Not as important as petty rockets in Israel, but apparently Malaysian Airliner downed by rocket fire

[Jayjay]

The circumstantial evidence pointing to Kievs involvement is growing by the day.

1. An apparently faked youtube video.
2. Fake photos purporting to be a BUK launcher in rebel held territory.
3. Eyewitness reports of Military jets near or accompanying the doomed airliner.
4. Video shots of these planes from the Rostov military centre so the Russians claim.
5. Photos of the Ukranians deploying BUK launchers in South eastern Ukraine.

The Russians are starting to release this evidence, into the public eye where it can be examined.

"Starting to release"? In other words, they have not released the evidence yet? How does that make Russian claims any more credible than American claims?

Besides note that items (3) and (4) conflict with (5)... if there were Ukrainian jets flying near the airplane, why would Ukrainians shoot the plane down with BUK? To me it just sounds like Russia is trying to throw every conspiracy theory they can conceive at the wall and seeing what sticks.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

So a plane flying at 33,000 feet had escorting military jets? People could tell this from 33,000 feet below on what appeared to be a mostly cloudy day?

 

[barbos]

So a plane flying at 33,000 feet had escorting military jets? People could tell this from 33,000 feet below on what appeared to be a mostly cloudy day?

Ever heard about radars?

 

[barbos]

No, they're not. The only reason you can even say this is because to accept anything else is to admit you are entirely wrong. The index is neither biased nor worthless; but based on the objective gathering and analysis of data.

But yes, there is not much freedom on russian established media (TV/radio)
internet is bit more free.

Internet is hardly more free in Russia; and no more trustworthy when it's been known for quite a while that the government hires large numbers of people to spam forums and sites with pro-russian commentary.

What we have here is western media covering for their politicians lying.

There is no such covering going on, and you have no evidence of them lying about anything in this incident.

It looks like most politicians and western media decided to gang up on Russia.
I can read/watch both and it is painfully obvious that this is what is happening.
I expected from the West more than that.

Bullshit. Russia has brought this on itself with its behavior. No sympathy whatsoever for them being "ganged up" on. Which, incidentally they're not. My country (you know, the one from which the majority of victims come from) has consistently avoiding assigning blame anywhere. Our PM has repeatedly stated that while they have strong evidence for who did it, they're not currently assigning blame anywhere. And I remind you that my government has done this having lost the most and after the despicable and dishonorable behavior of Russia towards us these past few years in a string of incidents. So don't you dare sit there, lying about we're ganging up on your chosen patrons.

If western media is so great why they are not pressuring about Odessa?
What's their fucking excuse?

 

[barbos]

In non-russian state media news:

It's being reported that according to Michael Bociurkiw, spokesperson for the OSCE, the wreckage has been deliberately tampered with. The tail section looks different now than when they first encountered it, with large sections of it cut into into. He's also said that the cockpit was being worked over with electric saws by men in uniform who refused to explain what they were doing and why.

Now why the fuck would the rebels be tampering with the wreckage if not to hide the evidence it was them?

You are that lacking imagination?
I have another question for you
Why would Ukrainian forces try to kill Malaysian investigators?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

So a plane flying at 33,000 feet had escorting military jets? People could tell this from 33,000 feet below on what appeared to be a mostly cloudy day?

Ever heard about radars?

Eyewitness reports... so eyewitnesses have radar? Did Russia give everyone a radar station in Eastern Ukraine?

Eyewitness implies visual confirmation.

 

[barbos]

Ever heard about radars?

Eyewitness reports... so eyewitnesses have radar? Did Russia give everyone a radar station in Eastern Ukraine?

Eyewitness implies visual confirmation.

Yes, Russia has Radars which can see behind the border.
And no, eyewitnesses were not claiming military jets at 33,000 feet. Su-25 can not get higher than 6-7 km and jets tend to have vapor trails so even at 10km you can see them

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Eyewitness reports... so eyewitnesses have radar? Did Russia give everyone a radar station in Eastern Ukraine?

Eyewitness implies visual confirmation.

Yes, Russia has Radars which can see behind the border.

The statement in the post said "eyewitness" which implies eyewitness, seeing it visually... on what appears to be a cloudy day. If the claim is that Russian radar indicated jets near the plane, that is what the claim should be, not "eyewitnesses".

And no, eyewitnesses were not claiming military jets at 33,000 feet.

The plane was allegedly at 33,000 feet.

Su-25 can not get higher than 6-7 km and jets tend to have vapor trails so even at 10km you can see them

When it isn't cloudy.

 

[dystopian]

If western media is so great why they are not pressuring about Odessa?
What's their fucking excuse?

There are plenty of independent western media outlets that have reported on alternative theories about what happened in Odessa, you're painting an incorrect picture of the 'western media' not doing so based on nothing more than your personal bias.

It also has everything to do with the fact that despite what you undoubtedly believe, there is no clear evidence as it being purported by the ukrainian government. You've made up your mind about what happened, and drone on and on about how the western media don't support your interpretation. And you use odessa whenever you're faced with arguments you can't defeat by actually addressing them. Fuck off about Odessa, it has nothing to do with the plane; and the fact that in your opinion western media don't pay enough attention to it does nothing to absolve the blatant disregard for the truth in the Russian media. The western media may not be perfect, but at least it doesn't routinely outright lie to us like Russian media does.

 

[dystopian]

You are that lacking imagination?

Yes; I'm lacking the imagination required to delude myself into thinking there's any other possible reason. Why don't you share your wondrous imagination with us? Let's see how it explains why they would deliberately cut up the fucking evidence before the international experts can show up to analyze it? Do you think we should start letting all criminal suspects destroy the evidence at the crimescene?

I have another question for you

Oh joy.

Why would Ukrainian forces try to kill Malaysian investigators?

They wouldn't, and they haven't. If you think otherwise then you've just been lied to by the Russian state media again. At no point have Malaysian, or Dutch, or other investigators been attacked by Ukrainian forces. They HAVE been severely hampered in their efforts by the seperatists who control the area, however.

 

[tupac chopra]

The circumstantial evidence pointing to Kievs involvement is growing by the day.

1. An apparently faked youtube video.
2. Fake photos purporting to be a BUK launcher in rebel held territory.
3. Eyewitness reports of Military jets near or accompanying the doomed airliner.
4. Video shots of these planes from the Rostov military centre so the Russians claim.
5. Photos of the Ukranians deploying BUK launchers in South eastern Ukraine.

The Russians are starting to release this evidence, into the public eye where it can be examined.

"Starting to release"? In other words, they have not released the evidence yet?

No they have released some. there may be more. Seems they have let the USA and Kiev hang themselves,and the USA is starting to backtrack now.

How does that make Russian claims any more credible than American claims?

They have released evidence wich can now be examined.

Besides note that items (3) and (4) conflict with (5)... if there were Ukrainian jets flying near the airplane, why would Ukrainians shoot the plane down with BUK? To me it just sounds like Russia is trying to throw every conspiracy theory they can conceive at the wall and seeing what sticks.

Who said it was shot down with a a BUK. We don't know that until the investigation has been finished. that has been the major theory, but it may not be true.

 

[bilby]

"Starting to release"? In other words, they have not released the evidence yet?

No they have released some. there may be more. Seems they have let the USA and Kiev hang themselves,and the USA is starting to backtrack now.

How does that make Russian claims any more credible than American claims?

They have released evidence wich can now be examined.

Besides note that items (3) and (4) conflict with (5)... if there were Ukrainian jets flying near the airplane, why would Ukrainians shoot the plane down with BUK? To me it just sounds like Russia is trying to throw every conspiracy theory they can conceive at the wall and seeing what sticks.

Who said it was shot down with a a BUK. We don't know that until the investigation has been finished. that has been the major theory, but it may not be true.

So your position is that everything is in doubt; except your position?

 

[tupac chopra]

Lie of omission; I already pointed out the fact that there is MORE than one video circulating; others which are certainly NOT faked (and I have seen no evidence that the one you're talking about was faked either; simply a russian claim that it is)

Which video do you think is not a fake?

You have zero evidence that these photos are faked, and in fact some of these photos have reliably and independently been sourced to the location in question.

What photos are you talking about. Why don't any of you guys ever provide evidence?. the US government has said they have no evidence of a BUK coming from or going to Russia. The Ukranians have said the rebels did not get one of their. All the photos I have seen have been debunked.

There are no such independently verified eyewitness reports at this time; just random noise on the internet that can't be sourced.

We how are you suggesting these reports be verified?

 

[Nexus]

Senior U.S. intelligence officials say they have no evidence of direct Russian government involvement in the shooting down of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17.

It looks like they are backing off from directly blaming Russia like they were yesterday with John Kerry's "building his case against Russia".






link

 

[Jayjay]

Which video do you think is not a fake?

How about this one:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...litary-truck-carrying-BUK-M1-border-town.html

The page has two videos, the first one I have personally not seen debunked, and the debunking of the second one is based on second-hand info on forums.

It'd be more useful if there was a site or somethign that would collect the data and their analysis in a single source. News sites are worthless for that sort of thing.

And where is the "evidence" that Russia has allegedly released? Are you referring to the satellite photos, which to me just seem to show that there was a BUK in rebel-held territory at the time... which I don't think anyone is denying.

 

[Jayjay]

Besides note that items (3) and (4) conflict with (5)... if there were Ukrainian jets flying near the airplane, why would Ukrainians shoot the plane down with BUK? To me it just sounds like Russia is trying to throw every conspiracy theory they can conceive at the wall and seeing what sticks.

Who said it was shot down with a a BUK. We don't know that until the investigation has been finished. that has been the major theory, but it may not be true.

The point is that alleged evidence for two incompatible theories for what happened don't reinforce each other. If anything, it makes the source of said evidence suspect.

 

[tupac chopra]

Which video do you think is not a fake?

How about this one:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...litary-truck-carrying-BUK-M1-border-town.html
The page has two videos, the first one I have personally not seen debunked, and the debunking of the second one is based on second-hand info on forums.

It'd be more useful if there was a site or somethign that would collect the data and their analysis in a single source. News sites are worthless for that sort of thing.

Well you have moved the goalposts Dystopian put up, but that's not really your fault. He said ..."others which are certainly NOT faked " So Dystopian is now claiming there are multiple videos "certainly NOT faked" ...and further he said ..."some of these photos have reliably and independently been sourced to the location in question."

But as for that daily mail link, at least some of those photos have been debunked. Even the USA is now being ultra cautious and saying one of the videos in "not confirmed".

And where is the "evidence" that Russia has allegedly released? Are you referring to the satellite photos, which to me just seem to show that there was a BUK in rebel-held territory at the time... which I don't think anyone is denying.

Which photo seems to show this. And plenty of people are denying that.

 

[Jayjay]

How about this one:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...litary-truck-carrying-BUK-M1-border-town.html
The page has two videos, the first one I have personally not seen debunked, and the debunking of the second one is based on second-hand info on forums.

It'd be more useful if there was a site or somethign that would collect the data and their analysis in a single source. News sites are worthless for that sort of thing.

Well you have moved the goalposts Dystopian put up, but that's not really your fault. He said ..."others which are certainly NOT faked " So Dystopian is now claiming there are multiple videos "certainly NOT faked" ...and further he said ..."some of these photos have reliably and independently been sourced to the location in question."

But as for that daily mail link, at least some of those photos have been debunked. Even the USA is now being ultra cautious and saying one of the videos in "not confirmed".

So which ones are debunked, and which ones aren't, and for those that are debunked, where is the exact line of reasoning that debunks them? Just saing that something is "debunked" is hardly convincing. And if you want to dismiss evidence that is "not confirmed", why are you listing things like unsourced alleged eyetiness reports claiming there were Ukrainian air planes?

 

[tupac chopra]

Who said it was shot down with a a BUK. We don't know that until the investigation has been finished. that has been the major theory, but it may not be true.

The point is that alleged evidence for two incompatible theories for what happened don't reinforce each other. If anything, it makes the source of said evidence suspect.

What are you trying to say?
You asked why the Ukranians would shoot the plane using a BUK, but we don't know for sure if that even happened.

We have been told that happened but we don't have any evidence that it did happen yet.

Kiev have told us that happened. John Kerry has told us that happened. But they told us these things way too early.
The USA says they have evidence of this but won't release it, which makes that assertion suspect.
The Ukrainian in Kiev say they have evidence but they won't release it either.
Maybe it was an air to air missile? What ever happened we should find evidence of that.
I don't know what evidence they have found yet.
I think it is probably a BUK launched missile because if it's not it would make no sense for those in Kiev to release that fake video purporting to be rebels admitting to doing it. (assuming the evidence of either will be noticeably different)

But right now what we have is
1.Several lines of "fake" evidence trying to point to the rebels.
2.The USA claiming to have evidence against the rebels but not releasing it
3.The Ukrainians in Kiev claiming to have evidence against the rebels but not releasing it.
4.Loads of people such as the ones in this thread claiming that the rebels did it, but having Zero evidence.

None of this points to the rebels, yet apparently we know they did it, without having to rely on evidence.

 

[tupac chopra]

So which ones are debunked, and which ones aren't, and for those that are debunked, where is the exact line of reasoning that debunks them?

You can find some stuff if you follow the links here

Once some of the photos/videos on that daily mail article are debunked or even shown to be suspect it curious that anyone would believe any of them with out having some confirmation.