Malaysian airline MH-17 discussion thread

Muahahaha

That rebel leader admitting they had several BUKs and were using them regularly is yet another nail in the coffin here. Couple that with the video of the SAM unit heading towards the Russian border with a BUK missile missing the next day and it's pretty difficult to believe that the rebels didn't carry this out.

Soon will come ballistics analysis which should be able to tell us for certain what kind of weapon downed it. Once that is confirmed as a BUK missile then the game is up as far as I'm concerned. After all we're never going to get a smoking gun here, people have to make their own minds up based on the evidence presented thus far and to be honest it's not looking great for the rebel side.

Egginacup

loughside wrote: »

does Reuters count?

I would imagine you think the CIA count.
But according to Robert Parry, a methodical, intelligent, trustworthy and cautious individual, he has received information from analysts with the Central Intelligence Agency that evidence points to parties within the Ukrainian Military. This is a marginal departure, but a departure, nonetheless, from the so called heretofore proof that Novorussians were emphatically to blame.

Notwithstanding, I'll withold judgement since again I have not been furnished with the proof for which I so await and therefore won't use Parry's angles with any more weight than those of the "blame Putin and the facts be damned, brigade".

I might remind you that Parry has blown open multiple scandals, levels of deceit, lies and subterfuge within the web that sometimes calls itself the "Defense Industry". Parry has multiple friends, comrades and acquaintances who work within the intelligence community. Many, if not all of them, men and women, who have skeletons in the closet or monkeys on their backs, but de-temps-en-temps feel the need to anonymously let him know the machinations within their remit.

Enough about Parry's pedigree and those who trust him. A man who has the girded loin to expose Iran-Contra and Assassination Procedures in Nicaragua has my ear a lot quicker than many.

This man has this to say:

"Regarding the shoot-down of the Malaysian jetliner on Thursday, I’m told that some CIA analysts cite U.S. satellite reconnaissance photos suggesting that the anti-aircraft missile that brought down Flight 17 was fired by Ukrainian troops from a government battery, not by ethnic Russian rebels who have been resisting the regime in Kiev since elected President Viktor Yanukovych was overthrown on Feb. 22.

According to a source briefed on the tentative findings, the soldiers manning the battery appeared to be wearing Ukrainian uniforms and may have been drinking, since what looked like beer bottles were scattered around the site. But the source added that the information was still incomplete and the analysts did not rule out the possibility of rebel responsibility.

A contrary emphasis has been given to the Washington Post and other mainstream U.S. outlets. On Saturday, the Post reported that “on Friday, U.S. officials said a preliminary intelligence assessment indicated the airliner was blown up by an SA-11 surface-to-air missile fired by the separatists.” But the objectivity of the Obama administration, which has staunchly supported the coup regime, is in question as are the precise reasons for its judgments."

Again I may be accused of casting doubt on the "official" narrative without ultimate evidence coming from the shadow and into the light. That being the case then I would suggest you all start slinging your little mudpies at Robert Parry and not I.

On one hand here we have people talking about the cunning skullduggery of Putin's Moscow and how they could so easily fabricate evidence, cover their tracks, tamper with voice recorders, etc. And yet the same shabby evidence of BEER BOTTLES being left strewn around the so-called scene of the crime is something that they just overlooked?

When a crime or a mistake is committed one doesn't just leave the most incriminating of evidence.

Again I have ZERO proof of what Parry is saying or his colleagues in the intelligence arena.

What I do know is that I have just as much right to believe or doubt him as anybody else on here. In fact if anyone on here who's arch opus regarding discourse is to stick their fingers in their ears, yell "I can't hear you, LALALALA" and then go down the shill and troll and tinfoil route then I have a simple recommendation and would be to perhaps not expect too much by way of an answer to your chucklings.

Why is John Kerry stating that he has irrefutable proof that the Novorussian seperatists are responsible? Yet the CIA are stating otherwise? And why are so many on here not saying "wait a minute...that's a tad strange" ?

Are all these CIA people in cahoots and on the payroll with me and my alleged "handlers" in Red Square?

Egginacup

loughside wrote: »

does Reuters count?

I read his synopsis. Interesting guy but within the article it also states that he was one of the first to expose the Assad Regime's use of chemical weapons against Syrian civilians.

That allegation was proven false and in fact fabricated a long time ago. It was admitted by Whitehall and Washington, albeit in hushed tones.

So why is this guy's article claiming to have exposed a hoax? Ought he not take down that rather dubious claim? Erase it from his resume, so to speak?

Exposing certain things whilst still claiming glory for hoaxes doesn't do one's credibility much charm.

Egginacup

And here's another vague, meaningless and shabby explanation from the LA Times:

touch,latimes,com/#section/-1/article/p2p-80870402/

Riddled with words like "probably", "believed to" and "possibly".

Have standards dropped so low that to ask for definitive proof is a badge of insanity?
And has innuendo become the new truth?

Maybe for some it would appear.

(As a newcomer, I'm not allowed to post links so I just replaced the "."s with ","s

Egginacup

smurfjed wrote: »

Would you consider these puncture marks?

The puncture marks, smurfjed...

What of them? And what of my opinion about them?

Egginacup

Muahahaha wrote: »

That rebel leader admitting they had several BUKs and were using them regularly is yet another nail in the coffin here. Couple that with the video of the SAM unit heading towards the Russian border with a BUK missile missing the next day and it's pretty difficult to believe that the rebels didn't carry this out.

Soon will come ballistics analysis which should be able to tell us for certain what kind of weapon downed it. Once that is confirmed as a BUK missile then the game is up as far as I'm concerned. After all we're never going to get a smoking gun here, people have to make their own minds up based on the evidence presented thus far and to be honest it's not looking great for the rebel side.

What kind of weapon downed it?
Once that is conformed as a BUK?

Do you actually need proof then?

Egginacup

I was actually thinking a lot about this tired conversation and what sprang to mind was one of my favourite films.

12 Angry Men.

Now in this play/film there are protagonists but for the most part there are flawed characters. I can't help but equating so many on here with one of two characters within that jury.

One is a racist, ignorant thug (played by Ed Begly). He walks around the table as others are trying to think and he spits out vitriol like "Come on, this kid is a common, ignorant slob. He's guilty. I've lived among them all my life, they're scum, he's guilty for sure. Everyone knows that." etc.

Then there's the other mouth (a brilliant character played by Lee J. Cobb)... refuses to even contemplate evidence in the face of his preordained notions. After all his prejudices, hatreds, failures as a father have been laid bare he still won't accept that there is monumental doubt, and hence exoneration for the person that he so wants to send to the electric chair.

He hates that anyone would provide even a scrap of logical opposition and doubt to his desire to be right.

There was also an old man in that movie and he said....."the kid maybe guilty, but I'd like to hear more"

Well, I'd like to hear more and not be snowed by impatient people who don't have the time of day for those who would like to hear more. I'm not convinced and shouting at me or calling me names isn't going to change that.

Muahahaha

Egginacup wrote: »

What kind of weapon downed it?
Once that is conformed as a BUK?

Do you actually need proof then?

Jaysis mate it doesn't take a rocket scientist to work it out if it's confirmed that it was indeed a BUK missile that downed the plane (as most at this stage already believe) then the rebels are on very shaky ground here. We've now several recorded conversations of known rebel leaders talking about downing "a bird" in the immediate aftermath. We have the Sam unit photographed and filmed on several occasions, once with a missile missing and heading back towards the border. We have different factions of the rebels at complete sixes and sevens, with one leader admitting they have BUKs and they have been using them to shoot at planes while the other leader denies that they ever had possession of them. You'd think they'd at least have come up with a consistent story but they can't even manage that.

But irrespective of all that when you follow the trail to Moscow things get even worse. Because we have Putin blaming it on Kiev. But he has zero evidence, all he has done so far is make up wild theories about how it could have happened, perhaps he was a target, perhaps Carlos the Spainiard did it

I'll say one thing Egginacup, you do seem to require an awfully high level of proof here, I'm not sure exactly what would do it for you, if anything at all. But let's just step into Putins shoes here for just one minute. You are running and funding a proxy war on the Ukrainkan border. A passenger jet gets shot down and it wasn't you nor was it any of the rebels you're working with. So it must have be Ukraine that done it. Lovely jubbly says Vlad, I'll just download the last 48 hours of footage from my satellites that I have trained on the border, because I'm fighting a war there after all, I'll then find those nasty Ukrainians with their Sam units in the area shooting down passenger jets. Then I'll expose the Ukrainians to the world for the heartless savages they are, there is no bloody way the EU will ever let them join after they've murdered 200 EU citizens, Ukraine will be begging me for mercy in no time'

There's Putins perspective if the Ukrainians did shoot it down. If the Kiev government shot down this plane then Putin right now has an amazing opportunity to make dam sure they won't be joining the EU for at leas the next 20 years. How could Putin miss such an opportunity to strike a fatal blow to the new Kiev government ? Why would he not take that opportunity if it presented itself ?

Despite the amazing opportunity available to Putin here to shaft the Kiev govt and stick it to the West in one foul swop Putim remains silent, the noise of the guilty. I still haven't seen him produce one single satellite image showing definitively that the Ukrainians had A Sam unit loaded with BUK missiles in the area. We know the rebel side did, sure we have pictures and videos of that. Now how come Vlad isn't showing us satellites of the Ukrainkan Sam and BUKs that were in the area ? My only guess is this is because there were none, if there were Putin would be all over it like a rash shoving it in the worlds face and saying 'I told you so'. But he isn't, he's running scared and shows all the hallmarks and behaviours of a very guilty man. None of his actions since this began have been the actions of an innocent man.

Egginacup

who_me wrote: »

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

Look at this quote (from rte.ie) :



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

The USS Vincennes shot an Iranian airliner down (by mistake) according to this.

They have never once apologised.

Egginacup

Muahahaha wrote: »

Jaysis mate it doesn't take a rocket scientist to work it out if it's confirmed that it was indeed a BUK missile that downed the plane (as most at this stage already believe) then the rebels are on very shaky ground here. We've now several recorded conversations of known rebel leaders talking about downing "a bird" in the immediate aftermath. We have the Sam unit photographed and filmed on several occasions, once with a missile missing and heading back towards the border. We have different factions of the rebels at complete sixes and sevens, with one leader admitting they have BUKs and they have been using them to shoot at planes while the other leader denies that they ever had possession of them. You'd think they'd at least have come up with a consistent story but they can't even manage that.

But irrespective of all that when you follow the trail to Moscow things get even worse. Because we have Putin blaming it on Kiev. But he has zero evidence, all he has done so far is make up wild theories about how it could have happened, perhaps he was a target, perhaps Carlos the Spainiard did it

I'll say one thing Egginacup, you do seem to require an awfully high level of proof here, I'm not sure exactly what would do it for you, if anything at all. But let's just step into Putins shoes here for just one minute. You are running and funding a proxy war on the Ukrainkan border. A passenger jet gets shot down and it wasn't you nor was it any of the rebels you're working with. So it must have be Ukraine that done it. Lovely jubbly says Vlad, I'll just download the last 48 hours of footage from my satellites that I have trained on the border, because I'm fighting a war there after all, I'll then find those nasty Ukrainians with their Sam units in the area shooting down passenger jets. Then I'll expose the Ukrainians to the world for the heartless savages they are, there is no bloody way the EU will ever let them join after they've murdered 200 EU citizens, Ukraine will be begging me for mercy in no time'

There's Putins perspective if the Ukrainians did shoot it down. If the Kiev government shot down this plane then Putin right now has an amazing opportunity to make dam sure they won't be joining the EU for at leas the next 20 years. How could Putin miss such an opportunity to strike a fatal blow to the new Kiev government ? Why would he not take that opportunity if it presented itself ?

Despite the amazing opportunity available to Putin here to shaft the Kiev govt and stick it to the West in one foul swop Putim remains silent, the noise of the guilty. I still haven't seen him produce one single satellite image showing definitively that the Ukrainians had A Sam unit loaded with BUK missiles in the area. We know the rebel side did, sure we have pictures and videos of that. Now how come Vlad isn't showing us satellites of the Ukrainkan Sam and BUKs that were in the area ? My only guess is this is because there were none, if there were Putin would be all over it like a rash shoving it in the worlds face and saying 'I told you so'. But he isn't, he's running scared and shows all the hallmarks and behaviours of a very guilty man. None of his actions since this began have been the actions of an innocent man.

Then why are you saying "once we're sure it was a BUK", if you already know it was a BUK?

Egginacup

Muahahaha wrote: »

Jaysis mate it doesn't take a rocket scientist to work it out if it's confirmed that it was indeed a BUK missile that downed the plane (as most at this stage already believe) then the rebels are on very shaky ground here. We've now several recorded conversations of known rebel leaders talking about downing "a bird" in the immediate aftermath. We have the Sam unit photographed and filmed on several occasions, once with a missile missing and heading back towards the border. We have different factions of the rebels at complete sixes and sevens, with one leader admitting they have BUKs and they have been using them to shoot at planes while the other leader denies that they ever had possession of them. You'd think they'd at least have come up with a consistent story but they can't even manage that.

But irrespective of all that when you follow the trail to Moscow things get even worse. Because we have Putin blaming it on Kiev. But he has zero evidence, all he has done so far is make up wild theories about how it could have happened, perhaps he was a target, perhaps Carlos the Spainiard did it

I'll say one thing Egginacup, you do seem to require an awfully high level of proof here, I'm not sure exactly what would do it for you, if anything at all. But let's just step into Putins shoes here for just one minute. You are running and funding a proxy war on the Ukrainkan border. A passenger jet gets shot down and it wasn't you nor was it any of the rebels you're working with. So it must have be Ukraine that done it. Lovely jubbly says Vlad, I'll just download the last 48 hours of footage from my satellites that I have trained on the border, because I'm fighting a war there after all, I'll then find those nasty Ukrainians with their Sam units in the area shooting down passenger jets. Then I'll expose the Ukrainians to the world for the heartless savages they are, there is no bloody way the EU will ever let them join after they've murdered 200 EU citizens, Ukraine will be begging me for mercy in no time'

There's Putins perspective if the Ukrainians did shoot it down. If the Kiev government shot down this plane then Putin right now has an amazing opportunity to make dam sure they won't be joining the EU for at leas the next 20 years. How could Putin miss such an opportunity to strike a fatal blow to the new Kiev government ? Why would he not take that opportunity if it presented itself ?

Despite the amazing opportunity available to Putin here to shaft the Kiev govt and stick it to the West in one foul swop Putim remains silent, the noise of the guilty. I still haven't seen him produce one single satellite image showing definitively that the Ukrainians had A Sam unit loaded with BUK missiles in the area. We know the rebel side did, sure we have pictures and videos of that. Now how come Vlad isn't showing us satellites of the Ukrainkan Sam and BUKs that were in the area ? My only guess is this is because there were none, if there were Putin would be all over it like a rash shoving it in the worlds face and saying 'I told you so'. But he isn't, he's running scared and shows all the hallmarks and behaviours of a very guilty man. None of his actions since this began have been the actions of an innocent man.

You have pictures of missiles crossing borders or being missing and the pedigree still on this collage is that he exposed Assad's use of Sarin on the Syrian people. Has this Higgins character not thought to remove the fake crap from his site or is he being ghost written by someone too clueless to factcheck.

How can one possibly expect credibility, let alone respect for that?

Egginacup

Muahahaha wrote: »

Jaysis mate it doesn't take a rocket scientist to work it out if it's confirmed that it was indeed a BUK missile that downed the plane (as most at this stage already believe) then the rebels are on very shaky ground here. We've now several recorded conversations of known rebel leaders talking about downing "a bird" in the immediate aftermath. We have the Sam unit photographed and filmed on several occasions, once with a missile missing and heading back towards the border. We have different factions of the rebels at complete sixes and sevens, with one leader admitting they have BUKs and they have been using them to shoot at planes while the other leader denies that they ever had possession of them. You'd think they'd at least have come up with a consistent story but they can't even manage that.

But irrespective of all that when you follow the trail to Moscow things get even worse. Because we have Putin blaming it on Kiev. But he has zero evidence, all he has done so far is make up wild theories about how it could have happened, perhaps he was a target, perhaps Carlos the Spainiard did it

I'll say one thing Egginacup, you do seem to require an awfully high level of proof here, I'm not sure exactly what would do it for you, if anything at all. But let's just step into Putins shoes here for just one minute. You are running and funding a proxy war on the Ukrainkan border. A passenger jet gets shot down and it wasn't you nor was it any of the rebels you're working with. So it must have be Ukraine that done it. Lovely jubbly says Vlad, I'll just download the last 48 hours of footage from my satellites that I have trained on the border, because I'm fighting a war there after all, I'll then find those nasty Ukrainians with their Sam units in the area shooting down passenger jets. Then I'll expose the Ukrainians to the world for the heartless savages they are, there is no bloody way the EU will ever let them join after they've murdered 200 EU citizens, Ukraine will be begging me for mercy in no time'

There's Putins perspective if the Ukrainians did shoot it down. If the Kiev government shot down this plane then Putin right now has an amazing opportunity to make dam sure they won't be joining the EU for at leas the next 20 years. How could Putin miss such an opportunity to strike a fatal blow to the new Kiev government ? Why would he not take that opportunity if it presented itself ?

Despite the amazing opportunity available to Putin here to shaft the Kiev govt and stick it to the West in one foul swop Putim remains silent, the noise of the guilty. I still haven't seen him produce one single satellite image showing definitively that the Ukrainians had A Sam unit loaded with BUK missiles in the area. We know the rebel side did, sure we have pictures and videos of that. Now how come Vlad isn't showing us satellites of the Ukrainkan Sam and BUKs that were in the area ? My only guess is this is because there were none, if there were Putin would be all over it like a rash shoving it in the worlds face and saying 'I told you so'. But he isn't, he's running scared and shows all the hallmarks and behaviours of a very guilty man. None of his actions since this began have been the actions of an innocent man.

298 human beings were killed. I stopped reading your yawn-producing bleat after "200 EU citizens".

Canis Lupus

Egginacup wrote: »

298 human beings were killed. I stopped reading your yawn-producing bleat after "200 EU citizens".

Egginacup wrote: »

There's no need to be either flippant OR abusive.

Indeed.

smurfjed

Good Morning again....

The puncture marks, smurfjed...What of them? And what of my opinion about them?

Its nice to see that you are at least willing to accept that the aircraft was destroyed from outside, and not from an external source. It might be worth noting that are puncture marks which indicates that the device exploded in the proximity rather than hitting the object.
We already know that MANPADS will not reach the required altitude, so that only leaves military grade SAM. We have seen the photos of a BUK missile system being located within the non-Ukraine area. So the evidence is starting to build up that the aircraft was shot down by a BUK. HOWEVER... the big question is WHO DID IT.

You quoted Robert Perry, but you didn't really quote ALL of his article...

What I’ve been told by one source, who has provided accurate information on similar matters in the past, is that U.S. intelligence agencies do have detailed satellite images of the likely missile battery that launched the fateful missile, but the battery appears to have been under the control of Ukrainian government troops dressed in what look like Ukrainian uniforms.

The source said CIA analysts were still not ruling out the possibility that the troops were actually eastern Ukrainian rebels in similar uniforms but the initial assessment was that the troops were Ukrainian soldiers. There also was the suggestion that the soldiers involved were undisciplined and possibly drunk, since the imagery showed what looked like beer bottles scattered around the site, the source said.

Why did you selectively change his report?

Egginacup

Canis Lupus wrote: »

Indeed.

The 98 non-EU dead don't count?
And yawn-producing yes it was. That's neither flippant nor it is abusive.

Perhaps if you were so eager to defend those from abuse at the hands of those weilding a flippant tongue you would have sprung to my assistance sooner.

Egginacup

smurfjed wrote: »

Good Morning again....

Its nice to see that you are at least willing to accept that the aircraft was destroyed from outside, and not from an external source. It might be worth noting that are puncture marks which indicates that the device exploded in the proximity rather than hitting the object.
We already know that MANPADS will not reach the required altitude, so that only leaves military grade SAM. We have seen the photos of a BUK missile system being located within the non-Ukraine area. So the evidence is starting to build up that the aircraft was shot down by a BUK. HOWEVER... the big question is WHO DID IT.

You quoted Robert Perry, but you didn't really quote ALL of his article...


Why did you selectively change his report?

Stop after your first sentence. I haven't even read any further before replying. I have simply stated that they look like the puncture marks that you asked about. Don't then just start saying that I'm admitting anything. Least of all how they were made. I have no patience for cheap tricks.
Will we continue? Yes they look like puncture marks. I might also state that in the background that appears to be a lovely couple in summer clothes walking along a country lane ....by a crash site in a war zone.

What are you asking here?

smurfjed

So you are not even willing to accept that the aircraft was shot down?

smurfjed

there is no bloody way the EU will ever let them join after they've murdered 200 EU citizens

Referred to Ukraine joining the UN, I don't see it as an attempt to diminish the deaths of the NON-EUROPEANS!

Egginacup

smurfjed wrote: »

Good Morning again....

Its nice to see that you are at least willing to accept that the aircraft was destroyed from outside, and not from an external source. It might be worth noting that are puncture marks which indicates that the device exploded in the proximity rather than hitting the object.
We already know that MANPADS will not reach the required altitude, so that only leaves military grade SAM. We have seen the photos of a BUK missile system being located within the non-Ukraine area. So the evidence is starting to build up that the aircraft was shot down by a BUK. HOWEVER... the big question is WHO DID IT.

You quoted Robert Perry, but you didn't really quote ALL of his article...


Why did you selectively change his report?

I didn't need to include the entire article. Elements of possibility leaning towards rebels was clearly there in the whole beer bottle episode. It was alluded to. The segment I selected was still apportioning suspicion and doubt to rebels and Ukrainian government forces. It didn't mention any other possible culprits however.

smurfjed

So you are basically telling us what an excellent and trustworthy Robert Perry is, but at the same time you are personally censoring his articles as you see fit!

Egginacup

smurfjed wrote: »

So you are not even willing to accept that the aircraft was shot down?

Are you telling me something or are you asking me something?
I apologise if I'm your nightmare witness who you can't lead. But I'm not qualified, and no doubt neither are you, to determine the exact cause of those holes and piercings on that piece of metal.
I'm not going to look at a piece off metal with damage to it, propped up against a tree and then have you

A. Tell me what I am or am not admitting to and
B. Lecture me about ballistics, trajectories and the like

From a jpeg file.

Egginacup

smurfjed wrote: »

So you are basically telling us what an excellent and trustworthy Robert Perry is, but at the same time you are personally censoring his articles as you see fit!

"We are all in the gutter but some of us are looking at the stars"

Have I somehow just censored Oscar Wilde's othe writings?

gandalf

Jaysus putinbot must be paid by the word

smurfjed

You are my nightmare witness as you are not willing to even consider other views that may be contrary to your own.

Last time that i checked, Oscar Wilde didn't report on current events!

steddyeddy

I was planning to fly with Malaysian Airlines next year. I asked them are bookings still going ahead and got a lovely email back.

deco nate

steddyeddy wrote: »

I was planning to fly with Malaysian Airlines next year. I asked them are bookings still going ahead and got a lovely email back.

And.... What did it say???

danniemcq

Egginacup wrote: »

Are you telling me something or are you asking me something?
I apologise if I'm your nightmare witness who you can't lead. But I'm not qualified, and no doubt neither are you, to determine the exact cause of those holes and piercings on that piece of metal.
I'm not going to look at a piece off metal with damage to it, propped up against a tree and then have you

A. Tell me what I am or am not admitting to and
B. Lecture me about ballistics, trajectories and the like

From a jpeg file.

You don't have to take his word for it

A piece of wreckage from the Malaysia Airlines Boeing 777-200 that was shot down in eastern Ukraine last week bears telltale marks of small pieces of high-velocity shrapnel that apparently crippled the jet in flight. Riddled with these perforations and buffeted by a blast wave as it flew high above the conflict zone, the plane then most likely sheared apart.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/22/world/europe/jet-wreckage-bears-signs-of-impact-by-supersonic-missile-analysis-shows.html?_r=0

Photos from the devastated scene of the Malaysia Airlines MH17 crash strongly suggest the plane was shot down by a surface-to-air missile, according to aviation and weapons experts. In support of that verdict, the New York Times has published a selection of photos of the wreckage taken by reporters on the ground.

http://www.newsweek.com/malaysia-airlines-flight-mh17-downed-supersonic-missile-expert-analysis-suggests-260483

The piece has several burn marks, a large central hole and several smaller punture marks surrouding it. The edges of the small holes seem to be bent outwards, evidence of something that got out of the skin from the inside of the plane.

This is a sign the missile, most probably fired by an SA-11 system according to almost all reports to date, equipped with a proximity fuse, detonated on the right side of the aircraft not too far from the nose, scattering several fragments of shrapnel so fast that they traversed the plane from side to side: they entered through the right side of the airframe and got out from the left one.

http://theaviationist.com/2014/07/24/mh-17-puncture-marks/

EVIDENCE BACKS MISSILE HIT

Analyst at the Royal United Services Institute in London, Justin Bronk, has tweeted what he says is photographic evidence that MH17 was brought down by a missile strike.

“The size of the shrapnel holes is consistent with what one might expect to see from an SA-11 hit. However, it is difficult to assess the total blast pattern with such a small fragment of fuselage,” he told the Financial Times.

http://www.news.com.au/travel/travel-updates/a-uk-analyst-says-early-clues-indicate-a-missile-exploded-in-front-of-mh17s-frontleft-engine-pod/story-fnizu68q-1226996918073

roryc

Muahahaha wrote: »

I'll say one thing Egginacup, you do seem to require an awfully high level of proof here, I'm not sure exactly what would do it for you, if anything at all.

This is the crux of the problem with this poster. If a video was released showing footage of Russians shooting down the plane, he would say its faked. If Putin came out and outright admitted his part in the debacle he would say its his doppelganger and the CIA have got Putin... He picked his side from the beginning and is refusing to consider the other possibilities, despite everything pointing to the the agreed scenario being the correct one. He's asking for a level of proof that probably consists of him taking Putins confession himself. The question you should be asking yourself is why have the Russians/Putin not made a big issue of refuting the accusations with proof of their own?

Nobody is against the idea that there could be something else behind this (unlikely as that is), but there is absolutely no benefit to denying what is staring you in the face. If it makes you feel better to think that 9/11 was an inside job, the Queens a lizard and the Moon Landings were faked go right ahead. Either way, staying up all night to write huge posts defending an untenable position will achieve nothing. Stick to the abstract bloggers you keep quoting.

steddyeddy

deco nate wrote: »

And.... What did it say???

Would I be allowed to post it here?

deco nate

Don't know tbh, it may be seen as going ot. So Yea best not post it