Malaysian airline MH-17 discussion thread

deco nate

roryc wrote: »

How has this troll not been banned yet? Spouting absolute rubbish with a blatantly obvious pro Russian agenda. There have been no 'facts' given on either side that satisfy some posters on this thread, but to state that the recordings have been 'proven fake' is simply false. You are the only person, anywhere, that has claimed this. I haven't seen it on any other news sites. You have made up this 'fact'.

Then to come out with this crap - "Any evidence shown so far (conversation recordings and some amateurish video) have proven to be fake. Moscow by contrast has released verifiable ATC, satellie and radar evidence showing that Kiev may indeed have been responsible." You are deluded.

Where the f**k are the mods on this thread? This troll created an account for the sole purpose of derailing this thread. He even condoned robbing from the dead and still hasn't been banned.

You forgot that the poster you are talking about only signed up the the day the plane went down.

And also only has one or two posts outside this thread!

aloyisious

Egginacup wrote: »

I'm asking the same few questions over and over again, the most repeated one being "where is the evidence to point to Novorussian separatists?"

Any evidence shown so far (conversation recordings and some amateurish video) have proven to be fake. Moscow by contrast has released verifiable ATC, satellie and radar evidence showing that Kiev may indeed have been responsible

Pardon me for pointing out the hole in the bucket, but the statement that "Moscow by contrast has released verifiable ATC, satellie and radar evidence showing that Kiev may indeed have been responsible" seem's to be contradictory in nature (verifiable evidence showing --- Kiev may indeed have been responsible) makes Moscow's evidence seem not to be watertight proof that Kiev and it's forces launched the missile that brought down the Malaysian aircraft. It seem's to leave doubt as to whom fired the missile.

josip

Is the term "Novorussian separatists" widely accepted?
Do they want to separate from Novorussia?
Is that a state?
Is the correct term for them at the moment Ukrainian separatists?

Egginacup

who_me wrote: »

It's odd how when you make statements they're facts, when anyone else does it they're "reckless accusations".

"Kiev seems to be going all out to hinder a probe into the cause of the crash" is not a fact. It's a conclusion you draw from reports that the Ukrainian government is shelling near the site. Not only do you accept that the shelling it taking place (which it may well be) but you can infer the government's motives, and call it a fact.

"while the Novorussian militia are helping." is not a fact. And I'm sure you'd find many written and TV reports directly contradicting the statement that they have been helping.

You're completely correct. I am not simply making things up.
If Kiev wanted this site secure then why are they doing their utmost to destroy it?
Why have they had SBU security seize tower to plane conversations?

If you really want the truth to out then why attempt to tamper with it?

Like I mentioned, previously, multiple members of the US Intelligence Community are demanding not only honesty and transparency but also the delivery of all this proof that implicates either the Novorussian militants or Moscow.

Everyone one this forum thread is insistent that this airliner was shot down by Novorussian militias at the order of Vladimir Putin and still they can't show or even proffer a credible case as to why.

Some are still saying it was a mistake by drunks who had a laugh with a sophisticated S.A.M. system. Others can't really make their mind up. They state that pro-Russian forces shot down a Malaysian passenger airliner but can't come up with anything better than their baseless hunches.

I'll ask this question once again...and sound like a COMPLETE broken record.....

Where is the evidence implicating those who you all blame?

comongethappy

josip wrote: »

Is the correct term for them at the moment Ukrainian separatists?

As good as any.

"Kremlin controlled & led Ukrainian separatists" doesn't quite roll off the tongue.

deco nate

Affs! Here we go again!!
All talk, no facts to back his/her argument up. Yet asks
Others to prove thier side.

Look at this stage there is no
Proven facts on either side.
Yet you are saying that there
Is proof that Ukraine MAY
Have shoot it down, so why don't you posts these "FACTS"
Do you need to go back to you're handler's for these "FACTS"

Egginacup

roryc wrote: »

How has this troll not been banned yet? Spouting absolute rubbish with a blatantly obvious pro Russian agenda. There have been no 'facts' given on either side that satisfy some posters on this thread, but to state that the recordings have been 'proven fake' is simply false. You are the only person, anywhere, that has claimed this. I haven't seen it on any other news sites. You have made up this 'fact'.

Then to come out with this crap - "Any evidence shown so far (conversation recordings and some amateurish video) have proven to be fake. Moscow by contrast has released verifiable ATC, satellie and radar evidence showing that Kiev may indeed have been responsible." You are deluded.

Where the f**k are the mods on this thread? This troll created an account for the sole purpose of derailing this thread. He even condoned robbing from the dead and still hasn't been banned.

roryc,

I would imagine the moderators on this thread are monitoring my postings quite well and it would appear that thus far they haven't seen the need to not only kick me out of this discussion nor even caution me.

Now if you need to call on those who might agree to your trolling accusations and move me "swiftly on" then again that doesn't add to this very serious debate that we are having.

I would however let you know that you have accused me of condoning corpse-robbing and that is a serious and revolting insult.

comongethappy

Egginacup wrote: »

I would however let you know that you have accused me of condoning corpse-robbing and that is a serious and revolting insult.

No.... That was the 8am - 4pm Kremlin troll he was addressing.
We call him: "Daytime Eggy".

"Graveyard shift Eggy".... Relax, only 5hrs left before you clock off.

deco nate

Egginacup wrote: »

roryc,



I would however let you know that you have accused me of condoning corpse-robbing and that is a serious and revolting insult.

Ok if it wasn't you that said " so what if someone robbed makeup, woopydee doo. It's not like they cut someone's finger off to robbed a ring"
Who posted that?
It may not have been taken from a body, but it was taken from someone's belongings.
That is Stealing.
But that person is dead, and most sane people see this.
Can you not see the link?!

loughside

Egginacup wrote: »

accused me of condoning corpse-robbing and that is a serious and revolting insult.

well, if the cap fits..



btw, you seem to have got stuck on this one ??
Quote:
Originally Posted by who_me
Yes, I'd also like to see evidence of that.

I`m in the queue too...

Links please!!

preferably of the non-kremlin type komrad

*waits patiently*

deco nate

That poster must be in a meeting with his/her handler

Egginacup

roryc wrote: »

How has this troll not been banned yet? Spouting absolute rubbish with a blatantly obvious pro Russian agenda. There have been no 'facts' given on either side that satisfy some posters on this thread, but to state that the recordings have been 'proven fake' is simply false. You are the only person, anywhere, that has claimed this. I haven't seen it on any other news sites. You have made up this 'fact'.

Then to come out with this crap - "Any evidence shown so far (conversation recordings and some amateurish video) have proven to be fake. Moscow by contrast has released verifiable ATC, satellie and radar evidence showing that Kiev may indeed have been responsible." You are deluded.

Where the f**k are the mods on this thread? This troll created an account for the sole purpose of derailing this thread. He even condoned robbing from the dead and still hasn't been banned.

The following people are demanding that the administration make public the proof that they allegedely have to implicate someone or anyone. My guess is that they more than likely, in their specific fields, rely on facts and not on hearsay:


They have actually delivered a request to not only the White House but to the US Congress:

William Binney, former Technical Director, World Geopolitical & Military Analysis, NSA; co-founder, SIGINT Automation Research Center (ret.)
Larry Johnson, CIA & State Department (ret.)
Edward Loomis, NSA, Cryptologic Computer Scientist (ret.)
David MacMichael, National Intelligence Council (ret.)
Ray McGovern, former US Army infantry/intelligence officer & CIA analyst (ret.)
Elizabeth Murray, Deputy National Intelligence Officer for Middle East (ret.)
Coleen Rowley, Division Counsel & Special Agent, FBI (ret.)
Peter Van Buren, U.S. Department of State, Foreign Service Officer (ret.)
Ann Wright, Col., US Army (ret.); Foreign Service Officer (resigned)


Are these intelligence EXPERTS attempting to derail a thread? I'm just asking a few questions. And I'm accused of being a troll, a fifth columnist, a plant.

If these people want answers then what does that make them in your eyes?
Are they also CT trolls?

deco nate

Again, can you post a link to this?
Why do you NEVER post a link??
If you post a link it may help
Your cause.

Egginacup

darkpagandeath wrote: »

By whom exactly ?

You're not going to derail this discussion by demanding further evidence of fakery, least not on my part. So I would recommend you not attempt to drag this cogent discussion sideways.

Evidence of shabby fakery is ubiquitous. Evidence of Novorussian and/or Russian involvement in this crime is non-existent.

Moving back to the discussion and the facts....
Where are the facts that Novorussian militia fighters executed this?
Where is the proof that the Russians not only supplied them with the means but also sanctioned this attack?

I've seen some speculation over the course of the last several days, including a piece of the front nose of the aircraft that has allegedly been riddled with gunfire rather than an explosive device in mid-air.

Not an aeronautical engineer, not an expert in physics, not a professor in metallurgy, not a single scientist who could lay even a simple, empirical and nonbiased opinion as to this crash.
Just people claiming to know something about missiles and who shot the aircraft down.

And on top of that they have no idea who did it or why but just a guess and then that coupled with a "it had to be them, and if you disagree then you're a Russkie terrorist"

And still not a peep out of those who could clear it all up. But won't. They have the "proof" but the rest of us can't see it.

deco nate

Also, all retired or whatnot,.
They are not in government, or
Have any power, why the ****
Should they know about anything that those that have
Are planning?

pablo128

Egginacup wrote: »

The following people are demanding that the administration make public the proof that they allegedely have to implicate someone or anyone. My guess is that they more than likely, in their specific fields, rely on facts and not on hearsay:


They have actually delivered a request to not only the White House but to the US Congress:

William Binney, former Technical Director, World Geopolitical & Military Analysis, NSA; co-founder, SIGINT Automation Research Center (ret.)
Larry Johnson, CIA & State Department (ret.)
Edward Loomis, NSA, Cryptologic Computer Scientist (ret.)
David MacMichael, National Intelligence Council (ret.)
Ray McGovern, former US Army infantry/intelligence officer & CIA analyst (ret.)
Elizabeth Murray, Deputy National Intelligence Officer for Middle East (ret.)
Coleen Rowley, Division Counsel & Special Agent, FBI (ret.)
Peter Van Buren, U.S. Department of State, Foreign Service Officer (ret.)
Ann Wright, Col., US Army (ret.); Foreign Service Officer (resigned)


Are these intelligence EXPERTS attempting to derail a thread? I'm just asking a few questions. And I'm accused of being a troll, a fifth columnist, a plant.

If these people want answers then what does that make them in your eyes?
Are they also CT trolls?

They are Americans looking for info on a Malaysian plane, shot down in Ukraine, possibly by Russians or Russian backed separatists, and they are asking the American government for this info?
What info would the Americans have exactly, that would be sufficient to apportion blame definitively?

deco nate

Egginacup wrote: »

You're not going to derail this discussion by demanding further evidence of fakery, least not on my part. So I would recommend you not attempt to drag this cogent discussion sideways.

Evidence of shabby fakery is ubiquitous. Evidence of Novorussian and/or Russian involvement in this crime is non-existent.

Moving back to the discussion and the facts....
Where are the facts that Novorussian militia fighters executed this?
Where is the proof that the Russians not only supplied them with the means but also sanctioned this attack?

I've seen some speculation over the course of the last several days, including a piece of the front nose of the aircraft that has allegedly been riddled with gunfire rather than an explosive device in mid-air.

Not an aeronautical engineer, not an expert in physics, not a professor in metallurgy, not a single scientist who could lay even a simple, empirical and nonbiased opinion as to this crash.
Just people claiming to know something about missiles and who shot the aircraft down.

And on top of that they have no idea who did it or why but just a guess and then that coupled with a "it had to be them, and if you disagree then you're a Russkie terrorist"

And still not a peep out of those who could clear it all up. But won't. They have the "proof" but the rest of us can't see it.

You are so full of bull****, when are you gonna post the links that you say that the Ukraine MAY have a shot down the plane, that the video was faked, the the phone call was also faked? When??

You keep posting this bs, but you never back it up, ever.!

Oh but you come on here an
post facts saying this, that, and the other. How many
Times can people ask you for links. How many times are you
Gonna avoid posters that ask you for links. And yet the mods don't intervene, if it were
Any other poster they are ask by mods to link to the info
On said facts.

Yet you are getting away with
This.

Yes, so how is the weather under your bridge?

darkpagandeath

Egginacup wrote: »

You're not going to derail this discussion by demanding further evidence of fakery, least not on my part. So I would recommend you not attempt to drag this cogent discussion sideways.

Evidence of shabby fakery is ubiquitous. Evidence of Novorussian and/or Russian involvement in this crime is non-existent.

Moving back to the discussion and the facts....
Where are the facts that Novorussian militia fighters executed this?
Where is the proof that the Russians not only supplied them with the means but also sanctioned this attack?

I've seen some speculation over the course of the last several days, including a piece of the front nose of the aircraft that has allegedly been riddled with gunfire rather than an explosive device in mid-air.

Not an aeronautical engineer, not an expert in physics, not a professor in metallurgy, not a single scientist who could lay even a simple, empirical and nonbiased opinion as to this crash.
Just people claiming to know something about missiles and who shot the aircraft down.

And on top of that they have no idea who did it or why but just a guess and then that coupled with a "it had to be them, and if you disagree then you're a Russkie terrorist"

And still not a peep out of those who could clear it all up. But won't. They have the "proof" but the rest of us can't see it.

You got me, People on the ground must have shot a plane down that was over 32,000 ft. Yup an Ak can shoot up that high you heard it here first folks. Let me just think how a piece of the plane could end up with bullet holes in it.... Could not have anything to do with our friendly drunk separatists on the ground who were in total control of the site... And tbh i think day egg is a little more eloquent i suppose we will have to wait for his/her shift to start.

Egginacup

deco nate wrote: »

Ok if it wasn't you that said " so what if someone robbed makeup, woopydee doo. It's not like they cut someone's finger off to robbed a ring"
Who posted that?
It may not have been taken from a body, but it was taken from someone's belongings.
That is Stealing.
But that person is dead, and most sane people see this.
Can you not see the link?!

I have absolutely no idea who said or wrote such a thing.

You have, however, accused me of condoning corpse-robbing and then called for me to be banned from this forum or at least called out to those and wondered why I haven't been banned.

Take caution in your tone and your accusations.

darkpagandeath

Egginacup wrote: »

I have absolutely no idea who said or wrote such a thing.

You have, however, accused me of condoning corpse-robbing and then called for me to be banned from this forum or at least called out to those and wondered why I haven't been banned.

Take caution in your tone and your accusations.

Maybe read the charter and attack the post and not the poster ? schoolboy trolling mistake right there.

pablo128

Egginacup wrote: »

Do you know if the story is TRUE?
If so what's the big deal? Makeup from a bag....well whoopie.
Not like she went sound with a pliers

There you go.

darkpagandeath

pablo128 wrote: »

There you go.

Your forgetting, It's blatant more than one person is using that account. You would think they have meetings and understand to read what was posted last.

deco nate

Egginacup wrote: »

I have absolutely no idea who said or wrote such a thing.

You have, however, accused me of condoning corpse-robbing and then called for me to be banned from this forum or at least called out to those and wondered why I haven't been banned.

Take caution in your tone and your accusations.

Bull****, look back at you're own posts!! You said it!!!
And here you are denying it.
And no I won't change my tone, you posted it.
Or are you trying to tell us thay
Someone else has access to you're account?

darkpagandeath

deco nate wrote: »

Bull****, look back at you're own posts!! You said it!!!
And here you are denying it.
And no I won't change my tone, you posted it.
Or are you trying to tell us thay
Someone else has access to you're account?

I think we need to wait for the day guy/girl to start his/her shift. :pac:

Egginacup

pablo128 wrote: »

They are Americans looking for info on a Malaysian plane, shot down in Ukraine, possibly by Russians or Russian backed separatists, and they are asking the American government for this info?
What info would the Americans have exactly, that would be sufficient to apportion blame definitively?

Well if certain members of the American political establishment claim that they have proof and that they know who is responsible then wouldn't you say they ought to reveal said proof?

After all, if I said that I had definitive and categorical proof as to who was responsible for a crime wouldn't you want to see it?

Call me old fashioned, if you will, but when someone says they have proof of something then I'd simply like to see that proof.
It's not a lot to ask.

If you really want people like me to go away then a simple "show the troll the proof" would be sufficient, no?

deco nate

Egginacup wrote: »

After all, if I said that I had definitive and categorical proof as to who was responsible for a crime wouldn't you want to see it?

Call me old fashioned, if you will, but when someone says they have proof of something then I'd simply like to see that proof.
It's not a lot to ask.

Yea, about that.... When are you gonna post links to... The youtube video was fake.... The phone call was fake.... An so and so on.....?

Egginacup

deco nate wrote: »

Bull****, look back at you're own posts!! You said it!!!
And here you are denying it.
And no I won't change my tone, you posted it.
Or are you trying to tell us thay
Someone else has access to you're account?

I'll rise to this furious blast but for this once...

When did I condone corpse-robbing?

I won't wait for another rant, speckled with *** s.

I have never condoned what you have accused me of and if your excuse is that someone else under my name did so then I would like for you to show the posting that this alleged charlatan has delivered.

Again, I might warn you that you are accusing me of something revolting and my advice is that you read the rules regarding discourse here.

deco nate

Egginacup wrote: »

I'll rise to this furious blast but for this once...

When did I condone corpse-robbing?

I won't wait for another rant, speckled with *** s.

I have never condoned what you have accused me of and if your excuse is that someone else under my name did so then I would like for you to show the posting that this alleged charlatan has delivered.

Again, I might warn you that you are accusing me of something revolting and my advice is that you read the rules regarding discourse here.

6 posts above your own, have a look.
And report me all you want,
Do you really not remember posting it? Do you really not know how to look at the posts you made, oh by the way I know what you are trying to do.

You are trying to trick me into going on a rant and get me banned.

We all know what you are!
Edit:were are the links to you're claims that the video was fake, the phone call was fake, that the Ukraine MAY have shot down the plane?
How many times do you have to be asked for this info? How many times are you Gonna avoid posting links????

Egginacup

aloyisious wrote: »

Pardon me for pointing out the hole in the bucket, but the statement that "Moscow by contrast has released verifiable ATC, satellie and radar evidence showing that Kiev may indeed have been responsible" seem's to be contradictory in nature (verifiable evidence showing --- Kiev may indeed have been responsible) makes Moscow's evidence seem not to be watertight proof that Kiev and it's forces launched the missile that brought down the Malaysian aircraft. It seem's to leave doubt as to whom fired the missile.

I have already pointed this out.

Kiev has shown as evidence conversations and videos proven to be fakes and mock-ups.

We can move on to Russian verifiable intelligence thereafter.

Were conversations and videos released by Kiev, purporting to implicate the Novorussian militia fake, and found to be fake, and if so why were these falsifications released?

I'll answer any question after this one has been satisfactorily addressed.

Why did Kiev make things up?
Why would they do such a thing?

I haven't seen any fake videos from Novorussians so why did Kiev release a couple and why weren't they vetted before going online?

deco nate

Egginacup wrote: »

I have already pointed this out.

Kiev has shown as evidence conversations and videos proven to be fakes and mock-ups.

We can move on to Russian verifiable intelligence thereafter.

Were conversations and videos released by Kiev, purporting to implicate the Novorussian militia fake, and found to be fake, and if so why were these falsifications released?

I'll answer any question after this one has been satisfactorily addressed.

Why did Kiev make things up?
Why would they do such a thing?

I haven't seen any fake videos from Novorussians so why did Kiev release a couple and why weren't they vetted before going online?

And yet again I will ask you, we're are the links for your info, or are you gonna skip over this post too?