Malaysian airline MH-17 discussion thread

Busted Flat.

Gatling wrote: »

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 ........
.........
.............
............

Where is the Kiev Air traffic controllers tapes simple question. What are they hiding.

Gatling

Busted Flat. wrote: »

Where is the Kiev Air traffic controllers tapes simple question. What are they hiding.

There not hiding anything a little less conspiracy and a little more fact .



What about ...

weisses

Schadenfreudia wrote: »

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.

Problem is however that The pilot of the fighter jet recognized the Boeing as a civilian aircraft but took the shot nonetheless .. And then the order came to shoot it down even over neutral territory.

See ...The Russians don't need motive ... They did it before without motive.

Schadenfreudia

weisses wrote: »

Problem is however that The pilot of the fighter jet recognized the Boeing as a civilian aircraft but took the shot nonetheless .. And then the order came to shoot it down even over neutral territory.

See ...The Russians don't need motive ... They did it before without motive.

They had a motive - the plane was thought to be carrying out surveillance or something.

Everybody needs a motive; if their is no motive than it's an accident.

weisses

Schadenfreudia wrote: »

They had a motive - the plane was thought to be carrying out surveillance or something.

Fighter pilot already identified it as a passenger plane ... But was instructed to shoot it down regardless .. Even over neutral territory, .. And they did again it with MH17 ......Motive ? Just fabricate one

Dohnjoe

A month before MH17, "rebels" shot down a Ukrainian Ilyushin Il-76 transport killing 50. Those aircraft have a max altitude higher than the cruising altitude of MH17

It's likely the "rebels" thought they were targeting another Ukrainian transport

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ilyushin_Il-76

It was certainly my first thought when I heard MH17 had gone down

Schadenfreudia

weisses wrote: »

Fighter pilot already identified it as a passenger plane ... But was instructed to shoot it down regardless .. Even over neutral territory, .. And they did again it with MH17 ......Motive ? Just fabricate one

Don't have to. There obviously was one :rolleyes:

LordSutch

What about MH370.

Nearly at the end of the two year search . . . . .

I must revisit the MH370 thread, if I can find it?

Schadenfreudia

LordSutch wrote: »

What about MH370.

Nearly at the end of the two year search . . . . .

I must revisit the MH370 thread, if I can find it?

Didn't know there was one - but as even indirect Russian involvement is vanishingly unlikely, I guess it isn't of any interest to the regulars here :rolleyes:

Gatling

LordSutch wrote: »

What about MH370.

Nearly at the end of the two year search . . . . .

I must revisit the MH370 thread, if I can find it?

Wait didn't the CIA helicopter in the wreckage of MH370 into Ukraine to make it look like mh17 in an attempt to besmirch vladi Putin .
That's what's was been claimed at some stage

Busted Flat.

https://twitter.com/Malinka1102/status/707664936768503813

BoJack Horseman

What radar assets would the US have had in eastern Ukraine on that day?

AN/SPY-1 wouldn't have anything near the range.
An AEWAC has greater range, but would still have needed to be over Ukraine to have a chance to see it..... and from checking, I can't find any record of an E-3 being deployed to Ukraine, ever.

What is there for the USA to share?

Gatling

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

What is there for the USA to share?

They actually shared already with several investigators shown the US evidence but hey that's not going to stop RT running sound bites about it

BoJack Horseman

Gatling wrote: »

They actually shared already with several investigators shown the US evidence but hey that's not going to stop RT running sound bites about it

That would be satellite imagery though wouldn't it?

Radar range is limited by physics.....
There could have been other assets nearby... but a ship would have had to have been right on the coast of Crimea to be close enough.

Gatling

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

That would be satellite imagery though wouldn't it?

Radar range is limited by physics.....
There could have been other assets nearby... but a ship would have had to have been right on the coast of Crimea to be close enough.

I believe so ,

Unless there's been an upgrade programme to systems in the Baltics we don't know about ,

Or a mix of assets that picked up the launch or this Is a fishing expedition for the Kremlin to find our exactly what the US and Nato can see and hear

Schadenfreudia

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

What radar assets would the US have had in eastern Ukraine on that day?

AN/SPY-1 wouldn't have anything near the range.
An AEWAC has greater range, but would still have needed to be over Ukraine to have a chance to see it..... and from checking, I can't find any record of an E-3 being deployed to Ukraine, ever.

What is there for the USA to share?

:pac::pac::pac::pac::pac:....jeez...you really do come out with some funny ones! :rolleyes:

BoJack Horseman

Schadenfreudia wrote: »

jeez...you really do come out with some funny ones! :rolleyes:

Well. what assets do you think would be sufficient to do the trick, from what range & from what location?

Happy to defer to your obviously superior knowledge here!

Schadenfreudia

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

Well. what assets do you think would be sufficient to do the trick, from what range & from what location?

Isn't that what the investigation are trying to find out?

BoJack Horseman

Schadenfreudia wrote: »

Isn't that what the investigation are trying to find out?

No, not at all.
As well you know!

No one is suspecting or investigating the US of shooting MH17 down.

So again, what was funny about my post?
What assets do you think were within range to be able to provide data (and are accordingly being covered up according to your colleagues in RT?)

Elmer Blooker

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

What radar assets would the US have had in eastern Ukraine on that day?


What is there for the USA to share?

Lots it seems .........

Kerry said social media reports and US surveillance put the missile system in question in the vicinity of the crash before the tragedy.

"We know because we observed it by imagery that at the moment of the shootdown we detected a launch from that area," he said. "Our trajectory shows that it went to the aircraft.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jul/20/mh17-crash-kerry-evidence-pro-russia-separatists-responsibility

BoJack Horseman

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

Lots it seems .........

Read your link komrade.... it makes no mention of anything!
And what it alludes to is satellite.

If only we knew what radar data the US was hiding.... or, that they have none at all.

Schadenfreudia

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

What assets do you think were within range to be able to provide data

Isn't that what the investigation are trying to find out?

weisses

Schadenfreudia wrote: »

Isn't that what the investigation are trying to find out?

I see being obtuse is today's lesson

Gatling

I see one of vladis close friends and former head of RT and Gazprom Mikhail Lesin who died back in November russian media claimed he suffered a heart attack and died in america .

Washington state coroner released autopsy reports he died from blunt force trauma .


And yet no word from the Kremlin odd that

Busted Flat.

bellingcat's Higgins admits gets money from Atlantic Council, NAC is the principal political decision-making body of the NATO @OctDalby

Gatling

Busted Flat. wrote: »

bellingcat's Higgins admits gets money from Atlantic Council, NAC is the principal political decision-making body of the NATO @OctDalby

According to a Russian on twitter

Lol

Autonomous Cowherd

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3556177/Was-MH17-shot-Ukrainian-fighter-jet-BBC-documentary-claims-Boeing-777-targeted-plane.html

New evidence suggests that the downing of the Malaysian Airlines plane MH17 was caused by a shot from a Ukrainian fighter jet rather than a ground-to-air missile.

The damning allegations will be revealed in a BBC documentary which puts forward a number of theories as to why the aircraft exploded.

keith16

Autonomous Cowherd wrote: »

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3556177/Was-MH17-shot-Ukrainian-fighter-jet-BBC-documentary-claims-Boeing-777-targeted-plane.html

New evidence suggests that the downing of the Malaysian Airlines plane MH17 was caused by a shot from a Ukrainian fighter jet rather than a ground-to-air missile.

The damning allegations will be revealed in a BBC documentary which puts forward a number of theories as to why the aircraft exploded.

Link is absolute trash.

Autonomous Cowherd

keith16 wrote: »

Link is absolute trash.

Wrong. The link is not 'absolute trash.' It links to a story (albeit in the Daily Mail, though the facts can be verified elsewhere re broadcast of documentary) that says the BBC will air a documentary on May 3rd suggesting possible alternative scenarios re MH17.

Whether or not those scenarios will be trash is a different matter entirely, but, no, the link is not trash.

keith16

Autonomous Cowherd wrote: »

Whether or not those scenarios will be trash is a different matter entirely, but, no, the link is not trash.

Link, other possible theories mentioned and said BBC show; all absolute and utter trash.