Malaysian airline MH-17 discussion thread

Autonomous Cowherd

keith16 wrote: »

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

Uh, okay, if you say so

keith16

Autonomous Cowherd wrote: »

Uh, okay, if you say so

What in that article leads you to believe anything credible will emerge from this? Among the people cited are "witnesses" and a "private investigator".

Autonomous Cowherd

keith16 wrote: »

What in that article leads you to believe anything credible will emerge from this? Among the people cited are "witnesses" and a "private investigator".

I'll just watch it anyway when I get a chance. 'Witnesses' are cited and relied upon in courts of law too...it is not considered a loaded term in those circumstances.

I do not know what happened MH17. I'm not in one camp or another.

Gatling

Looks like the criminal report should released sometime this week or next ,after 2 years we will finally see some movement on the shooting down of MH17

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/sep/27/mh17-inquiry-missile-launch-buk-ukraine-russia?CMP=twt_gu

HensVassal

The report will not show anything. NOTHING. There will be no release of US satellite data. There will be no blackbox or air traffic data. Nothing. Just another bloated document full of conjecture with zero proof and a plethora of omissions.

Good luck with that sh1t.

It will be like the Widgery Report or the crap implicating the Guildford 4.

Gatling

HensVassal wrote: »

The report will not show anything.

But the answer to what , where, and who shot down flight MH-17

HensVassal

Much like all that has been published already there will be no proper proof. No release of US surveillance or intelligence data. No Ukrainian tower comms. Nothing from eyewitnesses on the ground. Any Russian radar or satellite data will be ignored. Nevermind that you will say the aforementioned would just be fakery...if it was it would be easy to include in the report and put the verdict beyond doubt. But it will be just another joke of a report heavy on crap like "all probability points to..."

Load of rubbish.

Gatling

Ah sure some people believe anything that doesn't suit oul Vladis agendas

Gatling

HensVassal wrote: »

. Any Russian radar or satellite data will be ignored.

Odd that after 2 years they still can't find the radar images and video they originally claimed they had ,

Maybe we should see what's put on Sputnik as the real truth -didnt do so well last time though

BoJack Horseman

Report will be released tomorrow at noon.

Gatling wrote: »

Odd that after 2 years they still can't find the radar images and video they originally claimed they had

Funny you should mention that......

Remember a couple of years ago when they released their fake "proof" of an SU-25 shootdown?

Yeah.... well, 2 years on Ivan has dropped that.
Their MOD briefing yesterday now shows no other aircraft other than the 3 airliners traversing eastern Ukraine at the time.

You can also see that their "proofs" tried to paint MH17 being ordered to deviate course.... that seems to be dropped now too.

The story the Ru-MOD have decided now to go with is that iit was indeed a SAM (Hallelujah!) but that it was fired from Ukranian government controlled territory.

Tomorrow's report won't make a blind bit of difference though.
It's more evidence for the families and their case to the ECHR, but nothing else will likely come from it.

Elmer Blooker

Right then, I've heard enough!
The BUK was brought in from Russia.
The evidence: social media and intercepted "telephone conversations" .. "numerous witnesses"
It looks like Mr Eliot Bellingcat Higgins has carried out this "inquiry"
Obscene is the only word I can think of at the moment!

edit: I've just noticed looking at the tv that a "smoke trail" from bellingcat.com has been used as evidence.
The inquiry is constantly using the word "witness" I must have heard a hundred times!

Hande hoche!

Investigators saying it was a missile brought in from Russia. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-37495067

Gatling

^beaten to it ^

Buk missle that shot down MH-17 came from Russia and was fired from inside rebel territory

Gatling

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

Obscene is the only word I can think of at the moment!

Nonsense what's obscene is the denial's from certain groups .
Sputnik cant save Putin

Elmer Blooker

Gatling wrote: »

Nonsense what's obscene is the denial's from certain groups .
Sputnik cant save Putin

Bellingcat is NOT evidence!

ohnonotgmail

Gatling wrote: »

^beaten to it ^

Buk missle that shot down MH-17 came from Russia and was fired from inside rebel territory

so nothing that wasnt blindingly obvious to every impartial observer.

Gatling

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

Bellingcat is NOT evidence!

Face it .

You can have any opinion you want but you can't make up your own facts .

BoJack Horseman

Gatling wrote: »

Buk missle that shot down MH-17 came from Russia and was fired from inside rebel territory

You have been saying that for a very long time.

I didn't believe it myself.
I always assumed it was a captured missile & launcher from Ukrainian stocks but obviously fired by the rebels from their own territory.

It is good that no one, not even the kremlin themselves still pretend that it was a ukrainian fighter jet that brought it down.

Dohnjoe

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

You have been saying that for a very long time.

I didn't believe it myself.
I always assumed it was a captured missile & launcher from Ukrainian stocks but obviously fired by the rebels from their own territory.

The BUK 9M38 missile launcher is highly specialized, driver aside, the commander and 2 crew require a minimum of one years training (plus another year) to become proficient

The Donetsk uprising started in April, by July they had downed MH17. It's a short period and there are no indications it was a Ukrainian crew operating a captured Ukrainian BUK

RandomName2

Dohnjoe wrote: »

The BUK 9M38 missile launcher is highly specialized, driver aside, the commander and 2 crew require a minimum of one years training (plus another year) to become proficient

Arguably the crew weren't in this case proficient if they confused a passenger airliner with a military jet (which seems to be the case).

Dohnjoe

RandomName2 wrote: »

Arguably the crew weren't in this case proficient if they confused a passenger airliner with a military jet (which seems to be the case).

They were known to be targeting Ukrainian military transports, which looks similar to a passenger jet and can travel at that same altitude

One was brought down several weeks before while coming in to land
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukrainian_Air_Force_Ilyushin_Il-76_shoot-down

weisses

Dohnjoe wrote: »

The BUK 9M38 missile launcher is highly specialized, driver aside, the commander and 2 crew require a minimum of one years training (plus another year) to become proficient

The Donetsk uprising started in April, by July they had downed MH17. It's a short period and there are no indications it was a Ukrainian crew operating a captured Ukrainian BUK

That is the smoking gun

A sophisticated weapon system like that is not just handed over for a day to a group of rebels

In that context I can understand the Russian smoke screens and pathetic press conferences a day or two before the official investigation team makes a statement

ohnonotgmail

RandomName2 wrote: »

Arguably the crew weren't in this case proficient if they confused a passenger airliner with a military jet (which seems to be the case).

if they managed to hit a jet at altitude then they were proficient in the use of the weapon system. that they misidentified the plane they were aiming at (assuming they did misidentify) does not take away from that.

ohnonotgmail

weisses wrote: »

That is the smoking gun

A sophisticated weapon system like that is not just handed over for a day to a group of rebels

In that context I can understand the Russian smoke screens and pathetic press conferences a day or two before the official investigation team makes a statement

probably a russian BUK crew who were in ukraine on their holidays. it was a very popular tourist destination for the russian military last year.

BoJack Horseman

Dohnjoe wrote: »

there are no indications it was a Ukrainian crew operating a captured Ukrainian BUK

Indeed.
However we may never know who the trigger men were.

I'm just stating my own opinion at the time that it was rebels using the system because many Ukrainian service personnel defected in this conflict and I figure some of the systems operators would have too.

It looks like I was wrong.

Gatling

The question is now , what next

BoJack Horseman

Gatling wrote: »

The question is now , what next

Nothing next really.

- Whatever law suits will happen will creep forward and probably go nowhere.
- Europe might renew sanctions against Putin's oligarchs for another 6 months.... it might not, we'll see in December/January. European nations don't really care anymore so I think they might be dropped.

The world just moves on.

Gatling

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

Nothing next really.

The world just moves on.

I believe your right on that (pretty spot on in your analysis actually on the conflict too )

Unless something changes and someone stands up at UN and calls it a war crime (won't ever happen)

It and the victims will be forgotten

Skylinehead

Gatling wrote: »

I believe your right on that (pretty spot on in your analysis actually on the conflict too )

Unless something changes and someone stands up at UN and calls it a war crime (won't ever happen)

It and the victims will be forgotten

Nothing ever happens to the big boys in the UN. This'll go in the "nothing happens" bag just like Korea Air 007 and the USS Vincennes one.

weisses

Skylinehead wrote: »

Nothing ever happens to the big boys in the UN.

They will VETO themselves out of harms way

That whole UN is a charade