Malaysian airline MH-17 discussion thread

ProfessorPlum

Schadenfreudia wrote: »

To repeat the most salient point made on this thread:

"The relatives of MH17 victims have exactly the same chance of "justice" in relation to the downing of MH17 as the relatives of the Iranian Flight 655 have - none"

Must be nearly a year ago since I first pointed out this fact to those less fluent in geopolitics; but as my mission here is to educate I will persist. :cool:

Two wrongs don't make a right .....etc.



Also, I believe that the US and Iran did come to an agreement which involved the US paying compensation to the victims, albeit not fully accepting liability for the shoot down.

So when Russia pay compensation to the victims of MH17, feel free to make your point again.

Schadenfreudia

ProfessorPlum wrote: »

Two wrongs don't make a right .....etc.

Never said they did....:rolleyes:

weisses

Schadenfreudia wrote: »

To repeat the most salient point made on this thread:

"The relatives of MH17 victims have exactly the same chance of "justice" in relation to the downing of MH17 as the relatives of the Iranian Flight 655 have - none"

Must be nearly a year ago since I first pointed out this fact to those less fluent in geopolitics; but as my mission here is to educate I will persist. :cool:

I really thought your mission was to deflect, muddy the waters, engage in whataboutery, and other brain gymnastics to make a point, as the last 5 pages clearly demonstrate.

Schadenfreudia

weisses wrote: »

I really thought your mission was to deflect, muddy the waters, engage in whataboutery, and other brain gymnastics to make a point, as the last 5 pages clearly demonstrate.

One of my most salient lessons is that the use of the term "whataboutery" indicates an inability to deal with context.

I see the cap fits you nicely.....;)

weisses

Schadenfreudia wrote: »

One of my most salient lessons is that the use of the term "whataboutery" indicates an inability to deal with context.

I see the cap fits you nicely.....;)

Ahhh now I get it .. You posted all that waffle as part of a lesson, maybe you can ask your teacher to go over the part of your course that covered the difference between opinion and facts, you seem still confused. Just refer to this thread.

weisses

ProfessorPlum wrote: »

Also, I believe that the US and Iran did come to an agreement which involved the US paying compensation to the victims, albeit not fully accepting liability for the shoot down.

So when Russia pay compensation to the victims of MH17, feel free to make your point again.

They did reach an agreement. Which is not convenient for some on this thread, hence the selective quoting.

The term geo politics apperantly doesn't include Russia.

Schadenfreudia

weisses wrote: »

Ahhh now I get it .. You posted all that waffle as part of a lesson, maybe you can ask your teacher to go over the part of your course that covered the difference between opinion and facts, you seem still confused. Just refer to this thread.

All my posts here are part of my efforts to educate those less informed or less capable of rational analysis.

It's a public service I provide here.

Schadenfreudia

weisses wrote: »

The term geo politics apperantly doesn't include Russia.

Again I must correct you; it does.

weisses

Schadenfreudia wrote: »

All my posts here are part of my efforts to educate those less informed or less capable of rational analysis.

It's a public service I provide here.

Just a small word of advice ..... Please Stop ... you're embarrassing yourself

Maybe in the future there is need for your analysis ... Maybe better to analyse after the investigation,

You like to predict the outcome based on previous incidents, by doing that engaging in Whataboutery

weisses

Schadenfreudia wrote: »

Again I must correct you; it does.

Sorry ... I needed to add "in his head"

Schadenfreudia

weisses wrote: »

Just a small word of advice ..... Please Stop ... you're embarrassing yourself

Not in the least I assure you. I don't do embarrassment - it's one of the benefits of being the one-eyed man in the kingdom of the blind.

You like to predict the outcome based on previous incidents, by doing that engaging in Whataboutery

Hardly. I'm displaying an ability to observe the reality of geopolitics rather than engage in wishful thinking.

Ability to understand context is just one of the many things that gives me the edge over your recycled script-reading.

weisses

Schadenfreudia wrote: »

Ability to understand context is just one of the many things that gives me the edge over your recycled script-reading.

Context ?? that also includes the ability to look at facts and weighing them... which you clearly demonstrated here on thread you are incapable of .

As long as you keep spouting the nonsense RT was accurate in claiming MH 17 was allegedly shot down by a BUK then don't lecture me on recycled script reading please .... Or continue if you want to keep embarrassing yourself ..Whatever suits

Schadenfreudia

weisses wrote: »

Context ?? that also includes the ability to look at facts and weighing them... which you clearly demonstrated here on thread you are incapable of .

As long as you keep spouting the nonsense RT was accurate in claiming MH 17 was allegedly shot down by a BUK then don't lecture me on recycled script reading please .... Or continue if you want to keep embarrassing yourself ..Whatever suits

At the risk of repeating myself, to state that a BUK was allegedly responsible - is clinically accurate.

No amount of gibberish or waffle or illogicality from you will change that simple fact. :cool:

weisses

Schadenfreudia wrote: »

At the risk of repeating myself, to state that a BUK was allegedly responsible - is clinically accurate.

No amount of gibberish or waffle or illogicality from you will change that simple fact. :cool:

To bad the facts disagree with your opinion stating it is unproven a BUK was used

I know you repeat yourself .. But that is more because you have no facts that support your position, that's probably why you actually believe your own nonsense, repeat it until you believe it ... Your own little mantra.

Feel free to actually read the various reports Proving it was a BUK .. Including the manufacturer stating it was a BUK..all provided in this thread

I sincerely hope you will never be called up for jury duty .... What a potential mess that would be when you have to deal with such things called evidence.

Schadenfreudia

weisses wrote: »

To bad the facts disagree with your opinion stating it is unproven a BUK was used

Maybe going back to school would be an option, you are not really in a position to lecture

At the risk of repeating myself, yet again, to state that a BUK was allegedly responsible - is clinically accurate.

No amount of gibberish or waffle or illogicality from you will change that simple fact.

weisses

there we have it the mantra or is this you being rational ?... Next fase is kicking and screaming

Schadenfreudia

weisses wrote: »

there we have it the mantra or is this you being rational ?... Next fase is kicking and screaming

Nah..I leave the kicking and screaming to those who can't handle context....

weisses

Schadenfreudia wrote: »

Nah..I leave the kicking and screaming to those who can't handle context....

5 pages off waffle and finally the self reflection kicks in .... Well done, I knew you had it in you

weisses

Interesting and damning findings from Bellincat .. Specially in Context with other report/evidence

https://www.bellingcat.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/53rd-report-public.pdf

Schadenfreudia

weisses wrote: »

Interesting and damning findings from Bellincat .. Specially in Context with other report/evidence

https://www.bellingcat.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/53rd-report-public.pdf

Proving only that accidents happen - if indeed it was a BUK

weisses

Schadenfreudia wrote: »

Proving only that accidents happen - if indeed it was a BUK

wow 9 minutes and you read it all ..... very impressive ... glad you agree the Russians where involved in this "accident" ... Hopefully they will pay up just as the Americans, Polonium and suspicious heart attacks won't work this time

Schadenfreudia

weisses wrote: »

wow 9 minutes and you read it all ..... very impressive ... glad you agree the Russians where involved in this "accident" ... Hopefully they will pay up just as the Americans, Polonium and suspicious heart attacks won't work this time

Indeed, I am an exceptional student as well as an educator.

I guess whatever Mr Putin says will work will work - that's the way Big Countries operate.

Of course, unlike the US and Flight 655, Russia didn't shoot MH17 down...even if it was a BUK, which, allegedly, it was. The context supports this; at the time of the downing of 655 the US was hostile to Iran and actively engaged in opposition to it....I don't think Russia ever had an issue with Malaysia!

weisses

Schadenfreudia wrote: »

Indeed, I am an exceptional student as well as an educator.

I guess whatever Mr Putin says will work will work - that's the way Big Countries operate.

Of course, unlike the US and Flight 655, Russia didn't shoot MH17 down...even if it was a BUK, which, allegedly, it was. The context supports this; at the time of the downing of 655 the US was hostile to Iran and actively engaged in opposition to it....I don't think Russia ever had an issue with Malaysia!

What issue did Russia had With South Korea when they shot down flight 007 ?

All the evidence point towards a Russian BUK system driven over the border .. They shot down MH17 ( for whatever reason ) and then moved the BUK back to Russia. Of Course they will never acknowledge this .. No one will go to jail for this.

Schadenfreudia

weisses wrote: »

What issue did Russia had With South Korea when they shot down flight 007 ?

Part of a hostile military alliance or..whatever - but there was no question that Russia shot that one down...the questions are around what it was doing :rolleyes:

Regarding MH17 - there is no motive whatsoever...unless it was the Ukrainians did it.

Cui bono as they say.

Busted Flat.

US version of events starting to fall asunder, Kerry claims one day after the tragedy that they had video and satellite imagery has fallen flat according to the Dutch letter to the families, Shít starting to hit the fan.

Schadenfreudia

Busted Flat. wrote: »

US version of events starting to fall asunder, Kerry claims one day after the tragedy that they had video and satellite imagery has fallen flat according to the Dutch letter to the families, Shít starting to hit the fan.

That's really unfortunate.

I wonder why the inquiry doesn't just copy this thread - there are people here who know exactly what happened! :rolleyes:

Gatling

Busted Flat. wrote: »

US version of events starting to fall asunder, Kerry claims one day after the tragedy that they had video and satellite imagery has fallen flat according to the Dutch letter to the families, Shít starting to hit the fan.

Lol

Evidence that the Dutch didn't request here comes more conspiracy theories with the criminal investigation report due to be released exactly the same way as the claims on the technical report happened

Busted Flat.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Ccthc2YWoAI-ZmR.jpg

darkpagandeath

Schadenfreudia wrote: »

That's really unfortunate.

I wonder why the inquiry doesn't just copy this thread - there are people here who know exactly what happened! :rolleyes:

What happened to the Russian evidence of them proving it was Ukraine or not the Russians ?

Gatling

So all this huff and puff about America withholding evidence and not showing the Dutch investigation what it had .

Well seems all the questions were answered and evidence shown to the team


https://www.bellingcat.com/news/uk-and-europe/2016/02/25/dsb-responses/


And yet we keep hearing hidden evidence. ..




Where is the Russian Videos they claim they had ........
.........
.............
............