Flight MH17, who shot it down?

[Will Wiley]

Recent chest thumping by our pugilistic Prime Minister got me thinking about MH17 again, even moreso when I saw that Der Spiegel had come out and announced that German intelligence has "unambiguous" evidence that the plane had been downed by Ukrainian seperatists using a BUK missile launcher.
This together with John Kerry's assurances that America had a "mountain of evidence" proving the rebels were responsible.
America and Germany have as yet provided no evidence to back up their claims. In fact AFAIK there is no professionals who have maded an attempt to produce any report that Ukrainian seperatists were responsible using a BUK.
The only ones who have produced any report that I am aware of are some Russian engineers. Who unsurprisingly say the plane was shot down by a Ukrainian jet.
But shouldn't the difference between the damage caused by a SAM be distiguishable from the damage caused by a machine gun (despite the fact the SAM may have contained rods and have exploded some distance away from the plane)?

 

[Jayjay]

Recent chest thumping by our pugilistic Prime Minister got me thinking about MH17 again, even moreso when I saw that Der Spiegel had come out and announced that German intelligence has "unambiguous" evidence that the plane had been downed by Ukrainian seperatists using a BUK missile launcher.
This together with John Kerry's assurances that America had a "mountain of evidence" proving the rebels were responsible.
America and Germany have as yet provided no evidence to back up their claims. In fact AFAIK there is no professionals who have maded an attempt to produce any report that Ukrainian seperatists were responsible using a BUK.
The only ones who have produced any report that I am aware of are some Russian engineers. Who unsurprisingly say the plane was shot down by a Ukrainian jet.
But shouldn't the difference between the damage caused by a SAM be distiguishable from the damage caused by a machine gun (despite the fact the SAM may have contained rods and have exploded some distance away from the plane)?

That seems to be the key detail that the report is based on. By looking at the pictures the authors conclude that it is from bullets, rather than a missile, and that's the only solid argument against the BUK theory. However I am skeptical whether they can make that determination just by looking at a photo.

Given how adept Russia is in information warfare, I would take anything coming from a Russian source with a grain of salt.

 

[barbos]

Just for the record, "plane was shot down by an Ukrainian jet" is in no way official position of Russian Federation.
In fact I am hearing about these "Russian engineers" and their report here for the first time.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Recent chest thumping by our pugilistic Prime Minister got me thinking about MH17 again, even moreso when I saw that Der Spiegel had come out and announced that German intelligence has "unambiguous" evidence that the plane had been downed by Ukrainian seperatists using a BUK missile launcher.
This together with John Kerry's assurances that America had a "mountain of evidence" proving the rebels were responsible.
America and Germany have as yet provided no evidence to back up their claims. In fact AFAIK there is no professionals who have maded an attempt to produce any report that Ukrainian seperatists were responsible using a BUK.
The only ones who have produced any report that I am aware of are some Russian engineers. Who unsurprisingly say the plane was shot down by a Ukrainian jet.
But shouldn't the difference between the damage caused by a SAM be distiguishable from the damage caused by a machine gun (despite the fact the SAM may have contained rods and have exploded some distance away from the plane)?

I would be very surprised if the US releases the actual data showing the missile launch. That's a system meant to detect strategic launches, they're not going to go releasing data that can be used to figure out how sensitive it is.

As for distinguishing a machine gun from missile shrapnel, they probably could if they had a pristine scene to work with. They have nothing like that. The evidence is horribly contaminated at this point, proving what happened to a courtroom standard simply isn't going to happen. Had the separatists been innocent, though, that's not what we would have seen--they would have been wanting the international community to come have a look.

Furthermore, the separatists were the only ones firing SAMs in the area--Ukraine had no reason to because the separatists had no aircraft.

 

[thief of fire]

As for distinguishing a machine gun from missile shrapnel, they probably could if they had a pristine scene to work with. They have nothing like that. The evidence is horribly contaminated at this point, proving what happened to a courtroom standard simply isn't going to happen. Had the separatists been innocent, though, that's not what we would have seen--they would have been wanting the international community to come have a look.

The separatists didn't impede the investigation. Kiev forces started shelling the area.
Shellfire nearby forces MH17 investigators out of search area for more bodies

Furthermore, the separatists were the only ones firing SAMs in the area--Ukraine had no reason to because the separatists had no aircraft.

There is no evidence of separatists firing SAMS anywhere.
What we do know from Russian satellite images is that Kiev forces were active with BUKs at that very time, in that area.
10 more questions Russian military pose to Ukraine, US over MH17 crash

 

[bilby]

There was no military aircraft in the area at the time MH017 went down. According to the DSB report:

According to radar data three commercial aircraft were in the same Control Area as flight MH17 at the time of the occurrence. All were under control of Dnipro Radar. At 13.20 hrs the distance between the closest aircraft and MH17 was approximately 30 km.

Ukraine has no stealth aircraft. No other contact was in the air within 30km of MH017 when she was hit by "...impacts from a large number of high-energy objects from outside the aircraft."

There is no question that the aircraft was shot down from the ground; The question is by whom. By far the most likely (but at this stage, not the only) suspects are Russian backed Ukrainian separatists who had previously shot down Ukrainian military transport aircraft in the area. There are other, less plausible, possibilities; But any suggestion of another aircraft of any type or origin shooting down MH017 is pure conspiracist bullshit.

Given that the people on the ground, on both sides, are a for the most part bunch of parochial farm-boys with little education, and no knowledge of international commercial aviation, who were astonished to discover that aircraft not related to their petty squabble even transited Ukrainian airspace, it is very clear that nobody intended to shoot down an airliner. That doesn't resolve them of culpability; but it does make all the finger pointing and bullshit pointless.

So please stop.

 

[thief of fire]

There was no military aircraft in the area at the time MH017 went down. According to the DSB report:

According to radar data three commercial aircraft were in the same Control Area as flight MH17 at the time of the occurrence. All were under control of Dnipro Radar. At 13.20 hrs the distance between the closest aircraft and MH17 was approximately 30 km.

As that data appears to be coming from Kiev ATC it's worthless. though for some reason you are convinced. Do you really think Kiev is going to open up and admit there were military aircraft in the vicinity, if that were the case?

There is no question that the aircraft was shot down from the ground;

You can't say that unless there has been an investigation, and evidence presented.
Do you always form your conclusion before evidence is presented and examined?

 

[bilby]

There is no question that the aircraft was shot down from the ground;

You can't say that unless there has been an investigation, and evidence presented.

You mean like the one I linked to?

Seriously, evidence doesn't matter a whit to you does it?

You have a conspiracy theory, and if there is no evidence, you claim that your idea is better than any other; and if there is evidence, you claim that we are being lied to, and that your idea is definitely better than any other.

 

[thief of fire]

You can't say that unless there has been an investigation, and evidence presented.

You mean like the one I linked to?

You obviously didn't read it too well did you?
It is a preliminary report, the full report won't be out for another 12 months or so, but more important if you had bothered to read it you would have seen this.

..the sole objective of this investigation is the prevention of similar accidents and incidents. It is not the purpose of this activity to apportion blame or liability to any party.

Seriously, evidence doesn't matter a whit to you does it?

Says you, who formed your opinion before any investigation is complete and before you have seen the evidence.

 

[bilby]

You mean like the one I linked to?

You obviously didn't read it too well did you?
It is a preliminary report, the full report won't be out for another 12 months or so, but more important if you had bothered to read it you would have seen this.

..the sole objective of this investigation is the prevention of similar accidents and incidents. It is not the purpose of this activity to apportion blame or liability to any party.

Seriously, evidence doesn't matter a whit to you does it?

Says you, who formed your opinion before any investigation is complete and before you have seen the evidence.

Yes, I have read the report.

Apparently unlike you, I have understood what it says.

But then, I read it with the intent of finding out what happened, rather than just looking for a hook I could hang my denial on.

If you had looked more closely at my post, you would note that I didn't use the report for any purpose outside its scope; the report clearly indicated that there were no other aircraft in the vicinity at the time of the incident. While the DSB were constrained by their terms of reference to not draw any specific conclusion from this, they do not leave open the possibility that there was a military jet within range to shoot down MH017.

I have seen the evidence; I have presented it to you. Your disinterest in it, due to its conflicting with your preconceptions; and your sad attempt to discredit it, is noted, disappointing, and unsurprising.

All this conspiracist crap may be fun for you, but it is disrespectful to the families of the dead, and it is time to give it a rest.

 

[thief of fire]

I have seen the evidence; I have presented it to you.

You presented no evidence

the report clearly indicated that there were no other aircraft in the vicinity at the time of the incident.

The report does nothing of the sort. Kiev, who is under suspicion for being the cause told them there were not. For some reason you think this is independent.

All this conspiracist crap may be fun for you, but it is disrespectful to the families of the dead, and it is time to give it a rest.

Bullshit. I know some of the families involved. Do you? If you don't like it then go away.

 

[bilby]

You presented no evidence

Your failure to read, or to understand the report is not the same as my failing to present it.

the report clearly indicated that there were no other aircraft in the vicinity at the time of the incident.

The report does nothing of the sort. Kiev, who is under suspicion for being the cause told them there were not. For some reason you think this is independent.

If you had read the report, you would know that this information came from both Russian and Ukrainian FIR control centres.

All this conspiracist crap may be fun for you, but it is disrespectful to the families of the dead, and it is time to give it a rest.

Bullshit. I know some of the families involved. Do you? If you don't like it then go away.

Do you respond to others saying things you find distasteful and insulting by going away? No? Then why would I?

All this conspiracist crap may be fun for you, but it is disrespectful to the families of the dead, and it is time for you to give it a rest. If you know some of the families involved, then that is all the more reason for you to stop this stupidity.

 

[thief of fire]

All this conspiracist crap may be fun for you, but it is disrespectful to the families of the dead, and it is time for you to give it a rest. If you know some of the families involved, then that is all the more reason for you to stop this stupidity.

You don't speak for them. You don't know them. Stop pretending you care.

 

[bilby]

All this conspiracist crap may be fun for you, but it is disrespectful to the families of the dead, and it is time for you to give it a rest. If you know some of the families involved, then that is all the more reason for you to stop this stupidity.

You don't speak for them. You don't know them. Stop pretending you care.

I care.

I care more about the families of the dead than about political grandstanding, or than having fun spreading disinformation on the internet and claiming to have some kind of special knowledge of what happened, and how mysterious forces are trying to fool us into thinking things are just as straightforwardly tragic as they appear.

The plane was shot down, from the ground, by idiots, who had no clue that they were shooting down a civilian airliner.

Imaginary Ukrainian war-planes had nothing to do with it; it was a fuck up by a SAM crew, not some clever conspiracy. Nobody clever was involved.

All this conspiracist crap may be fun for you, but it is disrespectful to the families of the dead, and it is time for you to give it a rest.

 

[barbos]

So why was this presumably legitimate preliminary report by german intelligence leaked?
Also I am interested to know how they determined it was ukrainian buk captured by separatists.

 

[barbos]

The plane was shot down, from the ground, by idiots, who had no clue that they were shooting down a civilian airliner.

Well, it may be so, but what about Ukrainians who knew separatists had SAMs capable shooting civilian jets and did nothing to close their airspace?
These idiots who had no clue were under assumption that airspace is closed.

 

[thief of fire]

So why was this presumably legitimate preliminary report by german intelligence leaked?
Also I am interested to know how they determined it was ukrainian buk captured by separatists.

I think we can tell from the fact that they supply no evidence, like Bilby who supplies no evidence. Like John Kerry who supplied no evidence, despite saying he has a "mountain" of evidence.
Neither the Germans nor the Americans nor the Australians have supplied even one piece of evidence.

There actually is no evidence, but this doesn't stop Bilby , Obama, John Kerry, German intelligence or Tony Abbott from repeating the same old story. None of them supply any evidence.
In other words the German report is worthless, without evidence.

You'd be better off listening to German comedy.

German TV show ridicules 'evidence' of Russian involvement in Ukraine crisis

The tenacity of Western attempts to give the Ukrainian crisis an explicitly anti-Russian slant has been noted by a German political satire show, which ridiculed the apparent manner the United States presents its evidence.

The host of Extra 3, the comedy show aired by German TV channel NDR, got the program going with a few pieces of 'evidence': a US-photographed satellite image that supposedly depicts Russian complicity in cross-border fire with Ukraine, and a picture that appeared to be drawn by a child with color crayons.

 

[Ford]

Just for the record, "plane was shot down by an Ukrainian jet" is in no way official position of Russian Federation.

Well what do you know...an on the record statement from an official of the Russian Federation!

Is there anything else you'd like to convey from your employers?

 

[bilby]

I think we can tell from the fact that they supply no evidence, like Bilby who supplies no evidence. Like John Kerry who supplied no evidence, despite saying he has a "mountain" of evidence.
Neither the Germans nor the Americans nor the Australians have supplied even one piece of evidence.

There actually is no evidence, but this doesn't stop Bilby , Obama, John Kerry, German intelligence or Tony Abbott from repeating the same old story. None of them supply any evidence.
In other words the German report is worthless, without evidence.

You'd be better off listening to German comedy.

German TV show ridicules 'evidence' of Russian involvement in Ukraine crisis

The tenacity of Western attempts to give the Ukrainian crisis an explicitly anti-Russian slant has been noted by a German political satire show, which ridiculed the apparent manner the United States presents its evidence.

The host of Extra 3, the comedy show aired by German TV channel NDR, got the program going with a few pieces of 'evidence': a US-photographed satellite image that supposedly depicts Russian complicity in cross-border fire with Ukraine, and a picture that appeared to be drawn by a child with color crayons.

I don't know or give a shit about the positions of Obama, John Kerry, German intelligence or Tony Abbott; but I did provide evidence for what I said. HERE IT IS AGAIN.

Please desist from telling direct and obvious lies about me. It only makes you look foolish to make a claim that is refuted by evidence everyone can plainly see for themselves.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The separatists didn't impede the investigation. Kiev forces started shelling the area.
Shellfire nearby forces MH17 investigators out of search area for more bodies

Furthermore, the separatists were the only ones firing SAMs in the area--Ukraine had no reason to because the separatists had no aircraft.

There is no evidence of separatists firing SAMS anywhere.
What we do know from Russian satellite images is that Kiev forces were active with BUKs at that very time, in that area.
10 more questions Russian military pose to Ukraine, US over MH17 crash

The separatists aren't hiding the fact they shot down some Ukranian planes.

And the notion that Ukranian forces would be playing with BUKs in the area makes no sense--the separatists don't have planes to be shot down. Why would the Ukranians be using a weapon that has no use??

There's also the problem that the geometry makes it almost impossible for the missile to have come from Ukraine-controlled territory.