Malaysian airline MH-17 discussion thread

gandalf

Peist2007

Can someone point me to the evidence the American's have presented please? I am reading everywhere that evidence is "mounting". Therefore i would like to see it. Link please.

smurfjed

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/dc/Bulgarian_Air_Force_Sukhoi_Su-25UBK_Lofting.jpg

This is a Sukhoi 25, some papers are showing the Sukhoi 27 which is a different beast altogether. (Note this photo is of the BULGARIAN airforce)

goat2

Peist2007 wrote: »

Can someone point me to the evidence the American's have presented please? I am reading everywhere that evidence is "mounting". Therefore i would like to see it. Link please.

i think it is just all bluff they are doing, they have shown nothing to prove what they are saying is right,
but now that these black boxes are being handed to the uk, it may come up with some explaination,

as it has been broadcast on rt news that the plane poilot was asked to fly at a lower altitude, this should come up on the recordings of black box and who asked them to do so,
were they to fly lower as is being broadcast, could mean that they were being put within range of rocket,
and it would sort out that there was someone working within traffic control working with these creminals.or not

smurfjed

Peist2007, have a look at the Washington Post, they are saying:

1: We know that it was shot down.
2: We know how it was shot down.
3: We know from where it was shot down.
4: We DO NOT know by whom.

comongethappy

goat2 wrote: »

as it has been broadcast on rt news that the plane poilot was asked to fly at a lower altitude, this should come up on the recordings of black box and who asked them to do so,
were they to fly lower as is being broadcast, could mean that they were being put within range of rocket,
and it would sort out that there was someone working within traffic control working with these creminals.or not

RT do love their strawmen.

The missile system accepted as the likely culprit can track & destroy up to 80,000 ft.

if MH17 dropped from 35,000 to 33,000 for whatever reason the effect is moot.

I haven't checked RT is a while.... are they still saying it was an attack on Putin's jet?

Thoie

goat2 wrote: »

i think it is just all bluff they are doing, they have shown nothing to prove what they are saying is right,
but now that these black boxes are being handed to the uk, it may come up with some explaination,

as it has been broadcast on rt news that the plane poilot was asked to fly at a lower altitude, this should come up on the recordings of black box and who asked them to do so,
were they to fly lower as is being broadcast, could mean that they were being put within range of rocket,
and it would sort out that there was someone working within traffic control working with these creminals.or not

IIRC, FlightRadar24 was showing them at 33,000 ft for a good while before they disappeared. There wasn't any sign of them descending as they got into Ukraine.

Link: http://uk.flightaware.com/live/flight/MAS17/history/20140717/1000Z/EHAM/WMKK/tracklog

gandalf

smurfjed wrote: »

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/dc/Bulgarian_Air_Force_Sukhoi_Su-25UBK_Lofting.jpg

This is a Sukhoi 25, some papers are showing the Sukhoi 27 which is a different beast altogether. (Note this photo is of the BULGARIAN airforce)

Its a ground attack/ground support plane similar to the American A10 Warthog.

roryc

Peist2007 wrote: »

Can someone point me to the evidence the American's have presented please? I am reading everywhere that evidence is "mounting". Therefore i would like to see it. Link please.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/us-discloses-intelligence-on-downing-of-malaysian-jet/2014/07/22/b178fe58-11e1-11e4-98ee-daea85133bc9_story.html

They show images released by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence. People can be blinkered because of American statements in the past (WMD etc) but this has been in situations when they have been backed into a corner and there was massive pressure to come up with reasons to invade Afghanistan/Iraq. I don't recall a time when the Americans have made a number of statements like what is based in that article, without having any major pressure to do so. 'US Officials' have categorically stated that they believe the Russians are behind this. They have little to gain by making so many specific allegations:

"Senior U.S. intelligence officials cited sensors that traced the path of the missile, shrapnel markings on the downed aircraft"

"The officials also for the first time identified a sprawling Russian military installation near the city of Rostov as the main conduit of Russian support to separatists in Ukraine, describing it as a hub of training and weapons that has expanded dramatically over the past month."

"Analysts at the CIA and other U.S. intelligence agencies are continuing to examine information about the crash, but the officials said the intelligence assembled in the five days since the attack points overwhelmingly to Russian-backed separatists in territory they control in eastern Ukraine."

"The senior intelligence officials said they have ruled out the possibility that Ukrainian forces were responsible for the attack."

"The U.S. officials said they have confirmed the authenticity of some of those recordings, including one in which the self-proclaimed defense minister of the Donetsk People’s Republic, Igor Strelkov, claimed responsibility for shooting down a military transport plane at the time the Malaysian aircraft was struck. Analysis comparing that audio clip to other confirmed recordings of Strelkov’s voice “confirmed these were authentic conversations,” one of the officials said."

Assuming the Washington Post hasn't simply made these statements up, they are pretty clear as to who 'US Officials' believe is behind this, and what evidence they have. People aren't actively looking at America for these statements, yet they have been forthcoming. Russia on the other hand has barely said a word. Does it need to come straight from Obama's mouth before its 'verified'? Who honestly believes Russian had nothing to do with this?

As someone mentioned before, 99/100 the most obvious scenario is the correct one. Russian backed separatists or Russian mercenaries shot down the plane by accident.

Peist2007

roryc wrote: »

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/us-discloses-intelligence-on-downing-of-malaysian-jet/2014/07/22/b178fe58-11e1-11e4-98ee-daea85133bc9_story.html

'US Officials' have categorically stated that they believe the Russians are behind this. They have little to gain by making so many specific allegations:

The US came out yesterday evening and said they categorically believe the Russians are not involved. So, which is it?

I looked at your link. That is not evidence. The Russians had a training facility nearby. Are we to assume that the Ukrainians didnt?

Edit: i am no Russian shill. Just an Irish person disillusioned at the constant lies.

The bodies are at last been treated with the dignity they deserve.

Really moving ceremony.

who_me

pablomakaveli wrote: »

More information released by US intelligence agencies.

I've no doubt the mounting evidence will still be explained away by the Russia fans on here.

US INTELLIGENCE: No 'Direct' Russian Involvement In Downing Of MH17

Weird now differently different news sources are reporting the same story.

Look at this quote (from rte.ie) :

The intelligence official cited previous incidents over the years in which both Russian and US forces have mistakenly shot down civilian airliners.

A Korean airliner was downed by a Soviet fighter jet in 1983 and US naval forces mistakenly shot down an Iranian civilian passenger plane in 1988.

"We've all seen mistakes in the past," the official told reporters.

To me that's remarkably conciliatory, considering others are calling for tougher sanctions if not military intervention.

Peist2007

who_me wrote: »

US INTELLIGENCE: No 'Direct' Russian Involvement In Downing Of MH17

Weird now differently different news sources are reporting the same story.

So reputable sources in the West are citing completely differing standpoints on what happened. What did happen? Have we seen any missile? Or a collision? I have seen a plane smouldering on the ground and some smoke hanging in the air but nothing else. The Guardian are reporting that evidence is mounting. What evidence?

roryc

Peist2007 wrote: »

The US came out yesterday evening and said they categorically believe the Russians are not involved. So, which is it?

I looked at your link. That is not evidence. The Russians had a training facility nearby. Are we to assume that the Ukrainians didnt?

Edit: i am no Russian shill. Just an Irish person disillusioned at the constant lies.

I wouldn't consider it evidence either, but you asked what evidence the Americans have presented. Who does it need to come from before people believe it? Obama? If I read a story on BBC I will generally take it as fact. What is the US media equivalent (or is there one?)

FYI - the article above states the US have no 'direct evidence' but follow it up with "They say the passenger jet was likely felled by an SA-11 surface-to-air missile fired by Russian-backed separatists in eastern Ukraine and that Russia "created the conditions" for the downing by arming the separatists."

Peist2007

roryc wrote: »

I wouldn't consider it evidence either, but you asked what evidence the Americans have presented. Who does it need to come from before people believe it? Obama? If I read a story on BBC I will generally take it as fact. What is the US media equivalent (or is there one?)

FYI - the article above states the US have no 'direct evidence' but follow it up with "They say the passenger jet was likely felled by an SA-11 surface-to-air missile fired by Russian-backed separatists in eastern Ukraine and that Russia "created the conditions" for the downing by arming the separatists."

Ok no problem. I asked what evidence had been presented and you attached the link. I would conclude having read your link that, if that is the evidence presented thus far, then no evidence has yet been submitted. It doesnt need to come from anyone. It simply needs to be actual evidence. This is not.

Your second paragraph, if read by a cynic, would lead that cynic to conclude that the Americans initially thought they had a slam dunk and are now back-tracking.

The phrase "created the conditions" is so broad it could actually refer to the Ukrainian Government bringing the plane down. Russia annexed Crimea. Therefore they created the conditions for the attack (by the Ukraine).

ps. an easy trick to working out what is going on instead of listening to the media is to ask yourself who benefits from a particular event. That usually helps drown out the agendas

Autonomous Cowherd

Cui Bono. Exactly.

roryc

Peist2007 wrote: »

Ok no problem. I asked what evidence had been presented and you attached the link. I would conclude having read your link that, if that is the evidence presented thus far, then no evidence has yet been submitted. It doesnt need to come from anyone. It simply needs to be actual evidence. This is not.

Your second paragraph, if read by a cynic, would lead that cynic to conclude that the Americans initially thought they had a slam dunk and are now back-tracking.

The phrase "created the conditions" is so broad it could actually refer to the Ukrainian Government bringing the plane down. Russia annexed Crimea. Therefore they created the conditions for the attack (by the Ukraine).

ps. an easy trick to working out what is going on instead of listening to the media is to ask yourself who benefits from a particular event. That usually helps drown out the agendas

So at what point do you believe the evidence? Take this point as an example:

"The U.S. officials said they have confirmed the authenticity of some of those recordings, including one in which the self-proclaimed defense minister of the Donetsk People’s Republic, Igor Strelkov, claimed responsibility for shooting down a military transport plane at the time the Malaysian aircraft was struck. Analysis comparing that audio clip to other confirmed recordings of Strelkov’s voice “confirmed these were authentic conversations,” one of the officials said."

You either believe them or you don't. You are not going to be in a situation to test the audio clip yourself are you? Personally I'm waiting for the BBC to report these as 'facts' before I fully believe them, but in the meantime I think its safe to assume the Russians are heavily involved, at least to the point of supplying the weapons and/or operators of the BUK. The alternatives are simply too unlikely, and Russia has acted exactly how you would expect based on the leading scenario of accidental shooting down by pro-Russian rebels using Russian supplied weapons.

You can debate over evidence till the cows come home, at no point will it be sufficient for some people. I'd rather concentrate on what the next step is based on the most likely scenario of events. If the pressure keeps piling on Putin it will be interesting to see how he reacts.

Piliger

Peist2007 wrote: »

So reputable sources in the West are citing completely differing standpoints on what happened. What did happen? Have we seen any missile? Or a collision? I have seen a plane smouldering on the ground and some smoke hanging in the air but nothing else. The Guardian are reporting that evidence is mounting. What evidence?

Hilarious denialism ... so I guess you are trying to sell the pup that the Ukrainians snuck behind the Russian lines with huge ground to air missile, set it up in secret and aimed it at an airliner, and then snuck back across the lines into home territory.

Yeah ... great theory !

Muahahaha

I'd tend to agree with Roryc. Also if it wasn't the Russian rebels then that leads us down a theory of a joint CIA/Ukrainian false flag operation.

The problem with that is there is zero evidence for it this far. The Russians have produced nothing of substance to prove this was the case and at the end of the day the Russians have satellites trained on the border too so if there was a BUK missile unit operated by the CIA/Ukrainian special forces trundling through the Ukrainian countryside heading west after the missile attack I've no doubt Putin would be jumping up and down with pictures to show the world that it was the Ukrainians who did it. This hasn't happened.

Also the rebel leader who was recorded saying they downed a military cargo plane in the minutes after they had actually downed MH17 has been very silent in all this too. Surely if the US are saying the recording was authentic then he ought to be coming out and telling us that the CIA stitched him up ?

I don't doubt for one minute that the CIA are capable of false flag operations. But downing a passenger jet to blame it on Russia is just too far a step into the bizarre for me and there really hasn't been a shred of credible evidence to even suggest it IMO. And that's coming from someone who loves a good CIA conspiracy theory !

Peist2007

roryc wrote: »

So at what point do you believe the evidence? Take this point as an example:

"The U.S. officials said they have confirmed the authenticity of some of those recordings, including one in which the self-proclaimed defense minister of the Donetsk People’s Republic, Igor Strelkov, claimed responsibility for shooting down a military transport plane at the time the Malaysian aircraft was struck. Analysis comparing that audio clip to other confirmed recordings of Strelkov’s voice “confirmed these were authentic conversations,” one of the officials said."

You either believe them or you don't. You are not going to be in a situation to test the audio clip yourself are you? Personally I'm waiting for the BBC to report these as 'facts' before I fully believe them, but in the meantime I think its safe to assume the Russians are heavily involved, at least to the point of supplying the weapons and/or operators of the BUK. The alternatives are simply too unlikely, and Russia has acted exactly how you would expect based on the leading scenario of accidental shooting down by pro-Russian rebels using Russian supplied weapons.

You can debate over evidence till the cows come home, at no point will it be sufficient for some people. I'd rather concentrate on what the next step is based on the most likely scenario of events. If the pressure keeps piling on Putin it will be interesting to see how he reacts.

No you're missing the point.

The Americans have verified audio. That has been reported by the BBC. Fair enough. The Americans state that they have evidence that the plane was shot down by Russian separatists. This evidence amounts to nothing of the sort. Pointing out that the Russians have a military training base near where the plane went down is not evidence.

I think enough has happened in this world over the past 15-20 years to mean that no one should simply take what the BBC or any other major news station state as gospel. How could you believe them?

Now, i am not saying the Russians didnt do it. What i am saying is that the plane had hardly hit the ground and there was immediately a narrative which has never wavered. Not one opther possibility was mooted. The plane was shot down by separatists. End of. Then they showed us a youtube video of people oohing and aahing looking at the smoke in the distance. Case closed

Peist2007

Piliger wrote: »

Hilarious denialism ... so I guess you are trying to sell the pup that the Ukrainians snuck behind the Russian lines with huge ground to air missile, set it up in secret and aimed it at an airliner, and then snuck back across the lines into home territory.

Yeah ... great theory !

Ah no i am not putting that theory forward. Where did you get the surface to air missile theory?

I am trying to highlight that neither side has produced any evidence in this matter as of yet.

Peist2007

Muahahaha wrote: »

I don't doubt for one minute that the CIA are capable of false flag operations. But downing a passenger jet to blame it on Russia is just too far a step into the bizarre for me and there really hasn't been a shred of credible evidence to even suggest it IMO. And that's coming from someone who loves a good CIA conspiracy theory !

They were willing to down a passenger plane over Cuba in the 1960s so as to get started against Castro. It's there in released documents. It got as far as JFK but was vetoed. The CIA are capable of absolutely anything.

smurfjed

I'm delighted to hear that the CVR/FDR will be analysed by the UK AAIB. At least that will remove lots of future comments that the US changed the data for their own purposes !

Piliger

smurfjed wrote: »

I'm delighted to hear that the CVR/FDR will be analysed by the UK AAIB. At least that will remove lots of future comments that the US changed the data for their own purposes !

The number of people who actually believe that nonsense are insignificant and irrelevant.

SEPT 23 1989

Powerful images on CNN now

InTheTrees

One of the saddest aspects of this whole debacle is that russia is slipping backwards.

Why do they want to be the bad guy again? What is it about North Korea that makes them aspire to that position in the world?

Its like they tried democracy but just didn't have enough experience of it to really appreciate what it means.

darkpagandeath

It is heartening to see that so many people are feeling the loss of these people/victims. So many people lining the motorway to show their respect and support of the victims and their family's. Does give you some hope in humanity. Is really hard to watch though very moving. So many people feeling the same sense of loss.

Elmer Blooker

Peist2007 wrote: »

Can someone point me to the evidence the American's have presented please? I am reading everywhere that evidence is "mounting". Therefore i would like to see it. Link please.

I've noticed that the source of a lot of this "evidence" is coming from a certain Mr Anton Gerashenko, advisor to the Ukraine Ministry of Internal Affairs.
He the one who was responsible for the establishment of this new "security force" called the Azov Battalion. Have a look at the link below, we never seem to hear these "democrats" in the western media for some strange reason?

The political party led by the battalion's leader Biletsky calls for the expansion of Ukraine, the "struggle for the liberation of the entire White Race," and seeks to "punish severely sexual perversions and any interracial contacts."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Azov_Battalion

Piliger

darkpagandeath wrote: »

It is heartening to see that so many people are feeling the loss of these people/victims. So many people lining the motorway to show their respect and support of the victims and their family's. Does give you some hope in humanity. Is really hard to watch though very moving. So many people feeling the same sense of loss.

The stark contrast to the appalling, disrespectful and abusive treatment of these dead people by the Russian thugs in Ukraine could not be more evident in the supreme dignity being afforded them now.

roryc

Peist2007 wrote: »

The Americans have verified audio. That has been reported by the BBC. Fair enough. The Americans state that they have evidence that the plane was shot down by Russian separatists. This evidence amounts to nothing of the sort. Pointing out that the Russians have a military training base near where the plane went down is not evidence.

I think enough has happened in this world over the past 15-20 years to mean that no one should simply take what the BBC or any other major news station state as gospel. How could you believe them?

Now, i am not saying the Russians didnt do it. What i am saying is that the plane had hardly hit the ground and there was immediately a narrative which has never wavered. Not one opther possibility was mooted. The plane was shot down by separatists. End of. Then they showed us a youtube video of people oohing and aahing looking at the smoke in the distance. Case closed

So you're happy to accept the audio is almost certainly real. The audio where the rebels admit to shooting down a plane... You've heard the term 'smoking gun' before I assume?

As for the BBC, yes, I pretty much take what they say as gospel. You need to trust some news sources and in my opinion they are the most reputable. I don't ever recall them knowingly publishing false information. They are generally a bit behind the rest as they wait to verify info as much as possible.

As for the narrative wavering, this is simply down to it being the most plausible scenario, by quite some way, which has since been backed up by audio recordings. It was a specific scenario and nothing has proven it wrong in almost a week. Even the Russians haven't put up a strong denial. I work in the betting industry, and I would guess the chances of this not being as we have said are about 20\1. It's all well and good waiting for hard evidence but this will likely take a while, possibly months. Leave it to the UN lawyers to deal with that.