Malaysian airline MH-17 discussion thread

Elmer Blooker

Busted Flat. wrote: »

Try this.

Google this, link won't open for me in Boards.

Malaysian press charges Ukraine government shot down ...
www.wsws.org/en/articles/2014/08/09/mala-a09.html
3 days ago - Malaysian press charges Ukraine government shot down MH 17. By Alex Lantier ... A Thursday article in the New Straits Times, Malaysia's flagship ... satellite data showing a Ukrainian Sukhoi-25 fighter jet tailing MH17 shortly ...

No wonder the black boxes aren't going to Malaysia.
They went to the UK who......... wait for it.... are the only ones who have the technology to decipher the boxes......... We have "been told" this by "experts" ....haven't we?
These black boxes might as well be in Hollywood as far as I'm concerned!

InTheTrees

We've already brought this up. I expected the black boxes to go back to Boeing in Seattle to be decoded. I dont know you think the malaysians have that kind of technology.

InTheTrees

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

They went to the UK who......... wait for it.... are the only ones who have the technology to decipher the boxes......... We have "been told" this by "experts" ....haven't we?
These black boxes might as well be in Hollywood as far as I'm concerned!

You're really dont listen do you?

There was no article in the Malaysian press. That is a bogus link.

darkpagandeath

InTheTrees wrote: »

We've already brought this up. I expected the black boxes to go back to Boeing in Seattle to be decoded. I dont know you think the malaysians have that kind of technology.

Thought they were already being analysed in the UK by recovery/aviation experts.

sparksfly

Piliger wrote: »

Indeed. The evidence is in and has already been assessed and decided on by the public across the world. There is no one waiting on any report or any future evidence.

Putin's special forces fired the missile, killed 280+ people and still hasn't handed over all of the bodies to their families. What a disgusting and odious animal he is.

So the "public across the world" are qualified to assess and decide on the the (non existent) evidence and have concluded that "Putin's special forces fired the missile"

This is the kind of crap that even the most idiotic, brainwashed yank lover would be too clever to believe or too ashamed to spout.

Busted Flat.

InTheTrees wrote: »

You're really dont listen do you?

There was no article in the Malaysian press. That is a bogus link.

What is bogus about it, did you contact The New Straits Times for a denial.
This is not going away just because the pro western journalists have stopped reporting on it. Have you noticed it has gone off the main stream pro western media, do you not smell a rat somewhere.

https://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=8&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CDcQqQIwBw&url=http%3A%2F%2Faxisoflogic.com%2Fartman%2Fpublish%2FArticle_67273.shtml&ei=fHjqU-uPNLLT7AaMjYGgCQ&usg=AFQjCNFQijxqMChDc98cEfz0Q5YDmPuQ_A&bvm=bv.72676100,d.ZGU

darkpagandeath

Busted Flat. wrote: »

What is bogus about it, did you contact The New Straits Times for a denial.
This is not going away just because the pro western journalists have stopped reporting on it. Have you noticed it has gone off the main stream pro western media, do you not smell a rat somewhere.

https://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=8&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CDcQqQIwBw&url=http%3A%2F%2Faxisoflogic.com%2Fartman%2Fpublish%2FArticle_67273.shtml&ei=fHjqU-uPNLLT7AaMjYGgCQ&usg=AFQjCNFQijxqMChDc98cEfz0Q5YDmPuQ_A&bvm=bv.72676100,d.ZGU

I don't it was on the news for over a week, Nothing new since then black boxes need to be looked at investigation needs to go further along. Sorry if the western media does not keep bouncing from one CT to another CT. We will hear more in September I think when they got the preliminary stuff done.

pablo128

Busted Flat. wrote: »

What is bogus about it, did you contact The New Straits Times for a denial.
This is not going away just because the pro western journalists have stopped reporting on it. Have you noticed it has gone off the main stream pro western media, do you not smell a rat somewhere.

https://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=8&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CDcQqQIwBw&url=http%3A%2F%2Faxisoflogic.com%2Fartman%2Fpublish%2FArticle_67273.shtml&ei=fHjqU-uPNLLT7AaMjYGgCQ&usg=AFQjCNFQijxqMChDc98cEfz0Q5YDmPuQ_A&bvm=bv.72676100,d.ZGU

Here is the complete article. http://www.nst.com.my/node/20961
It says there had to be 2 fighter jets, one either side shooting at the cockpit for the theory to be correct. So what is it then? I Fighter jet, or 2?

darkpagandeath

pablo128 wrote: »

Here is the complete article. http://www.nst.com.my/node/20961
It says there had to be 2 fighter jets, one either side shooting at the cockpit for the theory to be correct. So what is it then? I Fighter jet, or 2?

To be fair does it matter, the service celling of the plane they keep using is 10,000 ft below the altitude of the passenger plane.

pablo128

darkpagandeath wrote: »

To be fair does it matter, the service celling of the plane they keep using is 10,000 ft below the altitude of the passenger plane.

That article says that the Russians claim they saw a Ukrainian jet in the same area on their satellite, yet the so-called experts said in the same article that there had to be 2 fighter jets. You would think they would get their story straight first.

Busted Flat.

pablo128 wrote: »

Here is the complete article. http://www.nst.com.my/node/20961
It says there had to be 2 fighter jets, one either side shooting at the cockpit for the theory to be correct. So what is it then? I Fighter jet, or 2?

The US have the proof with Awacks (not sure of the spelling) and Satellite surveillance. Show it to the world what have got to hide, that is the big queastion. What are they hiding, Kerry's árse is not important. Kerry like Hillary Clinton would have no problem getting a job in any Circus.

Peist2007

pablo128 wrote: »

You lot are gas.

What a silly childish argument you are making.

It was said that this is a discussion thread not an evidence one. That implies to me that you seem to think we are asking for posters here to produce the evidence. We are not.

The other poster's comment is asking for evidence that the US said they had. You see Kerry's words a few posts up. They said they have evidence.

So you're either thick or you're being deliberately awkward to avoid the very simple questions being asked.

pablo128

Peist2007 wrote: »

What a silly childish argument you are making.

It was said that this is a discussion thread not an evidence one. That implies to me that you seem to think we are asking for posters here to produce the evidence. We are not.

The other poster's comment is asking for evidence that the US said they had. You see Kerry's words a few posts up. They said they have evidence.

So you're either thick or you're being deliberately awkward to avoid the very simple questions being asked.

Miss Tickle was asking Piliger to produce evidence. Not asking the Americans to produce evidence, but asking a poster to produce evidence by the Americans. So jog on there with your 'simple' questions, unless you would like to withdraw your post where you said you weren't asking posters here for evidence.

Piliger

The evidence discussion ended a long long time ago. No one cares any more. Only the Putinistas. The public got the evidence and made up their mind many many weeks ago and this is such an old boring issue. Nothing that happens in the coming reports will say anything whatsoever about who shot the plane down. And no one needs them to. We know who did it and we know Putin's agenda.

El Guapo!

Peist2007, you were already warned about the name-calling. Don't post in this thread again.

Countryboy1999

I see Malaysian "state" news outlet "new straits times" is reporting Ukraine as shooting down the aircraft, and blaming the US..? What's all that about...?

loughside

Countryboy1999
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 1


Poor effort.... very very poor effort,

Elmer Blooker

it seems sanity may be restored after the US bullied Europe into a sanctions war when feelings were running high after July 17th.
Hopefully theres some truth in this story, it may suit the US to see this sanctions war escalate but I'd rather if us Europeans didn't have to chop up our furniture this winter to keep warm!
http://rt.com/business/180232-eu-soon-lift-sanctions/

pablomakaveli

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

it seems sanity may be restored after the US bullied Europe into a sanctions war when feelings were running high after July 17th.
Hopefully theres some truth in this story, it may suit the US to see this sanctions war escalate but I'd rather if us Europeans didn't have to chop up our furniture this winter to keep warm!
http://rt.com/business/180232-eu-soon-lift-sanctions/

RT again. Could you at least use a more neutral source? Would you accept the opinions of a poster who uses Fox News or the Daily Mail as a source?

miss tickle

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

it seems sanity may be restored after the US bullied Europe into a sanctions war when feelings were running high after July 17th.
Hopefully theres some truth in this story, it may suit the US to see this sanctions war escalate but I'd rather if us Europeans didn't have to chop up our furniture this winter to keep warm!
http://rt.com/business/180232-eu-soon-lift-sanctions/

makes sense,



http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-08-13/russia-sanctions-blowback-finlands-largest-dairy-lays-800-spain-seeks-eu-aid-poland-

Take a look at the S and P graph down the bottom to see whose really losing out here.

loughside

heh-heh, suck it up putin....... and there`s more to come komrads

`Russia's state-controlled energy giant Rosneft has asked the Russian government for a $42bn (£25.2bn) loan, as it feels the impact of Western sanctions.
The government said it will consider the request from Igor Sechin, head of Rosneft, in the next two weeks.
Sanctions on Russia have limited Rosneft's ability to raise funds.
Rosneft has requested the money from the National Wealth Fund, which finances state pensions.`


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-28801185

aloyisious

Malaysia's woes may not yet be over. A Bank employee (Banking Co unidentified) and her husband have been arrested in Malaysia re the siphoning of money from the HSBC accounts of four of the plane's dead passengers. http://www.independent.ie/world-news/asia-pacific/malaysia-airlines-mh370-two-arrested-as-25k-siphoned-from-passengers-bank-accounts-30511406.html

InTheTrees

miss tickle wrote: »

makes sense,

Funny.

Putins propaganda "makes sense" huh? "Rt" news prints what the regime tells it to print.

:pac:

Elmer Blooker

InTheTrees wrote: »

Funny.

Putins propaganda "makes sense" huh? "Rt" news prints what the regime tells it to print.

:pac:

eh?.............. the source of the story is Danske Bank and has absolutely nothing to do with the Russian Government. You (and pablomakaveli) obviously didn't bother to read the article because it was from RT.

InTheTrees

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

. You (and pablomakaveli) obviously didn't bother to read the article because it was from RT.

uh huh. So?

You're asking me to go and click on some dodgy russian website?

miss tickle

InTheTrees wrote: »

Funny.

Putins propaganda "makes sense" huh? "Rt" news prints what the regime tells it to print.

:pac:

I was referring to the Standard and Poor's index at the bottom of my link (it's an interesting site, if just for the comments)
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-08-13/russia-sanctions-blowback-finlands-largest-dairy-lays-800-spain-seeks-eu-aid-poland-
with reference
to how poorly Europe is performing since the sanctions have been imposed, but the US is high-fiving itself, because it is the big winner. Loss of life and humanitarian catastrophe of the scale that has been visited on those in eastern Ukraine is only recorded as points on the stock market scale. It's humbling to realize that in the grand scheme of things that is what the victim of this conflict amounted to but it is the reality.

InTheTrees

miss tickle wrote: »

I was referring to the Standard and Poor's index at the bottom of my link (it's an interesting site, if just for the comments)
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-08-13/russia-sanctions-blowback-finlands-largest-dairy-lays-800-spain-seeks-eu-aid-poland-
with reference
to how poorly Europe is performing since the sanctions have been imposed, but the US is high-fiving itself, because it is the big winner. Loss of life and humanitarian catastrophe of the scale that has been visited on those in eastern Ukraine is only recorded as points on the stock market scale. It's humbling to realize that in the grand scheme of things that is what the victim of this conflict amounted to but it is the reality.

So you're of the opinion that the west shouldnt help Ukraine (even though they may need our help) because it would mean hardship for the west?

So weaker countries should never expect any assistance then?

miss tickle

InTheTrees wrote: »

So you're of the opinion that the west shouldnt help Ukraine (even though they may need our help) because it would mean hardship for the west?

So weaker countries should never expect any assistance then?

nobody seems to be in too much of a hurry to impose sanctions on Israel in relation to the Gaza situation, neither are they interested in imposing sanctions on the US for supplying weapons which mainly target civilians.

http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/25109-us-provides-israel-the-weapons-used-on-gaza


Israel has come under criticism for bombing medical facilities and news media buildings, and also for its failure to prevent civilian casualties. Truthout asked Richard Falk, former UN special rapporteur on Palestinian human rights, what he thought an appropriate response from the international community might be. He replied:
[Israel] shows no sign of respecting the wishes of the international community at this time for an immediate ceasefire. So I think that the only way the world can show that it's at all serious about protecting vulnerable peoples - in this case the Palestinians - would be to impose an arms embargo.
Falk also pointed out that the US weapons exports to Israel violate the Arms Control Act of 1976. "There's no legal, political or moral argument that would uphold the claim that Israel is acting in legitimate self-defense," Falk said. "Gaza, from an international law point of view, is not a foreign state, but an occupied territory. It's not clear that you can exercise self-defense in relation to a territory that you are responsible for administering in accordance with international humanitarian law."

darkpagandeath

miss tickle wrote: »

nobody seems to be in too much of a hurry to impose sanctions on Israel in relation to the Gaza situation, neither are they interested in imposing sanctions on the US for supplying weapons which mainly target civilians.

http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/25109-us-provides-israel-the-weapons-used-on-gaza


Israel has come under criticism for bombing medical facilities and news media buildings, and also for its failure to prevent civilian casualties. Truthout asked Richard Falk, former UN special rapporteur on Palestinian human rights, what he thought an appropriate response from the international community might be. He replied:
[Israel] shows no sign of respecting the wishes of the international community at this time for an immediate ceasefire. So I think that the only way the world can show that it's at all serious about protecting vulnerable peoples - in this case the Palestinians - would be to impose an arms embargo.
Falk also pointed out that the US weapons exports to Israel violate the Arms Control Act of 1976. "There's no legal, political or moral argument that would uphold the claim that Israel is acting in legitimate self-defense," Falk said. "Gaza, from an international law point of view, is not a foreign state, but an occupied territory. It's not clear that you can exercise self-defense in relation to a territory that you are responsible for administering in accordance with international humanitarian law."

Already a thread about this, what has Gaza got to do with a passenger plane being shot down over Ukraine ?

Grayson

miss tickle wrote: »

nobody seems to be in too much of a hurry to impose sanctions on Israel in relation to the Gaza situation, neither are they interested in imposing sanctions on the US for supplying weapons which mainly target civilians.

http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/25109-us-provides-israel-the-weapons-used-on-gaza


Israel has come under criticism for bombing medical facilities and news media buildings, and also for its failure to prevent civilian casualties. Truthout asked Richard Falk, former UN special rapporteur on Palestinian human rights, what he thought an appropriate response from the international community might be. He replied:
[Israel] shows no sign of respecting the wishes of the international community at this time for an immediate ceasefire. So I think that the only way the world can show that it's at all serious about protecting vulnerable peoples - in this case the Palestinians - would be to impose an arms embargo.
Falk also pointed out that the US weapons exports to Israel violate the Arms Control Act of 1976. "There's no legal, political or moral argument that would uphold the claim that Israel is acting in legitimate self-defense," Falk said. "Gaza, from an international law point of view, is not a foreign state, but an occupied territory. It's not clear that you can exercise self-defense in relation to a territory that you are responsible for administering in accordance with international humanitarian law."

Lots of people have called for both sanctions and boycotts of Israeli goods. I remember people calling for them when the US invaded Iraq. In "the great war for civilisation" Robert Fisk tracked down the manufacturers of a hellfire missile that was used to blow up a crowded ambulance in Lebanon (Amazing book btw. I'd highly recommend it for anyone interested in middle eastern politics. It covers nearly every middle eastern conflict since the 50's).

Just because one situation was ignored does not mean another should be. Surely it's better to do something 33% of the time rather than 0% of the time