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

[Ford]

Why in the world would anyone trust a report on this from a Russian state-run arms manufacturer?

In this case, it has nothing to do with trust. Whether it is accurate or not, the task at hand here is not a search for answers, but to continue to present the Russian version of events. The talking points have been delivered, and the poster is dutifully relaying them. There will be no concession, no real discussion, and certainly no regard for the truth.

You're basically dealing with a volunteer Kremlin spokesperson (or a very low-paid one at least), so you're not going to get any more deviation from the "official" Russian viewpoint than you would if you were talking directly to an official from the Kremlin.

 

[beero1000]

Why in the world would anyone trust a report on this from a Russian state-run arms manufacturer?

In this case, it has nothing to do with trust. Whether it is accurate or not, the task at hand here is not a search for answers, but to continue to present the Russian version of events. The talking points have been delivered, and the poster is dutifully relaying them. There will be no concession, no real discussion, and certainly no regard for the truth.

You're basically dealing with a volunteer Kremlin spokesperson (or a very low-paid one at least), so you're not going to get any more deviation from the "official" Russian viewpoint than you would if you were talking directly to an official from the Kremlin.

That's exactly what I meant by 'trust'.

 

[Jayjay]

Almaz Antey demonstrated that had the missile come from Snizhne, from head on then we should have seen warhead fragments exiting the right side of the cockpit. You can see that here just after the 1 hour mark.
[YOUTUBE]https://youtu.be/LKAXKwnUTg0[/YOUTUBE]

Yet the DSB report on page 31 section 2.8 says.

The right hand side of the cockpit shows no high energy impact damage.

http://cdn.onderzoeksraad.nl/documents/appendix-x-nlr-report-en.pdf

This is perhaps a simpler more conclusive way to show the missile cannot have come from Snizhne.

The missile and the plane in the AA experiment were stationary. In reality, both would have been traveling at high speeds almost head on. Therefore, the trajectories of the fragments would be different and the exit points farther down the fuselage rather than the cockpit.

As for the DSB report, that part of the cockpit has no high energy impact damage, but there is mention of exit perforations in the lower-right part of the cockpit (which may have disintegrated into a separate piece), which you'd expect if the point of impact is on upper-left side (chapter 2.4, exit damage).

 

[Will Wiley]

As for the DSB report, that part of the cockpit has no high energy impact damage, but there is mention of exit perforations in the lower-right part of the cockpit (which may have disintegrated into a separate piece), which you'd expect if the point of impact is on upper-left side (chapter 2.4, exit damage).

As with so many things in this supposedly thorough report figure 10 does not say precisely where the one lonely exit hole is.
The location could well give another clue.

This is extremely crucial information. The DSB knew that Almaz Antey made a very big deal about this yet the DSB left this out. Why the cover-up?

 

[Will Wiley]

In this case, it has nothing to do with trust. Whether it is accurate or not, the task at hand here is not a search for answers, but to continue to present the Russian version of events. The talking points have been delivered, and the poster is dutifully relaying them. There will be no concession, no real discussion, and certainly no regard for the truth.

You're basically dealing with a volunteer Kremlin spokesperson (or a very low-paid one at least), so you're not going to get any more deviation from the "official" Russian viewpoint than you would if you were talking directly to an official from the Kremlin.

That's exactly what I meant by 'trust'.

It funny how all the Americans here want to attack the people rather than deal with the evidence. Why is that?

We know that the investigation is compromised. One of the investigating parties is Ukraine who is one of the suspects. So someone needs to check the work. America should because they have been accusing Russia.
Of course it would be better to have someone else check the DSB's findings, but at least AA are doing it.

 

[Ford]

That's exactly what I meant by 'trust'.

It funny how all the Americans here want to attack the people rather than deal with the evidence. Why is that?

You've been given plenty of evidence, but still stick to the official Kremlin line. Evidence obviously won't change your mind, because you're not here to discuss evidence. Why is that?

 

[beero1000]

That's exactly what I meant by 'trust'.

It funny how all the Americans here want to attack the people rather than deal with the evidence. Why is that?

For the same reason we don't allow the accused to perform the official investigation of their own cases. There is a clear conflict of interest.

If Russia has actual evidence, they should submit it to an impartial criminal investigation of the shooting down of MH17. Oh, wait, Russia already vetoed the creation of an international tribunal to determine guilt...

 

[Will Wiley]

It funny how all the Americans here want to attack the people rather than deal with the evidence. Why is that?

You've been given plenty of evidence, but still stick to the official Kremlin line. Evidence obviously won't change your mind, because you're not here to discuss evidence. Why is that?

I guess that's why you guys invaded Iraq on the basis of documented lies. You guys aren't interested in evidence. https://www.iraqbodycount.org/
You grew up watching too many cowboy movies Ford

 

[Will Wiley]

If Russia has actual evidence, they should submit it to an impartial criminal investigation of the shooting down of MH17.

Russia presented their evidence and it was ignored. Did you not know that????
I gues Fox News didn't report that

Oh, wait, Russia already vetoed the creation of an international tribunal to determine guilt...

Russia vetoed a tribunal until the results of the investigations were known. why did you want to not wait?

 

[Ford]

You've been given plenty of evidence, but still stick to the official Kremlin line. Evidence obviously won't change your mind, because you're not here to discuss evidence. Why is that?

I guess that's why you guys invaded Iraq on the basis of documented lies. You guys aren't interested in evidence. https://www.iraqbodycount.org/
You grew up watching too many cowboy movies Ford

Ah, the old "let's change the subject" tactic.

What page is that on in your handbook?


Edited to add:


You know what? I'll make you a deal. I'll give you that the 2003 invasion of Iraq was based on false premises. Now you go...

I mean, you criticize your employers in Moscow. It doesn't even have to be as big as an invasion of a sovereign nation (not that Russia would ever do such a thing ) just admit something your government has done that is really bad.


I'll wait...

 

[Will Wiley]

The sham Dutch report pretends to be clueless about where the missile came from, hinting that it may have come from head on, Snizhne.
Almaz Antey completely busted this bullshit by showing that warhead fragments were travelling longitudinally down the length of the aircraft.
This was completely ignored by the bogus Dutch report. But hey, you Americans keep on believing (I mean the Americans in this thread who pretend to have evidence.....which is obviously not all Americans).

If the missile came from head on we would not get warhead fragments grazing the plane the way they did or leaving puncture holes that show they flew from the front towards the rear.
Keep watching Fox News you guys.

And some Rocky And Bullwinkle.
[YOUTUBE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hTzuO24i-YA[/YOUTUBE]

 

[Will Wiley]

Russia is an accused party - ..

Only if you watch Fox News.....Are you that isolated? A lot of the world thinks America is lying....yet again.

 

[Will Wiley]

I'll wait...

Ok...I'm putting you back on ignore. I took you off when I saw this. Where you apeared to ask a mature intelligent question.
http://talkfreethought.org/showthre...MH17-shootdown&p=212935&viewfull=1#post212935

Obviously you didn't like the answer. Good Bye

 

[Ford]

I'll wait...

Ok...I'm putting you back on ignore. I took you off when I saw this. Where you apeared to ask a mature intelligent question.
http://talkfreethought.org/showthre...MH17-shootdown&p=212935&viewfull=1#post212935

Obviously you didn't like the answer. Good Bye

And for those playing along at home, this is what happens when you call a shill on their bullshit.

 

[Jayjay]

As for the DSB report, that part of the cockpit has no high energy impact damage, but there is mention of exit perforations in the lower-right part of the cockpit (which may have disintegrated into a separate piece), which you'd expect if the point of impact is on upper-left side (chapter 2.4, exit damage).

As with so many things in this supposedly thorough report figure 10 does not say precisely where the one lonely exit hole is.
The location could well give another clue.

This is extremely crucial information. The DSB knew that Almaz Antey made a very big deal about this yet the DSB left this out. Why the cover-up?

This is not mentioned in the list of comments received from Russian Federation for the draft report. If it's such a big deal, why didn't Almaz Antey bring it up during the review process?

 

[Jayjay]

Russia presented their evidence and it was ignored. Did you not know that????

What evidence did Russia present that was ignored? Every comment from Russia that was not taken into the final report is listed in the report, with explanation why. Russia was the most prolific commentator, and had more of its change requests impact the final wording than any other nation, including Netherlands and Ukraine.

For example, the orientation and position of the missile suggested by Russia was not ignored, those values were simulated and it was determined that they don't match the damage on the plane. Did you know that????

I would like to see a written version of the Almaz Antey report and the points they are making. What we have now is a detailed report from DSB that documents every step of the deduction. What we have from Russia is a video of a press conference. It's "just so" stories, as opposed to any substantial criticism. Until you can provide a written document that outlines the Russia case (or even a transcript of the Almaz Antey press conference since I'm pretty sure that's all they have), you've got nothing.

 

[Will Wiley]

I would like to see a written version of the Almaz Antey report and the points they are making.

This is the best I can do. http://www.scribd.com/doc/284722224/Slideshow-van-Almaz-Antey

What we have now is a detailed report from DSB that documents every step of the deduction.

What you have is a report which cherry picks.holes for these fragments in the cockpit wall. Don't you find that strange?
It suspiciously gives no details of the chemical analysis of the two alleged "bow tie" fragments.
Makes no attempt to eaplain why there are no
It makes no attempt to explain why the puncture holes at the rear of the cabin have a trajectory that points towards the rear.
It doesn't give enough data about the holes in the left engine. And many other things.

Almaz Antey, at the end of their presentation took questions on any subject.

The sham Dutch report did not. DO you knwo what happened when the Dutch were asked questions? It's a complete fraud, and it's a mystery why you worship it. hjow can you defend them?
Questions for DSB having no answers in final report

DSB did not allow journalists to ask questions after the presentation by chairman Joustra. The response of DSB was: “all answers are in the report”. On a question of a journalist spokewomen Sara Vernooij litterly said:

So the DSB spokesman, Sara Vernooij, was asked from what source did the DSB obtain the parameters of the missile and warhead which have become the evidence for the DSB’s determination that a Buk missile was the sole cause of the MH17 crash. Vernooij said the DSB will not answer. “If it’s not in report, it is not to be released,” Vernooij said.

That does not look like transparancy at all. Now that the final report has been published we can ask questions which answers are not in the report.

The dishonest Dutch fraudsters have shut down any questions....yet you are gushing about it.

 

[Jayjay]

This is the best I can do. http://www.scribd.com/doc/284722224/Slideshow-van-Almaz-Antey

Thanks, bookmarked.

What we have now is a detailed report from DSB that documents every step of the deduction.

What you have is a report which cherry picks.holes for these fragments in the cockpit wall. Don't you find that strange?
It suspiciously gives no details of the chemical analysis of the two alleged "bow tie" fragments.
Makes no attempt to eaplain why there are no
It makes no attempt to explain why the puncture holes at the rear of the cabin have a trajectory that points towards the rear.
It doesn't give enough data about the holes in the left engine. And many other things.

Almaz Antey, at the end of their presentation took questions on any subject.

The sham Dutch report did not. DO you knwo what happened when the Dutch were asked questions? It's a complete fraud, and it's a mystery why you worship it. hjow can you defend them?

I worship data and evidence, and the DSB report has those despite whinings from Russian propaganda. Your labeling the entire report as a fraud because they didn't take questions at a press conference is ridiculous, and complaining that there isn't enough detail is silly because the Almaz Antey presentation was a freaking powerpoint with absolutely no explanations for the locations of the exit holes for example. By your own standards of "fraud", the entire Almaz Antey report is inadmissible.

Why do you think Almaz-Antey didn't blow up a missile from the orientation that they think it happened? Because that would have shown that the damage would be utterly incompatible with MH17. It's easier to pick holes in the other guy's theory than try to support your own. I'm not saying that the slight inconsistencies between Almaz-Antey experiment and the Dutch conclusions are entirely irrelevant, but it's not like we know exactly where the detonation happened and what the orientation of the missile was: all we know are some boundary parameters that are consistent with the damage. Picking one position and observng ever so slighty different kind of damage does not discredit the head-on hypothesis, it just means there is enough variation and unknowns that could be compensated with slight variations in the parameters. That's wy the Dutch simulated the impact with many different parameters to determine what was the most likely one. And in fact, I suspect Almaz-Antey did the same by running their simulation multiple times to figure out what orientation would be most likely to not produce the data from DSB report, so as to better discredit it.

Take a step back and look what the Russia has, and what the Dutch have: on one side, we have multiple independent, internally consistent lines of evidece pointing to a single conclusion. On the other side we have a couple of one-shot complaints like "there should have been more exit holes" that are neither conclusive nor internally consistent.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The sham Dutch report pretends to be clueless about where the missile came from, hinting that it may have come from head on, Snizhne.
Almaz Antey completely busted this bullshit by showing that warhead fragments were travelling longitudinally down the length of the aircraft.
This was completely ignored by the bogus Dutch report. But hey, you Americans keep on believing (I mean the Americans in this thread who pretend to have evidence.....which is obviously not all Americans).

If the missile came from head on we would not get warhead fragments grazing the plane the way they did or leaving puncture holes that show they flew from the front towards the rear.
Keep watching Fox News you guys.

And some Rocky And Bullwinkle.
[YOUTUBE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hTzuO24i-YA[/YOUTUBE]

Or perhaps the missile didn't explode exactly beside the airplane and we're seeing fragments that weren't coming perfectly straight in.

Or perhaps Russia is just talking out of it's ass as usual.

- - - Updated - - -

Russia is an accused party - ..

Only if you watch Fox News.....Are you that isolated? A lot of the world thinks America is lying....yet again.

The popularity of an opinion doesn't have anything to do with it's truth.

 

[fromderinside]

Only if you watch Fox News.....Are you that isolated? A lot of the world thinks America is lying....yet again.

The popularity of an opinion doesn't have anything to do with it's truth.

Neither does fair and balanced. As for the arguments presented favoring the
Russian position all the A/C had to do was be oriented about twenty degrees north of the battery to show that pattern. A/C often crab fly given wind conditions at altitude so that isn't a stretch.