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2707650/Proof-Russia-firing-Ukrainian-troops-U-S-State-Department-publishes-satellite-images-says-Russian-artillery-used-pro-Kremlin-rebels.html

BoJack Horseman

S.R. wrote: »

Well, the Kremlin is excellent student.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2707650/Proof-Russia-firing-Ukrainian-troops-U-S-State-Department-publishes-satellite-images-says-Russian-artillery-used-pro-Kremlin-rebels.html

Not really.

A Kremlin lie can't be compared to a NATO truth.

Gatling

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

Let's hope the Kremlin provide more than this pathetic effort!

The famous mig 29 Photoshop shame though russian military can't identify a mig 29 from a Airliner

Egginacup

Gatling wrote: »

Absolutely there will be No apology

Will there be an apology from the vlad club at all when the full details are released and proven what we all ready know

What exactly do you know? Nothing, that's what.
The only "proof" that Novorussians shot the plane down is a twitter entry or some such rubbish. You call that proof?
The whole story that Ukraine and the US/NATO are putting out that it was shot down by a missile is farcical and really is a story for suckers.

As for that picture of a fighter shooting down the airliner, I myself am skeptical as to it's veracity. It looks like another fabrication BY western entities to muddy the waters and discredit who actually believes that the plane was shot down by fighters.
Simple tactic....some believe that the plane was shot down by jets (and the evidence certainly points that way) and others simply believe it was shot down by a surface to air missile, despite there not being a shred of proof. The best way to strengthen the weak argument of the BUK brigade is to release a fake image of the plane being shot down by a jet. That way even it it's true that it was downed by a Ukrainian fighter (which seems very likely) the missile people can just ignore the debate and scream "fake photos by Moscow" ....even though these photos were released by Western sources.

The results of that investigation will never be published because they can't implicate Novorussians so it'll at best be a whitewash or a fabrication. Obama and crew don't care. They got what they wanted, i.e. sanctions against Russia for something there's no proof Russia was responsible for.

Who cares about 298 dead civilians. They've served their purpose.

One other thing that nobody seems to mention and that is has anyone actually seen a BUK missile launch? It leaves a vapour trail. For a BUK to hit the MH17 it would leave behind a vapour trail 10km long. And that trail stays for about 10 or 15 minutes.
Yet not a soul witnessed such a trail. Not one report or seeing a launch. Not one report of anyone seeing that vapour trail. Not one photo or video. I can understand there being no civilian camera-phone footage of jets attacking the airliner. It would have happened very quickly. It would have taken the plane about 40-45 seconds to hit the ground from 30,000ft.
If the plane was shot down by a missile system that vapour trail would be hanging in the air for 10, 15, 20 minutes....enough time for anybody to get out their phone, camera and record it. In fact when we saw pictures of the smoke rising from the crash site on the news there was no missile vapour trail either.

The missile story would be laughable if the whole damn episode wasn't so tragic.

gandalf

And we're off again :rolleyes:

Gatling

gandalf wrote: »

And we're off again :rolleyes:

And it's even worse

Egginacup

Grayson wrote: »

You're ignoring a post made by a separatist commander claiming they had shot down a plane. A post made shortly after the plane had been shot down.
There's also the recorded conversation between the commander and a subordinate. I can't testify to it's veracity since I don't speak russian, however I haven't seen anything to discredit it.

Put that along with the fact that multiple planes had been shot down in that area by separatists in the preceding weeks and I'd say you have a lot of compelling evidence against the separatists.

Whereas the other side have a Spanish air traffic controller that doesn't exist and claims that Ukraine, which had not shot down a single thing in the conflict to that date, decided to shoot down a plane to blame the separatists.

Only someone who really wanted to believe that Ukrainian forces were responsible would believe that they did it. There's no evidence pointing that way and there's a preponderance of it directed at the separatists.

There is ZERO evidence implicating Novorussian fighters. I wish people would stop saying such claptrap. Repeating a lie over and over will not make it true.
If someone tweets tomorrow that they shot Kennedy are you going to drop everything and state to the world "Look he just admitted to killing JFK! What more proof does anyone need??" ?

Do you realise how ridiculous you sound using that so called conversation as the bulwark of your "unshakeable" evidence

Egginacup

gandalf wrote: »

And we're off again :rolleyes:

What's the purpose of this thread gandalf? Blank posts?

Egginacup

Grayson wrote: »

You're ignoring a post made by a separatist commander claiming they had shot down a plane. A post made shortly after the plane had been shot down.
There's also the recorded conversation between the commander and a subordinate. I can't testify to it's veracity since I don't speak russian, however I haven't seen anything to discredit it.

Put that along with the fact that multiple planes had been shot down in that area by separatists in the preceding weeks and I'd say you have a lot of compelling evidence against the separatists.

Whereas the other side have a Spanish air traffic controller that doesn't exist and claims that Ukraine, which had not shot down a single thing in the conflict to that date, decided to shoot down a plane to blame the separatists.

Only someone who really wanted to believe that Ukrainian forces were responsible would believe that they did it. There's no evidence pointing that way and there's a preponderance of it directed at the separatists.

Simple question Grayson:

You believe the statement made by this so called commander that he allegedly admitted to shooting down the aircraft.

How come you don't believe the statements of eyewitnesses who say they saw jets shooting the plane down?

You haven't seen anything to discredit them either, have you?

BoJack Horseman

Egginacup wrote: »

Simple question Grayson:

You believe the statement made by this so called commander that he allegedly admitted to shooting down the aircraft.

How come you don't believe the statements of eyewitnesses who say they saw jets shooting the plane down?

You haven't seen anything to discredit them either, have you?

True dat.

I always trust the word of anonymous & unverified peasant farmers in identifying a military aircraft 20 metres long way up 10kms in the sky.... With the naked eye!

This whole mess is obviously a CIA false flag.

Egginacup

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

True dat.

I always trust the word of anonymous & unverified peasant farmers in identifying a military aircraft 20 metres long way up 10kms in the sky.... With the naked eye!

This whole mess is obviously a CIA false flag.

So you're saying these eyewitnesses hallucinated? And are you stating that a farmer's eyesight is inferior?
Your little throwaway comment is a bit childish.

Gatling

You have to forgive us mere mortals we all weren't born with Xray vision and the ability to see through heavy cloud cover seems to be unique to Russian farmers

Egginacup

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

True dat.

I always trust the word of anonymous & unverified peasant farmers in identifying a military aircraft 20 metres long way up 10kms in the sky.... With the naked eye!

This whole mess is obviously a CIA false flag.

But you believe unquestioningly that not a single person saw a missile racing upwards, leaving a vapour trail and blowing the plane out of the sky?

Gatling

I see even the CT forum are shooting this down

Egginacup

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

True dat.

I always trust the word of anonymous & unverified peasant farmers in identifying a military aircraft 20 metres long way up 10kms in the sky.... With the naked eye!

This whole mess is obviously a CIA false flag.

Well, what makes you unflinchingly believe this commander and unflinchingly disbelieve eyewitnesses? What gives his story unshakeable credibility in your eyes?

gandalf

Egginacup wrote: »

What's the purpose of this thread gandalf? Blank posts?

Well from your perspective it's here to spread falsehoods Egg.

S.R.

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

Not really.

A Kremlin lie can't be compared to a NATO truth.

NATO truth, chapter 100500:

http://tinypic.com/view.php?pic=14tu1lh&s=8#.VGpm8Z-PUjA

BoJack Horseman

Egginacup wrote: »

Well, what makes you unflinchingly believe this commander and unflinchingly disbelieve eyewitnesses? What gives his story unshakeable credibility in your eyes?

Egginacup wrote: »

So you're saying these eyewitnesses hallucinated? And are you stating that a farmer's eyesight is inferior?
Your little throwaway comment is a bit childish.

Egginacup wrote:

Well, what makes you unflinchingly believe this commander and unflinchingly disbelieve eyewitnesses? What gives his story unshakeable credibility in your eyes?

Did it really take 3 attempts to reply to my post?

Was the retort side of the brain a bit slow, or was there a shift change at the 'I heart shirtless autocrats' fan club?