Malaysian airline MH-17 discussion thread

Schadenfreudia

seamus wrote: »

Irish law;
Not relevant obviously

I extracted the key words to ensure clarity.

On reflection, if that really is Irish Law - it's pretty daft. Is there any case history??

weisses

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

..... 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!

Malaysia filed for the investigation because it was a Malaysian plane
Why did you not mention that ? ..... That whole thing stinks

weisses

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.

providing documented evidence, including satellite monitoring data of Ukrainian airspace to allow international experts to come to a sound conclusion,
First appeared: http://journal-neo.org/2015/08/13/who-is-obstructing-the-mh17-investigation/

Is that the same kind of evidence that was labelled as "poorly photo shopped"

However, despite the active efforts of the United States to use the investigation to further incite anti-Russian sentiments in the world, there’s a growing number of evidences that suggest that the whole tragedy of the MH17 was staged by Washington to use it in its anti-Russian propaganda campaign, even though it is as regrettable as it may sound. To a certain degree the attempts to obscure the undeniable guilt Kiev had in allowing the flight in the area of military conflict may serve as a proof of this
First appeared: http://journal-neo.org/2015/08/13/who-is-obstructing-the-mh17-investigation/

Really ... That is you definition of a non biased source ?:o ....

weisses

Schadenfreudia wrote: »

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

As I suspected your real intend is showing in the above post

1)You said it was an accident

2)Donetsk rebels probably made a booboo when they shot down what they thought was a military plane according to you

Taking that in mind that piece of propaganda must be an insult to you too ?

unless .. . . . . . . . .

JacquesSon

Schadenfreudia wrote: »

I extracted the key words to ensure clarity.

On reflection, if that really is Irish Law - it's pretty daft. Is there any case history??

I don't think it's daft at all. It's good law. Don't kill people.

smurfjed

“The sole objective of the investigation of an accident or incident shall be the prevention of accidents and incidents. It is not the purpose of this activity to apportion blame or liability.
First appeared: http://journal-neo.org/2015/08/13/who-is-obstructing-the-mh17-investigation/

I told you this last year, the ICAO mandated report would tell you the when/where and how, it wont tell you the who or why.

According to some commentators, the “John” that was mentioned in Stern’s conversations is the head of the CIA, John Brennan who visited Ukraine shortly before the crash and according to the former chief of the SBU Yakimenko “brought instructions and orders: what to do, how to do and what forces to use to carry out the plans that were drafted by the CIA.”

Thus, the “light at the end of the tunnel” is clearly visible and the truth will become known, no matter how hard Washington and Langley resist it./

So that whole article all comes down to this..... the CIA did it!

Schadenfreudia

weisses wrote: »

1)You said it was an accident

2)Donetsk rebels probably made a booboo when they shot down what they thought was a military plane according to you

Yes I said those things - repeatedly; you have some point to make? Why should the article be an "insult" to me?

I'm not a bit insulted by it! I found it rather interesting - providing food for thought....which is rather more than the "Putin shot it down just for a lark" brigade here have ever done :rolleyes:

Schadenfreudia

JacquesSon wrote: »

I don't think it's daft at all. It's good law. Don't kill people.

It's not daft - it's insane! Someone is trying to kill you with a gun and you fire back hitting someone else by mistake.

That would accidental killing in self defence in any sensible jurisdiction - I doubt it is the law here; as I asked above - any case history?

weisses

Schadenfreudia wrote: »

Yes I said those things - repeatedly; you have some point to make? Why should the article be an "insult" to me?

I'm not a bit insulted by it! I found it rather interesting - providing food for thought....which is rather more than the "Putin shot it down just for a lark" brigade here have ever done :rolleyes:

Yeah its really food for thought the MH17 was staged by Washington to use it in its anti-Russian propaganda campaign

How is that "more" then some people here blaming Putin ?

What is your agenda ?

Schadenfreudia

weisses wrote: »

Yeah its really food for thought the MH17 was staged by Washington to use it in its anti-Russian propaganda campaign

Yep, that's what I said.

Certainly much more plausible than the absurd idea of Putin ordering the deliberate shooting down of a civilian plane with no connection to the conflict.

How is that "more" then some people here blaming Putin ?

The anti-Putin brigade have failed utterly to provide any food for thought; just endless recycling of the Pentagon line on events.

What is your agenda ?

I just want folks to get along.......

weisses

Schadenfreudia wrote: »

The anti-Putin brigade have failed utterly to provide any food for thought; just endless recycling of the Pentagon line on events.

Luckily we have you as a voice for the Kremlin

Busted Flat.

weisses wrote: »

Luckily we have you as a voice for the Kremlin

I would put it another way, "Luckily we have you as a voice for the truth".
And it will out eventually.

weisses

Yup .... Truth is al I want

darkpagandeath

So the UN the Ukraine, Australia, Malaysia and the Netherlands are all in league with the lizard people to bring down Russia is that right ? You know off people who know the "Truth"...

Schadenfreudia

darkpagandeath wrote: »

So the UN the Ukraine, Australia, Malaysia and the Netherlands are all in league with the lizard people to bring down Russia is that right ?

At least as plausible as the notion that Putin ordered MH17 shot down, don't you think?

darkpagandeath

Schadenfreudia wrote: »

At least as plausible as the notion that Putin ordered MH17 shot down, don't you think?

Who said that ? We expect it to be The same lads that had been shooting down stuff in the area for weeks. They would have been given the green light to take out planes but I doubt Ordered. Problem in this Case is Random troops would not have the training to fire the BUK system with any kind of accuracy. We presume they are probably lads on holiday, that happened to have access to a BUK system to bring with them. And those missiles are not cheap.

Schadenfreudia

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Who said that ? We expect it to be The same lads that had been shooting down stuff in the area for weeks.

Well, not sure who you mean by "we" but Putin has been implicated numerous times on this thread by several different posters.

(Don't ask me to go back and look for them!)

Problem in this Case is Random troops would not have the training to fire the BUK system with any kind of accuracy. We presume they are probably lads on holiday, that happened to have access to a BUK system to bring with them. And those missiles are not cheap.

I'm getting dizzy repeating myself here

I agree the most likely sequence of events was the rebels had got Russian supplied BUK systems to repel attacks by the Ukrainian airforce and that they shot down the MH 17 mistaking it for a Ukrainian plane.

If we all agree this is the case then there is nothing much to learn and indeed little to investigate.

It happened in a war; it was an accident. :cool:

On the other hand if the "CIA/Ukrainians did it" theories are true - then it was mass murder.

darkpagandeath

Schadenfreudia wrote: »

Well, not sure who you mean by "we" but Putin has been implicated numerous times on this thread by several different posters.

(Don't ask me to go back and look for them!)



I'm getting dizzy repeating myself here

I agree the most likely sequence of events was the rebels had got Russian supplied BUK systems to repel attacks by the Ukrainian airforce and that they shot down the MH 17 mistaking it for a Ukrainian plane.

If we all agree this is the case then there is nothing much to learn and indeed little to investigate.

It happened in a war; it was an accident. :cool:

On the other hand if the "CIA/Ukrainians did it" theories are true - then it was mass murder.

If they are lads on holiday they are not Rebels they are foreign troops.

Schadenfreudia

darkpagandeath wrote: »

If they are lads on holiday they are not Rebels they are foreign troops.

Rebels, foreign troops - whatever. They were involved in a war. Changes nothing.

darkpagandeath

Schadenfreudia wrote: »

Rebels, foreign troops - whatever. They were involved in a war. Changes nothing.

It changes who is to blame.

Schadenfreudia

darkpagandeath wrote: »

It changes who is to blame.

As it was an accident it hardly matters. It would only matter if the airline was deliberately targeted.

Hence why the latest research indicating an on-board bomb is so interesting.

If that was the case we'd be looking at mass murder.

darkpagandeath

Schadenfreudia wrote: »

As it was an accident it hardly matters. It would only matter if the airline was deliberately targeted.

Hence why the latest research indicating an on-board bomb is so interesting.

If that was the case we'd be looking at mass murder.

It was deliberately targeted, They thought it was a Ukrainian Plane. Even though Ukrainian transport planes don't fly at that altitude. Bombs explode outwards the wreckage is not bent outwards. A BUK goes off like a shotgun next to a plane to have the best effect in causing catastrophic failure. It can have large balls in it hence the CT of a 30mm cannon.

Schadenfreudia

darkpagandeath wrote: »

It was deliberately targeted, They thought it was a Ukrainian Plane.

You know that is not what I mean by "deliberately targeted"

"They thought it was a Ukrainian Plane" - and that was the mistake!

I can have large balls

Common - bragging won't help solve the mystery!

Gatling

Schadenfreudia wrote: »

It happened in a war;

On the other hand if the "CIA/Ukrainians did it" theories are true - then it was mass murder.

Illegal invasion by the Russian military and authorities.
But I'm sure we'll get a bush /Blair reply .

The only reason there is conflict anywhere is Ukraine is because Vladimir Putin believes he can and will do as he pleases to maintain some crackpot idea that America and Nato are planning to invade Russia.
Sooner or later he's going to fall and fall hard

sparksfly

Gatling wrote: »

Illegal invasion by the Russian military and authorities.
But I'm sure we'll get a bush /Blair reply .

The only reason there is conflict anywhere is Ukraine is because Vladimir Putin believes he can and will do as he pleases to maintain some crackpot idea that America and Nato are planning to invade Russia.
Sooner or later he's going to fall and fall hard

The only reason there is conflict in Ukraine is the illegal NATO coup used to destroy the relationship Russia had with the Ukraine and Europe. Putin secured his interests as any other nation would do.

The US believes it can and will do as it pleases to maintain any crackpot power to serve the American interest.

The illegal overthrow of a non compliant government absolutely suits to serve the US/NATO interests, why else are they so proficient at it?

Vladimir Putin never had any stupid notion that America and NATO are planning to invade Russia, no more than him invading anywhere else. The US however loves to spout the danger of an imminent threat of attack by "Terrorists" to justify its obscene military spend. It helps this perceived threat by creating as many terrorists as possible.

Gatling

sparksfly wrote: »

The only reason there is conflict in Ukraine is the illegal NATO coup used to destroy the relationship Russia had with the Ukraine and Europe. Putin secured his interests as any other nation would do.

The US believes it can and will do as it pleases to maintain any crackpot power to serve the American interest.

The illegal overthrow of a non compliant government absolutely suits to serve the US/NATO interests, why else are they so proficient at it?

Vladimir Putin never had any stupid notion .

Cracking conspiracy theory but .

NO .

Busted Flat.

The bill is getting bigger all the time, US are trying to put some distance from the monster they have created in Ukraine that all the kids that fought in WW2 stopped on with great sacrifice

deco nate

Wow! How /why is their no bans been giving out on this thread? It's gone beyond a joke at this stage!!! It's insane? Some people given real links to info.... Others calling bs on said links.... And not backing up said bs bar linking to rt, or other professional russian sites!

This thread should be closed down now. Just to stop the bs, and when the report comes out, well then
Chat about it.

Schadenfreudia

Gatling wrote: »

Illegal invasion by the Russian military and authorities.
But I'm sure we'll get a bush /Blair reply .

You surely will...now that you are straying from the topic of MH 17 to dabble in context

Schadenfreudia

llegal invasion by the Russian military and authorities.

The only reason there is conflict anywhere is Ukraine is because Vladimir Putin believes he can and will do as he pleases to maintain some crackpot idea that America and Nato are planning to invade Russia.
Sooner or later he's going to fall and fall hard

As I said, the motivation of those who are calling for criminal prosecutions has F-all to do with "justice".

You are hoist by your own words :rolleyes: