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

[tupac chopra]

No the rebels did not admit they had BUK's.
Are you deliberately spreading lies now?

See my post above.

This is a guy who doesn't get on with most of the rebels..and this is what he said.

"What resources our partners have, we cannot be entirely certain. Was there (a BUK)? Wasn’t there? If there was proof that there was, then there can be no question."

And he also says:

"I knew that a BUK came from Luhansk. At the time I was told that a BUK from Luhansk was coming under the flag of the LNR," he said, referring to the Luhansk People's Republic, the main rebel group operating in Luhansk, one of two rebel provinces along with Donetsk, the province where the crash took place.

"That BUK I know about. I heard about it. I think they sent it back. Because I found out about it at exactly the moment that I found out that this tragedy had taken place. They probably sent it back in order to remove proof of its presence," Khodakovsky told Reuters on Tuesday.

His admission that he doesn't know what the rebels "partners" are doing, which itself implies that Russia is deeply involved in supplying and assisting the rebels, in no way negates that he knew the BUK was in Luhansk and it was operated by the rebels or their partners in Russia. And you seem to be suggesting that because he's not in good terms with the Igor "Strelkov" Girkin, who got caught pants down boasting about downing the plane in social media, somehow makes this guy any less credible. What it shows is that the home-grown separatists in Ukraine are getting second thoughts about the rebellion being orchestrated from Moscow.

There are now reports that he is denying he said that.

Preamble: On July 23, 2014, Anton Zverev, Peter Graff and Giles Elgood of Reuters came out with an article entitled “Ukraine rebel commander acknowledges fighters had BUK missile.” Prior to this interview, all such claims were firmly denied by the Novorossiya Militia, as well as by Russia. Considering the venerable reputation of Reuters, this sensational news was spread far and wide by the Western media.

Except that this news is now forcefully being challenged as false. Khodakovskiy says that he never stated to his interviewer anything of the kind that has been attributed to him. What’s more, Khodakovskiy indicates that there are video recordings of the interview, in possession of several TV channels, which will prove him right – they will show, according to Khodakovskiy, that he never said that the Novorossiya Militia had BUK complexes and that this statement cannot be attributed to him.

Did the interviewer somehow misunderstand what Khodakovskiy was saying? According to Khodakovskiy, his interviewer spoke Russian quite well. Is it possible that Khodakovskiy is lying? The interview with Khodakovskiy was taped. Copies of portions of the videotape were submitted to other news channels, including to REN-TV and ORT. Khodakovskiy speaks confidently that he never said anything of the kind that was reported by Reuters. Moreover, his interview given to the TV program “The Essence of Time – DPR” at about the same time, contains no such admissions regarding “BUK” complexes.

In this regard, all I can do is challenge Reuters to produce the tape that will show Khodakovskiy saying what Reuters claims he said in his interview. If Reuters does not, I will reserve the judgement to the readers of this blog. If Reuters does, and Khodakovskiy is shown to have lied, I will publicly announce this on this blog.

From here
http://slavyangrad.wordpress.com/20...s-about-militia-and-mh17-and-video-proves-it/

Alexander Khodakovskiy: I am telling you absolutely – after we analyzed the entire situation and took inventory of the equipment in our arsenal – I can tell you with full authority that the Militia has no “BUKs”. MANPADS – yes, those we do have. But their upper ceiling is no more than …​

 

[barbos]

New version:
According to ukrainian sources in the military they were conducting exercises and used Su-25 as target, missile was launched by mistake and hit B777. That certainly explains why radars were ON and it does remind 2001 shooting of the rassian plane.
Of course this could be made up by russians.

In other news Yatsenuk resigned and chances are, he will not be able to get to PM chair after parlament election.
US should be prepared to deal with someone who is total wacko (according to current polls). Yatsenuk was a "sane" one in that government, he would say crazy things to the crowd but that was mostly political necessity for him I think.

 

[tupac chopra]

New version:
According to ukrainian sources in the military they were conducting exercises and used Su-25 as target, missile was launched by mistake and hit B777. That certainly explains why radars were ON and it does remind 2001 shooting of the rassian plane.
Of course this could be made up by russians.

My bet is that the Americans have evidence it was the Ukranian military, which is why they wont release it, and are concentrating now on saying Russia "created the conditions" for it to happen.
None of the lies will hold up if the evidence is released, but unfortunately it is reported that the Ukrainian intelligence confiscated the transmits between the plane and air traffic control.

 

[barbos]

New version:
According to ukrainian sources in the military they were conducting exercises and used Su-25 as target, missile was launched by mistake and hit B777. That certainly explains why radars were ON and it does remind 2001 shooting of the rassian plane.
Of course this could be made up by russians.

My bet is that the Americans have evidence it was the Ukranian military, which is why they wont release it, and are concentrating now on saying Russia "created the conditions" for it to happen.
None of the lies will hold up if the evidence is released, but unfortunately it is reported that the Ukrainian intelligence confiscated the transmits between the plane and air traffic control.

US cover-up on such a scale would be truly depressing.

 

[bilby]

My bet is that the Americans have evidence it was the Ukranian military, which is why they wont release it, and are concentrating now on saying Russia "created the conditions" for it to happen.
None of the lies will hold up if the evidence is released, but unfortunately it is reported that the Ukrainian intelligence confiscated the transmits between the plane and air traffic control.

US cover-up on such a scale would be truly depressing.

Also pretty much impossible to achieve.

The ATC broadcasts are not encrypted, nor are they hard to intercept; there are likely a dozen 'official' recordings in various places, and probably ten times as many unofficial ones in the hands of plane spotters.

A successful cover up would require a degree of competence unprecedented from the US government.

 

[tupac chopra]

My bet is that the Americans have evidence it was the Ukranian military, which is why they wont release it, and are concentrating now on saying Russia "created the conditions" for it to happen.
None of the lies will hold up if the evidence is released, but unfortunately it is reported that the Ukrainian intelligence confiscated the transmits between the plane and air traffic control.

US cover-up on such a scale would be truly depressing.

Why?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-hBY7CnigL8

 

[barbos]

US cover-up on such a scale would be truly depressing.

Also pretty much impossible to achieve.

The ATC broadcasts are not encrypted, nor are they hard to intercept; there are likely a dozen 'official' recordings in various places, and probably ten times as many unofficial ones in the hands of plane spotters.

Yes, and black box most certainly contain that too.
Stilll SBU took it and has not given it to investigators yet.

A successful cover up would require a degree of competence unprecedented from the US government.

True, but government may be unaware of that and try to cover-up anyway.

 

[Jayjay]

What false evidence? The BUK he refers to was spotted in Luhansk beyond any reasonable doubt,

No it wasn't . What evidence do you have? And please don't come up with some evidence there was a BUK in Luhansk in 2013.

The famous video with one missile missing, was taken in Luhansk (and not in Krasnoarmeysk as pro-Russian propaganda claims):

http://www.interpretermag.com/russi...try-claim-about-buk-video-doesnt-add-up/#0613

Plus there are the few other photos of the same. Now of course even if we know the location, we cannot know the time, but at least I have not seen any indication that this video or the pictures were taken in 2013.

 

[tupac chopra]

No it wasn't . What evidence do you have? And please don't come up with some evidence there was a BUK in Luhansk in 2013.

The famous video with one missile missing, was taken in Luhansk (and not in Krasnoarmeysk as pro-Russian propaganda claims):

http://www.interpretermag.com/russi...try-claim-about-buk-video-doesnt-add-up/#0613

Plus there are the few other photos of the same. Now of course even if we know the location, we cannot know the time, but at least I have not seen any indication that this video or the pictures were taken in 2013.

I've already agreed with you about the location. Here and I notice you did not reply, because if you do you'll end up in an awful tangle What you need to explain is how you think it is the one referred to when Alexander Khodakovskiy is saying he never claimed the rebels even had one.

 

[Jayjay]

The famous video with one missile missing, was taken in Luhansk (and not in Krasnoarmeysk as pro-Russian propaganda claims):

http://www.interpretermag.com/russi...try-claim-about-buk-video-doesnt-add-up/#0613

Plus there are the few other photos of the same. Now of course even if we know the location, we cannot know the time, but at least I have not seen any indication that this video or the pictures were taken in 2013.

I've already agreed with you about the location. Here and I notice you did not reply, because if you do you'll end up in an awful tangle What you need to explain is how you think it is the one referred to when Alexander Khodakovskiy is saying he never claimed the rebels even had one.

Yes, I posted a link to the same site earlier. But actually, the above link is new one. While the first post merely cast doubt on the location being Krasnoarmeysk, it seems that the bloggers later pinpointed the exact location in Luhansk. You have not posted anything that would invalidate that analysis: what you linked later was a story about a different photo and video entirely, which are clearly not taken in July. That in no way invalidates the original video, or the photos that were published around the same time. Indeed I don't see any point in getting tangled defending something that I never brought up in the first place.

I cannot speak for Khodakovskiy, but even in the original article, he hints at the "partners" having the BUK rather than rebels. Has he unequivocally denied that these mystery partners do not have a BUK, or that there was no BUK in Luhansk? To me it seems taht being a rebel leader, he's received some feedback from his "partners" in Moscow to shut the fuck up and deny everything.

 

[tupac chopra]

I've already agreed with you about the location. Here and I notice you did not reply, because if you do you'll end up in an awful tangle What you need to explain is how you think it is the one referred to when Alexander Khodakovskiy is saying he never claimed the rebels even had one.

Yes, I posted a link to the same site earlier. But actually, the above link is new one. While the first post merely cast doubt on the location being Krasnoarmeysk, it seems that the bloggers later pinpointed the exact location in Luhansk. You have not posted anything that would invalidate that analysis:

I've agreed on the location

what you linked later was a story about a different photo and video entirely, which are clearly not taken in July. That in no way invalidates the original video, or the photos that were published around the same time. Indeed I don't see any point in getting tangled defending something that I never brought up in the first place.

I linked to an article about various photos that were published on the SBU website, includinga still from that very video. Apparently the photographs were then removed. So it's possible the others were fake and that one is real ,but at the very least thewhole thing is suspicious.
RTnews seems to indicate they think that BUK is number 312 also, though I cant see any numbers though my eyesight isn't the best.

I cannot speak for Khodakovskiy, but even in the original article, he hints at the "partners" having the BUK rather than rebels. Has he unequivocally denied that these mystery partners do not have a BUK, or that there was no BUK in Luhansk? To me it seems taht being a rebel leader, he's received some feedback from his "partners" in Moscow to shut the fuck up and deny everything.

Have you listened to the original interview? I have not and I don't think it has even been released but something is very wrong somewhere with the whole thing

 

[Jayjay]

Yes, I posted a link to the same site earlier. But actually, the above link is new one. While the first post merely cast doubt on the location being Krasnoarmeysk, it seems that the bloggers later pinpointed the exact location in Luhansk. You have not posted anything that would invalidate that analysis:

I've agreed on the location

what you linked later was a story about a different photo and video entirely, which are clearly not taken in July. That in no way invalidates the original video, or the photos that were published around the same time. Indeed I don't see any point in getting tangled defending something that I never brought up in the first place.

I linked to an article about various photos that were published on the SBU website, includinga still from that very video. Apparently the photographs were then removed. So it's possible the others were fake and that one is real ,but at the very least thewhole thing is suspicious.

RTnews seems to indicate they think that BUK is number 312 also, though I cant see any numbers though my eyesight isn't the best.

The RT article you linked does not suggest that. It had yet another picture of BUK #312 taken elsewhere, which proves nothing of course.

However, comparing the images, even if we can't make out the number, it's clearly a different truck (the "real" video has a blue streak on the doors of the truck, whereas in the "fake" video the cabin is plain white).

I cannot speak for Khodakovskiy, but even in the original article, he hints at the "partners" having the BUK rather than rebels. Has he unequivocally denied that these mystery partners do not have a BUK, or that there was no BUK in Luhansk? To me it seems taht being a rebel leader, he's received some feedback from his "partners" in Moscow to shut the fuck up and deny everything.

Have you listened to the original interview? I have not and I don't think it has even been released but something is very wrong somewhere with the whole thing

How so? It seems that the title of the article was originally misleading (he did not technically confirm the rebels have BUK), but I don't see any contradiction between his old and new statements.

 

[tupac chopra]

I've agreed on the location

what you linked later was a story about a different photo and video entirely, which are clearly not taken in July. That in no way invalidates the original video, or the photos that were published around the same time. Indeed I don't see any point in getting tangled defending something that I never brought up in the first place.

I linked to an article about various photos that were published on the SBU website, includinga still from that very video. Apparently the photographs were then removed. So it's possible the others were fake and that one is real ,but at the very least thewhole thing is suspicious.

RTnews seems to indicate they think that BUK is number 312 also, though I cant see any numbers though my eyesight isn't the best.

The RT article you linked does not suggest that. It had yet another picture of BUK #312 taken elsewhere, which proves nothing of course.

Here is the photos.

However, comparing the images, even if we can't make out the number, it's clearly a different truck (the "real" video has a blue streak on the doors of the truck, whereas in the "fake" video the cabin is plain white).

You would need to look at the same side of the truck to be 100% sure, but even if the trucks are different what does that matter? That just shows the photos weren't shot on the same day. It doesn't place the photo in mid July

 

[Jayjay]

I've agreed on the location

what you linked later was a story about a different photo and video entirely, which are clearly not taken in July. That in no way invalidates the original video, or the photos that were published around the same time. Indeed I don't see any point in getting tangled defending something that I never brought up in the first place.

I linked to an article about various photos that were published on the SBU website, includinga still from that very video. Apparently the photographs were then removed. So it's possible the others were fake and that one is real ,but at the very least thewhole thing is suspicious.

RTnews seems to indicate they think that BUK is number 312 also, though I cant see any numbers though my eyesight isn't the best.

The RT article you linked does not suggest that. It had yet another picture of BUK #312 taken elsewhere, which proves nothing of course.

Here is the photos. View attachment 710

However, comparing the images, even if we can't make out the number, it's clearly a different truck (the "real" video has a blue streak on the doors of the truck, whereas in the "fake" video the cabin is plain white).

You would need to look at the same side of the truck to be 100% sure, but even if the trucks are different what does that matter? That just shows the photos weren't shot on the same day. It doesn't place the photo in mid July

There are photos of the alleged July truck from a different angle:

(source: http://www.smh.com.au/world/mh17-cr...-attack-ukraine-spy-chief-20140720-zuwws.html, which says that they're from Ukraine government site.)

And it is my point exactly that because the photos don't depict the same truck, there is no reason to think they depict the same BUK, or that they have anything whatsover to do with each other. we know the other one was taken in winter. But is there any reason to think that the other one was not taken in July? That's the one that the Ukrainian government is pushing for anyway.

 

[tupac chopra]

But is there any reason to think that the other one was not taken in July? That's the one that the Ukrainian government is pushing for anyway.

Is there any reason to think it is?
We are getting nearer and nearer to a confrontation between two nuclear powers. We need to prove these things not assume that the photos are real unless proven otherwise

And it is my point exactly that because the photos don't depict the same truck, there is no reason to think they depict the same BUK,

I agree

 

[Jayjay]

Is there any reason to think it is?
We are getting nearer and nearer to a confrontation between two nuclear powers. We need to prove these things not assume that the photos are real unless proven otherwise

It's circumstantial evidence that adds up:

A) The timing when photos surfaced, is exactly after the shooting down of the plane. Unlike the "fake" photos which were all published before somewhere earlier.
B) The fact that one missile is missing from the BUK.
C) The fact that there are several pictures of the BUK and the truck from the same area, not just a single source.

Of coruse there are some questions that do need an answer, like why isn't the US releasing satellite photos, and why isn't Ukraine admitting that they may have had planes tailing a civilian air craft. The video of the hot chick rebel you posted earlier may indeed imply that Ukraine had fighters in the air, using the civilian plane as cover, which is a big no-no. But so far the evidence that we have available seems to point to Russia and/or the rebels as the ones who actually fired the missile.

 

[barbos]

Looks like US now admits that russian satellite photos showing ukrainian Buks are real and in the range.

 

[barbos]

Of coruse there are some questions that do need an answer, like why isn't the US releasing satellite photos,

At the very least they could have shown these photos to their own senators in the relevant committee.
This guy thinks US has much better satellite photos than russians and the reason for not releasing is that it shows Ukrainians shot that plane.

I find it suspicious that US is not even pressing Russia about having evidence anymore.
Very suspicious.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Looks like US now admits that russian satellite photos showing ukrainian Buks are real and in the range.

My impression is that there is no way they could possibly be within range unless the plane glided for a while after being hit.

 

[barbos]

Looks like US now admits that russian satellite photos showing ukrainian Buks are real and in the range.

My impression is that there is no way they could possibly be within range unless the plane glided for a while after being hit.

Well, White House seems to be implying that you are most likely wrong.