Russia: Don't look for who did the MH17 shootdown

[barbos]

Nobody is going to do that. Dutch said "We are done with it, no more investigation"
If you ask me, it all looks like they know Almaz-Antey is correct. And russians act as if they know dutch know that.

Russia is acting exactly like a guilty party would act: trying to delay, obstruct, and shift blame. The report did consider Russia's request, and even made some changes based on it (such as not explicitly saying that Russia is party to the conflict in Eastern Ukraine), but regarding the evidence:

3.8 Simulations to assess the origin of the damage

3.8.1 Introduction
Using the results in Section 3.7 that the aeroplane was struck by a warhead, a number of simulations were run. These were intended to corroborate the findings and to calculate the volume of space of the warhead's detonation location and the missile's possible flight path from the ground to the detonation. Simulations performed by three parties delivered results that were consistent with the damage observed on the aeroplane's wreckage. A study provided by the Russian Federation had results that were not consistent with the damage.

The data that Russia tried to peddle was rejected because it did not match the damage, and furthermore because it contradicted with three other parties.

That's complete and utter bullshit.

 

[bilby]

Russia is acting exactly like a guilty party would act: trying to delay, obstruct, and shift blame. The report did consider Russia's request, and even made some changes based on it (such as not explicitly saying that Russia is party to the conflict in Eastern Ukraine), but regarding the evidence:

3.8 Simulations to assess the origin of the damage

3.8.1 Introduction
Using the results in Section 3.7 that the aeroplane was struck by a warhead, a number of simulations were run. These were intended to corroborate the findings and to calculate the volume of space of the warhead's detonation location and the missile's possible flight path from the ground to the detonation. Simulations performed by three parties delivered results that were consistent with the damage observed on the aeroplane's wreckage. A study provided by the Russian Federation had results that were not consistent with the damage.

The data that Russia tried to peddle was rejected because it did not match the damage, and furthermore because it contradicted with three other parties.

That's complete and utter bullshit.

Thank you for clearing that up; I was inclined to accept the findings of the Onderzoeksraad Voor Veiligheid report, but having read the detailed information you provide here, and weighed it against the casual denial without evidence, as presented by the OVV, I am forced to agree that your evidence massively outweighs theirs.

 

[barbos]

Russia is acting exactly like a guilty party would act: trying to delay, obstruct, and shift blame. The report did consider Russia's request, and even made some changes based on it (such as not explicitly saying that Russia is party to the conflict in Eastern Ukraine), but regarding the evidence:

3.8 Simulations to assess the origin of the damage

3.8.1 Introduction
Using the results in Section 3.7 that the aeroplane was struck by a warhead, a number of simulations were run. These were intended to corroborate the findings and to calculate the volume of space of the warhead's detonation location and the missile's possible flight path from the ground to the detonation. Simulations performed by three parties delivered results that were consistent with the damage observed on the aeroplane's wreckage. A study provided by the Russian Federation had results that were not consistent with the damage.

The data that Russia tried to peddle was rejected because it did not match the damage, and furthermore because it contradicted with three other parties.

That's complete and utter bullshit.

Thank you for clearing that up; I was inclined to accept the findings of the Onderzoeksraad Voor Veiligheid report, but having read the detailed information you provide here, and weighed it against the casual denial without evidence, as presented by the OVV, I am forced to agree that your evidence massively outweighs theirs.

Dutch are assholes, they made it look like russian study was just bad and JayJay fell for it exactly.
In reality dutch asked to simulate certain trajectory and russians did so, and result did not match the damage, that only says that particular trajectory is wrong. That's why they accuse dutch report in misrepresentation.
As for 2 other simulations, these are most likely using intentionally wrong data on missile to fit favorable for ukrainian trajectory with damage
Dutch are lying. And Almaz-Antey are behaving as someone who knows that.
What is probably gonna happen is Almaz saying what I just said "You used wrong "data" on missile" and Dutch will keep ignoring and if Russia decides not to play along and press the issue they will say "Sorry, me speak no russian, me can't read specification and used specification for US made missile"

 

[bilby]

Russia is acting exactly like a guilty party would act: trying to delay, obstruct, and shift blame. The report did consider Russia's request, and even made some changes based on it (such as not explicitly saying that Russia is party to the conflict in Eastern Ukraine), but regarding the evidence:

3.8 Simulations to assess the origin of the damage

3.8.1 Introduction
Using the results in Section 3.7 that the aeroplane was struck by a warhead, a number of simulations were run. These were intended to corroborate the findings and to calculate the volume of space of the warhead's detonation location and the missile's possible flight path from the ground to the detonation. Simulations performed by three parties delivered results that were consistent with the damage observed on the aeroplane's wreckage. A study provided by the Russian Federation had results that were not consistent with the damage.

The data that Russia tried to peddle was rejected because it did not match the damage, and furthermore because it contradicted with three other parties.

That's complete and utter bullshit.

Thank you for clearing that up; I was inclined to accept the findings of the Onderzoeksraad Voor Veiligheid report, but having read the detailed information you provide here, and weighed it against the casual denial without evidence, as presented by the OVV, I am forced to agree that your evidence massively outweighs theirs.

Dutch are assholes, they made it look like russian study was just bad and JayJay fell for it exactly.
In reality dutch asked to simulate certain path and russians did so, and result did not match the damage, that only says that particular trajectory is wrong. That's why they accuse dutch report in misrepresentation.
As for 2 other simulatons, these are most likely using intentionally wrong data on missile to fit favorable for ukrainians trajectory with damage
Dutch are lying. And Almaz-Antey are behaving as someone who knows that.

Meh.

If the Russian backed rebels were not responsible, they should not have bragged about shooting a plane down at the time.

All the physical evidence agrees with the obvious deduction that they did it - There seems to be no reason to think they were trying to shoot down an airliner, and they probably were too dumb to even realise that anyone other then Ukraine and Russia were even using that airspace. But nevertheless, it is bloody obvious from day one that they did it. The ONLY 'evidence' contradicting this is hearsay. None of that - no matter what the source - is worth listening to, because it all has the potential to be corrupt; Indeed most of it exists purely in an attempt to cause confusion where none need exist.

It was a tragic error by Russian backed forces. No doubt the Russians who supported them were seriously pissed off that this bunch of fuckwits made such a dreadful error; but covering up for them was a poor choice of response - if Putin had been smart, he would have had the Russian army arrest them, had them tried and convicted for manslaughter, and had some low-level scapegoat in the Russian military shot for supplying the BUK in the first place. But instead he doubled down on the stupid with a transparent cock-and-bull story about the Ukrainian forces shooting the plane down, despite the physical evidence contradicting every part of the tale; and despite the effective admission of guilt by the people responsible on the day of the incident.

Fucking idiots.

 

[barbos]

Russia is acting exactly like a guilty party would act: trying to delay, obstruct, and shift blame. The report did consider Russia's request, and even made some changes based on it (such as not explicitly saying that Russia is party to the conflict in Eastern Ukraine), but regarding the evidence:

3.8 Simulations to assess the origin of the damage

3.8.1 Introduction
Using the results in Section 3.7 that the aeroplane was struck by a warhead, a number of simulations were run. These were intended to corroborate the findings and to calculate the volume of space of the warhead's detonation location and the missile's possible flight path from the ground to the detonation. Simulations performed by three parties delivered results that were consistent with the damage observed on the aeroplane's wreckage. A study provided by the Russian Federation had results that were not consistent with the damage.

The data that Russia tried to peddle was rejected because it did not match the damage, and furthermore because it contradicted with three other parties.

That's complete and utter bullshit.

Thank you for clearing that up; I was inclined to accept the findings of the Onderzoeksraad Voor Veiligheid report, but having read the detailed information you provide here, and weighed it against the casual denial without evidence, as presented by the OVV, I am forced to agree that your evidence massively outweighs theirs.

Dutch are assholes, they made it look like russian study was just bad and JayJay fell for it exactly.
In reality dutch asked to simulate certain path and russians did so, and result did not match the damage, that only says that particular trajectory is wrong. That's why they accuse dutch report in misrepresentation.
As for 2 other simulatons, these are most likely using intentionally wrong data on missile to fit favorable for ukrainians trajectory with damage
Dutch are lying. And Almaz-Antey are behaving as someone who knows that.

Meh.

If the Russian backed rebels were not responsible, they should not have bragged about shooting a plane down at the time.

I am glad you agreed that dutch are assholes.

All the physical evidence agrees with the obvious deduction that they did it - There seems to be no reason to think they were trying to shoot down an airliner, and they probably were too dumb to even realise that anyone other then Ukraine and Russia were even using that airspace. But nevertheless, it is bloody obvious from day one that they did it. The ONLY 'evidence' contradicting this is hearsay. None of that - no matter what the source - is worth listening to, because it all has the potential to be corrupt; Indeed most of it exists purely in an attempt to cause confusion where none need exist.

Again, I am glad you finally agreed with the truth that ukrainian army is responsible for this disaster.

It was a tragic error by Russian backed forces. No doubt the Russians who supported them were seriously pissed off that this bunch of fuckwits made such a dreadful error; but covering up for them was a poor choice of response - if Putin had been smart, he would have had the Russian army arrest them, had them tried and convicted for manslaughter, and had some low-level scapegoat in the Russian military shot for supplying the BUK in the first place. But instead he doubled down on the stupid with a transparent cock-and-bull story about the Ukrainian forces shooting the plane down, despite the physical evidence contradicting every part of the tale; and despite the effective admission of guilt by the people responsible on the day of the incident.

Fucking idiots.

Yes, ukrainians and dutch are fucking idiots.

 

[tupac chopra]

Meh.

If the Russian backed rebels were not responsible, they should not have bragged about shooting a plane down at the time.

There was clearly confusion as to what happened and evidence that two planes came down. The rebels thought that they shot down a Ukrainian fighter jet which they thought had brought down the plane as well. In the heat of the moment most could have been sure what happened.
http://www.news.com.au/travel/trave...down-flight-mh17/story-fnizu68q-1227444884741

The unit commander, takes several phone calls and the scene becomes clearer, and he then chats off camera to a subordinate.
“The other plane that fell down, they are after them, the pilots,” he says.
“The second one?” his colleague asks.
“Yes, there’s two planes taken down. We need the second.
“The second one is a civilian too?
“The fighter jet brought down this one, and our people brought down the fighter,” a third man responds.
“They decided to do it this way, to look like we have brought down the plane.”

All the physical evidence agrees with the obvious deduction that they did it -.

Incorrect. The physical damage to the plane, on the left engine covering shows that the missile did not come from in front of the plane but from the side. This points to Ukrainian forces not the rebels.

 

[bilby]

Russia is acting exactly like a guilty party would act: trying to delay, obstruct, and shift blame. The report did consider Russia's request, and even made some changes based on it (such as not explicitly saying that Russia is party to the conflict in Eastern Ukraine), but regarding the evidence:

3.8 Simulations to assess the origin of the damage

3.8.1 Introduction
Using the results in Section 3.7 that the aeroplane was struck by a warhead, a number of simulations were run. These were intended to corroborate the findings and to calculate the volume of space of the warhead's detonation location and the missile's possible flight path from the ground to the detonation. Simulations performed by three parties delivered results that were consistent with the damage observed on the aeroplane's wreckage. A study provided by the Russian Federation had results that were not consistent with the damage.

The data that Russia tried to peddle was rejected because it did not match the damage, and furthermore because it contradicted with three other parties.

That's complete and utter bullshit.

Thank you for clearing that up; I was inclined to accept the findings of the Onderzoeksraad Voor Veiligheid report, but having read the detailed information you provide here, and weighed it against the casual denial without evidence, as presented by the OVV, I am forced to agree that your evidence massively outweighs theirs.

Dutch are assholes, they made it look like russian study was just bad and JayJay fell for it exactly.
In reality dutch asked to simulate certain path and russians did so, and result did not match the damage, that only says that particular trajectory is wrong. That's why they accuse dutch report in misrepresentation.
As for 2 other simulatons, these are most likely using intentionally wrong data on missile to fit favorable for ukrainians trajectory with damage
Dutch are lying. And Almaz-Antey are behaving as someone who knows that.

Meh.

If the Russian backed rebels were not responsible, they should not have bragged about shooting a plane down at the time.

I am glad you agreed that dutch are assholes.

All the physical evidence agrees with the obvious deduction that they did it - There seems to be no reason to think they were trying to shoot down an airliner, and they probably were too dumb to even realise that anyone other then Ukraine and Russia were even using that airspace. But nevertheless, it is bloody obvious from day one that they did it. The ONLY 'evidence' contradicting this is hearsay. None of that - no matter what the source - is worth listening to, because it all has the potential to be corrupt; Indeed most of it exists purely in an attempt to cause confusion where none need exist.

Again, I am glad you finally agreed with the truth that ukrainian army is responsible for this disaster.

It was a tragic error by Russian backed forces. No doubt the Russians who supported them were seriously pissed off that this bunch of fuckwits made such a dreadful error; but covering up for them was a poor choice of response - if Putin had been smart, he would have had the Russian army arrest them, had them tried and convicted for manslaughter, and had some low-level scapegoat in the Russian military shot for supplying the BUK in the first place. But instead he doubled down on the stupid with a transparent cock-and-bull story about the Ukrainian forces shooting the plane down, despite the physical evidence contradicting every part of the tale; and despite the effective admission of guilt by the people responsible on the day of the incident.

Fucking idiots.

Yes, ukrainians and dutch are fucking idiots.

Thank you for illustrating just how much respect you have for the truth.

Or perhaps you really think that you are a more respectable authority than I on the question of what I think?

 

[Ford]

Or perhaps you really think that you are a more respectable authority than I on the question of what I think?

All he knows is that the authority of his bosses back in Moscow outweigh everything else. Gotta keep those Rubles coming in.

 

[bilby]

There was clearly confusion as to what happened and evidence that two planes came down. The rebels thought that they shot down a Ukrainian fighter jet which they thought had brought down the plane as well. In the heat of the moment most could have been sure what happened.
http://www.news.com.au/travel/trave...down-flight-mh17/story-fnizu68q-1227444884741

The unit commander, takes several phone calls and the scene becomes clearer, and he then chats off camera to a subordinate.
“The other plane that fell down, they are after them, the pilots,” he says.
“The second one?” his colleague asks.
“Yes, there’s two planes taken down. We need the second.
“The second one is a civilian too?
“The fighter jet brought down this one, and our people brought down the fighter,” a third man responds.
“They decided to do it this way, to look like we have brought down the plane.”

All the physical evidence agrees with the obvious deduction that they did it -.

Incorrect. The physical damage to the plane, on the left engine covering shows that the missile did not come from in front of the plane but from the side. This points to Ukrainian forces not the rebels.

Sure.

And I "finally agreed with the truth that ukrainian army is responsible for this disaster" too.

And the Moon is made of Stilton Cheese.

The problem with attempting to spead disinformation is that after a while, you invariably comment on something your audience knows about, at which point their knowledge that you are wrong on that point places doubt over all the rest of your statements.

In short, nobody thinks you are telling the truth any more on this subject. So you are wasting everyone's time.

 

[tupac chopra]

The problem with attempting to spead disinformation

What disinformation am I spreading? The left engine covering was damaged. clearly by fragments. Can you explain this if the missile was fired from head on?

In short, nobody thinks you are telling the truth any more on this subject.

If you don't think it is the truth then can you explain why?

And whether people think it is the truth is not really the issue. What does the evidence say? The evidence on the left engine cover.

Added in edit:

You can find pictures on page 60 of the report, and can compare the "perforation holes" to those in the cockpit.
http://cdn.onderzoeksraad.nl/documents/report-mh17-crash-en.pdf

 

[Ford]

The left engine covering was damaged. clearly by fragments. Can you explain this if the missile was fired from head on?

Are you saying that if a missile of this type hit the aircraft almost head on, no other part of the plane could have possibly been damaged by the shrapnel?

 

[Tom Sawyer]

The left engine covering was damaged. clearly by fragments. Can you explain this if the missile was fired from head on?

Are you saying that if a missile of this type hit the aircraft almost head on, no other part of the plane could have possibly been damaged by the shrapnel?

What, missiles can make things explode and become shrapnel all of a sudden? I bet you think that steel can burn, too, don't you?

Wake up, dude.

 

[tupac chopra]

The left engine covering was damaged. clearly by fragments. Can you explain this if the missile was fired from head on?

Are you saying that if a missile of this type hit the aircraft almost head on, no other part of the plane could have possibly been damaged by the shrapnel?

The missile is designed to explode very close to the aircraft and has a proximity fuse to cause this to happen. The "shrapnel" or fragments explode outwards to the side in a narrow area or "lancet".
This is not a missile which send fragments flying out in all directions hoping to hit the target. It is designed to come very close and explode fragments in a narrow band and make a direct hit. So only some parts of the plane will be hit by fragments.

We can predict what parts of the plane will be damaged from which angle.

 

[tupac chopra]

Are you saying that if a missile of this type hit the aircraft almost head on, no other part of the plane could have possibly been damaged by the shrapnel?

What, missiles can make things explode and become shrapnel all of a sudden? I bet you think that steel can burn, too, don't you?

Wake up, dude.

Missiles don't explode and "become" shrapnel. They contain a warhead containing shrapnel. A warhead designed to explode in a very specific way.

 

[Ford]

So you're saying that there's no way that this missile could have possibly damaged any other part of the airplane.


That video simulation from the Dutch is completely wrong because the Dutch are assholes, and you've provided a completely unbiased graphic in Russian which proves your point?


Congratulations. You've earned your Rubles for the day. Spend them well.

 

[barbos]

Thank you for illustrating just how much respect you have for the truth.

Yes, I have respect for the truth, unlike you and dutch.

 

[Ford]

So we've got Putin's enemies list narrowed down here...

1. Ukraine.

2. Western Media.

3. The CIA.

4. The Dutch.

5. Posters on a small internet forum.


The last one is a bit of an odd choice. Why would Putin be so angry with Talk Freethought that he'd send some folks over to argue his case? Now that I think about it, though, I kinda feel sorry for our resident Moscow employees. I mean, of all the places you could earn your Rubles, this is pretty low on the list. Not much traffic. Not many arguments to refute. Maybe the plan is...if you post a sufficient amount of pro Kremlin stuff you get to graduate to posting on somewhere actually popular? Like Reddit?

 

[bilby]

What, missiles can make things explode and become shrapnel all of a sudden? I bet you think that steel can burn, too, don't you?

Wake up, dude.

Missiles don't explode and "become" shrapnel. They contain a warhead containing shrapnel. A warhead designed to explode in a very specific way.

And when that shrapnel hits near the front a commercial airliner with a pressurised cabin at FL330, travelling at M0.82, it generates a whole heap more shrapnel that used to be part of the aircraft, which the rest of the airframe will plow into at high speed. As the OVV report explains in some detail, the missile did enough damage to separate the entire cockpit and front portion of the aircraft from the rest of the fuselage; How you could break up an internally pressurised airframe in this way without generating further shrapnel, to strike the wings, engines, and other parts aft of the initial impact is a total mystery.

Catastrophic failure of a pressurised cabin is quite easy to achieve; as the Lockerbie bombing of Pan Am 103 showed, even a small bomb that can be hidden in a tape recorder can destroy a large jetliner, due to the effects of internal pressurisation combined with a slipstream at nearly 1,000km/h. A small hole doesn't stay small for long in such conditions.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

What disinformation am I spreading? The left engine covering was damaged. clearly by fragments. Can you explain this if the missile was fired from head on?

You have a simplistic idea of how the missile works. When missiles first came out you would be right but a modern missile has more brains than that--the BUK is programmed to fly above it's target and detonate.

 

[barbos]

Missiles don't explode and "become" shrapnel. They contain a warhead containing shrapnel. A warhead designed to explode in a very specific way.

And when that shrapnel hits near the front a commercial airliner with a pressurised cabin at FL330, travelling at M0.82, it generates a whole heap more shrapnel that used to be part of the aircraft, which the rest of the airframe will plow into at high speed. As the OVV report explains in some detail, the missile did enough damage to separate the entire cockpit and front portion of the aircraft from the rest of the fuselage; How you could break up an internally pressurised airframe in this way without generating further shrapnel, to strike the wings, engines, and other parts aft of the initial impact is a total mystery.

Catastrophic failure of a pressurised cabin is quite easy to achieve; as the Lockerbie bombing of Pan Am 103 showed, even a small bomb that can be hidden in a tape recorder can destroy a large jetliner, due to the effects of internal pressurisation combined with a slipstream at nearly 1,000km/h. A small hole doesn't stay small for long in such conditions.

I am glad you agreed that there are problems with dutch theory which does not explain the damage distribution.
And no, debris can not make secondary holes consistent with missile shrapnel.