Malaysian airline MH-17 discussion thread

smurfjed

This gentlemen is suggesting that it was a bomb....

Doomed flight MH17 was downed over eastern Ukraine by on-board explosives planted by the CIA and detonated via a signal sent from a satellite in space, according to a bizarre new Russian claim.
Highlighted today by a major pro-Kremlin newspaper, the latest theory accuses the Dutch and Ukrainian secret services of complicity in an attack aimed at embarrassing Moscow.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3195289

Strangely enough missile fragments would bend the aircraft aluminium inwards, whilst an explosion would bend it outwards.

Schadenfreudia

smurfjed wrote: »

This gentlemen is suggesting that it was a bomb....

Strangely enough missile fragments would bend the aircraft aluminium inwards, whilst an explosion would bend it outwards.

Certainly that theory sits better with the Cui Bono principle.

Though I'll still go with Occam's Razor and say the most likely cause was Donetsk rebels mistaking it for a Ukrainian aircraft.

weisses

Schadenfreudia wrote: »

Certainly that theory sits better with the Cui Bono principle.

Though I'll still go with Occam's Razor and say the most likely cause was Donetsk rebels mistaking it for a Ukrainian aircraft.

Do you mean the Russian backed, Russian (poorly) trained, Russian supplied Donetsk rebels ?

My name is URL

MadYaker wrote: »

So if I accidentally kill 300 people, I shouldn't face any criminal charges? Riiiight.

When the Americans did it they were given medals

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Air_Flight_655#Post-tour_of_duty_medals

Elmer Blooker

smurfjed wrote: »

This gentlemen is suggesting that it was a bomb....



Strangely enough missile fragments would bend the aircraft aluminium inwards, whilst an explosion would bend it outwards.

But Russian security expert Sergei Sokolov – head of a shadowy organisation called Analytics and Security which boasts close ties to the secret services in Moscow

:pac: Who needs 007 or Austin Powers - of course this ... shadowy organisation has close ties to the secret service!

gandalf

Schadenfreudia wrote: »

Then that, by your own words, would be a mistake, wouldn't it? :cool:

So because they made a "mistake" you seem to reckon they should be let go scot free then?

They meant to shoot a plane down, they did shoot a plane down. It just was the wrong plane.

The people who fired should face justice, the people who ordered them to fire should and the people who supplied the weapon should definitely face justice.

Elmer Blooker

smurfjed wrote: »

This gentlemen is suggesting that it was a bomb....



Strangely enough missile fragments would bend the aircraft aluminium inwards, whilst an explosion would bend it outwards.

Heres an even better one for you from the Mail. I love the huge spaceport in Kazakhstan bit, just picture it exploding as Bond gets the bird in the end. I love the Mail!
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2967157/Vladimir-Putin-ordered-Russian-special-ops-steal

Schadenfreudia

weisses wrote: »

Do you mean the Russian backed, Russian (poorly) trained, Russian supplied Donetsk rebels ?

Yep - they'd be my prime suspects; but I'd not rule anything out. I wasn't there. :cool:

Schadenfreudia

gandalf wrote: »

So because they made a "mistake" you seem to reckon they should be let go scot free then?

"Should" is a pointless word in this context.

There is no effective International Law - not least because the West won't risk their approved (deliberate) mass murderers facing justice.

They meant to shoot a plane down, they did shoot a plane down. It just was the wrong plane.

Noting wrong with shooting down enemy warplanes in a war situation.

The people who fired should face justice, the people who ordered them to fire should and the people who supplied the weapon should definitely face justice.

That "should" again; let's do this chronologically; when the West (US/EU/Israel) signs up to having it's armies tried for murder, torture and war crimes then we can worry about the Donetsk rebels.

Meanwhile nobody is going to put any Russian or Russian ally on trial anywhere.

Live with it.

weisses

Schadenfreudia wrote: »

"Should" is a pointless word in this context.

There is no effective International Law - not least because the West won't risk their approved (deliberate) mass murderers facing justice.



Noting wrong with shooting down enemy warplanes in a war situation.



That "should" again; let's do this chronologically; when the West (US/EU/Israel) signs up to having it's armies tried for murder, torture and war crimes then we can worry about the Donetsk rebels.

Meanwhile nobody is going to put any Russian or Russian ally on trial anywhere.

Live with it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_war_crimes

How far back do you want to go ??

Meanwhile anybody can shoot down civilian aircrafts ?... How far do you want to stretch that ridiculous comparison ?

Schadenfreudia

weisses wrote: »

How far back do you want to go ??

Meanwhile anybody can shoot down civilian aircrafts ?... How far do you want to stretch that ridiculous comparison ?

Not very far actually...how about last week? :cool:

weisses

Schadenfreudia wrote: »

Not very far actually...how about last week? :cool:

How does that work out chronologically ?

Schadenfreudia

weisses wrote: »

How does that work out chronologically ?

Well, let's start with the shooting of the Iranian passenger plane (Iran Air Flight 655) by an American warship in 1988.

Who has been brought to criminal trial for that?

Answers on a postcard....zzzzzzzz......:cool:

weisses

Schadenfreudia wrote: »

Well, let's start with the shooting of the Iranian passenger plane (Iran Air Flight 655) by an American warship in 1988.

Who has been brought to criminal trial for that?

Answers on a postcard....zzzzzzzz......:cool:

But you said something happened last week as well ... you seem to be quite confused

Gatling

Schadenfreudia wrote: »

Well, let's start with the shooting of the Iranian passenger plane (Iran Air Flight 655) by an American warship in 1988.

Who has been brought to criminal trial for that?

Answers on a postcard....zzzzzzzz......:cool:

Again welcome to the MH 17 shot down in July 2014 thread,

Not iran

Not Iraq

Not Tony Blair

Not Greorge bush Jr

But hey whataboutry at its weakest

Schadenfreudia

Gatling wrote: »

Again welcome to the MH 17 shot down in July 2014 thread,

Not iran

Not Iraq

Not Tony Blair

Not Greorge bush Jr

But hey whataboutry at its weakest

Lot of people here talking about "justice" and "criminal prosecutions". You can't have a judicial system that isn't based on "whataboutery". Without that no system has legitimacy.

This is all about Iraq, Blair, Bush and the shooting down of an Iranian civilian aircraft - allegedly by accident.

The reason there is zero chance of any Russian facing prosecution for MH 17 is the exact same reason why nobody faced prosecution for the other crimes you listed.

You may not like that reality - but whining denial ain't gonna change it :cool:

Nor will facetious references to "conspiracy theories", "whataboutery" and the other stock dumb clichés spattered about this thread like spaghetti at a wake....

weisses

Schadenfreudia wrote: »

Lot of people here talking about "justice" and "criminal prosecutions". You can't have a judicial system that isn't based on "whataboutery". Without that no system has legitimacy.

This is all about Iraq, Blair, Bush and the shooting down of an Iranian civilian aircraft - allegedly by accident.

The reason there is zero chance of any Russian facing prosecution for MH 17 is the exact same reason why nobody faced prosecution for the other crimes you listed.

You may not like that reality - but whining denial ain't gonna change it :cool:

Nor will facetious references to "conspiracy theories", "whataboutery" and the other stock dumb clichés spattered about this thread like spaghetti at a wake....

But they where in their rights to shoot down that Iranian plane due to the war crimes Russia committed unpunished earlier in the decade ... Surely you must agree to that ..following your own logic.

Schadenfreudia

weisses wrote: »

But they where in their rights to shoot down that Iranian plane due to the war crimes Russia committed unpunished earlier in the decade ... Surely you must agree to that ..following your own logic.

I never said any shooting of a civilian airline was "right". I said it was a mistake in the case of MH17 (unless the Ukrainians/CIA did it) and the Americans claimed it was a mistake in the case of the Iranian plane.

Nobody has, to my knowledge, claimed they had a "right" to shoot down either plane.

I amazed here that so many of those demanding "criminal prosecutions" have to constantly invent straw men to make their points - not a sign of a very solid case.

weisses

Schadenfreudia wrote: »

I amazed here that so many of those demanding "criminal prosecutions" have to constantly invent straw men to make their points - not a sign of a very solid case.

You keep referring to the Iranian incident I'm just defending why people involved in that tragedy shouldn't be prosecuted, If you look at what the Russians did earlier, I only need to use your own logic to make that statement

Civilian plane got shot down ..Now parties involved are looking to find what and who did it and seek some justice ...... How dare they

Schadenfreudia

weisses wrote: »

If you look at what the Russians did earlier, I only used your own logic to make that statement

Wrong. You invented something I didn't say and went on from there.

Civilian plane got shot down ..Now parties involved are looking to find what and who did it and seek some justice ...... How dare they

And I'm merely pointing out that they are wasting their time and explaining why that is the case.

weisses

Schadenfreudia wrote: »

Wrong. You invented something I didn't say and went on from there.

you brought in The Iranian plane incident .. and how it was a precedent for this case I just used your logic explaining why no one was prosecuted for that

Schadenfreudia wrote: »

And I'm merely pointing out that they are wasting their time and explaining why that is the case.

I agree its probably a waste of time, It shouldn't but it probably is

Busted Flat.

Some questions about the investigation.


http://journal-neo.org/2015/08/13/who-is-obstructing-the-mh17-investigation/

Busted Flat.

Some questions about the investigation.


http://journal-neo.org/2015/08/13/who-is-obstructing-the-mh17-investigation/

weisses

Busted Flat. wrote: »

Some questions about the investigation.


http://journal-neo.org/2015/08/13/who-is-obstructing-the-mh17-investigation/

What a load of bollocks .. Russian PR machine at full capacity

Elmer Blooker

Busted Flat. wrote: »

Some questions about the investigation.


http://journal-neo.org/2015/08/13/who-is-obstructing-the-mh17-investigation/

“Instead of acting under the authority of the International Civil Aviation Organization… Ukraine, Australia, Belgium and the Netherlands signed bilateral agreements between themselves, the substance of which were never made fully known, and they organized a joint criminal investigation team last August”

..... and these four countries recently wanted the UN to establish an international criminal investigation into MH17, the real motive of this UN motion was of course political as it was known in advance that Russia would veto it. The whole thing stinks!

Schadenfreudia

weisses wrote: »

What a load of bollocks .. Russian PR machine at full capacity

As I suspected, there is more than merely "seeking justice for the innocent" at play here! :rolleyes:

Busted Flat.

weisses wrote: »

What a load of bollocks .. Russian PR machine at full capacity

What part of the article gives you that impression. There is no implication from the writer putting the blame on anyone just asking legitimate questions. Have you read the artical in full.

Schadenfreudia

“Instead of acting under the authority of the International Civil Aviation Organization… Ukraine, Australia, Belgium and the Netherlands signed bilateral agreements between themselves, the substance of which were never made fully known, and they organized a joint criminal investigation team last August”
First appeared: http://journal-neo.org/2015/08/13/who-is-obstructing-the-mh17-investigation/

Now, either that's true or it isn't true - who is saying it is irrelevant.

Schadenfreudia

Busted Flat. wrote: »

What part of the article gives you that impression. There is no implication from the writer putting the blame on anyone just asking legitimate questions. Have you read the artical in full.

Hey! Don't mention Iranian planes, don't contradict the "facts" known only to a few posters here...don't spoil the party with real facts or context of any sort. We have an agenda to push - Putin ordered his goons to shoot down a civilian airline - just for the craic - everything else is "whataboutery conspiracy theories"

seamus

Schadenfreudia wrote: »

Then that, by your own words, would be a mistake, wouldn't it? :cool:

Curious sidenote about Irish law;

Let's say for example, that you had a guy pointing a gun at you, and you were completely certain that he intended to shoot, so you shoot first, intending to kill him.
But you miss, and you hit a bystander, killing them.

In Irish law, you will be charged with murder. Even though you were legally acting in self-defence in the first instance, and accidentally hit the other person in the second instance, according to Irish law that is murder, because your intention was to cause death.

Not relevant obviously, just thought it was an interesting thought because it's similar to what you suggest about this downing being nothing more than a tragic accident.