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

[barbos]

It seems to me that the Dutch have the least interest in misrepresenting what happened to their citizens, therefore they have the most credibility. Attacking them as stooges of the US and NATO sounds like desperation.

Elsewhere on the internets, I see others saying the BUK was a Ukrainian BUK. That seems more fertile ground.

Just sayin'

Yeah--it looks like it was a Ukrainian BUK that the "rebels" captured some weeks before the shoot-down.

That's not what John Kerry claimed:

"We have enormous input about this that points fingers," Kerry told CNN's State of the Union. "It is pretty clear that this was a system from Russia, transferred to separatists. We know with confidence that the Ukrainians did not have such a system anywhere near the vicinity at that point of time."

Kerry was wrong on all counts. Russia did not transfer it to rebels and ukrainian army had shitload of buks all over the area.

 

[tupac chopra]

http://en.news-4-u.ru/almaz-antey-a...-distortion-data-in-the-report-on-boeing.html

Almaz Antey is the one misleading you. The caption of the picture doesn't state that the diamond-shaped area is calculated Almaz-Antey. Those would be the other, irregularly shaped areas in the same map.

Almaz-Antey and Russians are just pissed because their simulation was used to validate the similar results from Dutch and Ukrainian teams. If that had not happened, you and other pro-Russian stooges would be shouting at the rooftops how those simulations are biased and can't be trusted.

Jayjay I think the problem is that Almaz Antey identified some areas that the missile could not have been launched from (according to their work), yet the DSB included these areas and put Almaz Anteys name to them.

That seems either deceptive or incompetent on the part of the DSB

 

[Ford]

Yeah--it looks like it was a Ukrainian BUK that the "rebels" captured some weeks before the shoot-down.

That's not what John Kerry claimed.

Regardless of what he claimed, Kerry is Dutch, so we can't trust him.

 

[Jayjay]

Almaz Antey is the one misleading you. The caption of the picture doesn't state that the diamond-shaped area is calculated Almaz-Antey. Those would be the other, irregularly shaped areas in the same map.

Almaz-Antey and Russians are just pissed because their simulation was used to validate the similar results from Dutch and Ukrainian teams. If that had not happened, you and other pro-Russian stooges would be shouting at the rooftops how those simulations are biased and can't be trusted.

I don't need Alamaz-Antey to mislead me, I can read english myself.
Fucking dutch are misrepresenting Almaz-Antey. You are unbelievable.

They are not misrepresenting anything in the report, and you've been unable to show a single sentence that would imply otherwise. All you've shown is an article from poorly-translated Russian where Almaz-Antey misrepresents the Dutch. It's possible that the draft version Almaz-Antey originally received didn't have a clarification in the caption, in which case the complaint might have been valid, but the final version certainly does.

Accusations of "misrepresenting" Almaz-Antey are just part of a barrage of propaganda to discredit the report by any means necessary.

 

[Jayjay]

Almaz Antey is the one misleading you. The caption of the picture doesn't state that the diamond-shaped area is calculated Almaz-Antey. Those would be the other, irregularly shaped areas in the same map.

Can you show where Almaz Antey calculate those areas?
Thanks you

Page 145 describes the data provided by Almaz-Antey. I presume the actual calculations and the models used are not public anywhere, as I'd presume the characteristics of the missile are trade secrets that only Almaz-Antey knows.

 

[Jayjay]

Almaz Antey is the one misleading you. The caption of the picture doesn't state that the diamond-shaped area is calculated Almaz-Antey. Those would be the other, irregularly shaped areas in the same map.

Almaz-Antey and Russians are just pissed because their simulation was used to validate the similar results from Dutch and Ukrainian teams. If that had not happened, you and other pro-Russian stooges would be shouting at the rooftops how those simulations are biased and can't be trusted.

Jayjay I think the problem is that Almaz Antey identified some areas that the missile could not have been launched from (according to their work), yet the DSB included these areas and put Almaz Anteys name to them.

That seems either deceptive or incompetent on the part of the DSB

No, if you read the report, it's very clearly explained that Almaz Antey provided the results of calculatons based on possible detonation location and orientation from other teams. So basically, the Dutch asked AA: "If the missile detonated here, where could it have been launched from"? And Almaz-Antey ran the numbers through their simulation and provided the answer. There is no reason to think that these results are not accurate, even if they are embarrassing to Russia.

Of course, Almaz-Antey and Russia disagree about the point of detonation (because it implicates Russia or the rebels as the perpetrator), but that's a separate issue and that has nothing to do with the flight path simulation. Of course you can complain why the DSB report doesn't include "both sides" of the argument, but that's just like teaching creationism controversy in science class: the detonation point suggested by Russia is not consistent with the damage on the plane, so whatever launch sites one could derive from it is counter-factual. It's like running a simulation based on assumption "what if MH17 was actually flying over Kentucky" and then using that to implicate US military.

 

[barbos]

Jayjay, You behave like typical western propganda hack
report says:

"Calculated by JSC concern Almaz-Antey using NLR/TNO data"

Almaz-Antey have calculated no such thing, period.

 

[tupac chopra]

Of course you can complain why the DSB report doesn't include "both sides" of the argument, but that's just like teaching creationism controversy in science class: the detonation point suggested by Russia is not consistent with the damage on the plane, so whatever launch sites one could derive from it is counter-factual. It's like running a simulation based on assumption "what if MH17 was actually flying over Kentucky" and then using that to implicate US military.

Actually it is the DSB who act like creationists. They cherry picked AA's analysis and tried to (mis)use part of it to back up their own case whilst ignoring AA's other data and overall case.

This is just what creationists do, they quote mine a real scientist to make it look like they agree with their position

 

[barbos]

I have mentioned before that nobody here is qualified to read that report and discuss every tiny point/details in it.
Nobody here have an actual BUK rocket to test.
All we can do is to look at obvious stuff like this obvious case of distortion on the part of dutch.
In theory, both sides have reason to lie here, but as have said before Almaz-Antey have much less as opposed to dutch.
Almaz-Antey is not the guilty party here, they merely made the weapon. And it is clear that Russia did not supply the system to the rebels so Russian government can not be blamed either. It is true that Russia would be glad to put the blame directly on current Ukrainian regime, but they would not fabricate the evidence, that would be too risky. I think what really happened is Almaz-Antey really believe what they are saying, that missile did not come from where dutch and John Kerry claim it came.

 

[tupac chopra]

I have mentioned before that nobody here is qualified to read that report and discuss every tiny point/details in it.
Nobody here have an actual BUK rocket to test.
All we can do is to look at obvious stuff like this obvious case of distortion on the part of dutch.
In theory, both sides have reason to lie here, but as have said before Almaz-Antey have much less as opposed to dutch.
Almaz-Antey is not the guilty party here, they merely made the weapon. And it is clear that Russia did not supply the system to the rebels so Russian government can not be blamed either. It is true that Russia would be glad to put the blame directly on current Ukrainian regime, but they would not fabricate the evidence, that would be too risky. I think what really happened is Almaz-Antey really believe what they are saying, that missile did not come from where dutch and John Kerry claim it came.

There is a cover up going and many people recognize this.
MH17: Lack of Evidence and Political Chess Games

Taking into consideration that 16 Ukrainian planes and helicopters were brought down by the rebels in the weeks up to the downing of Flight MH17 one may ask whether a Ukrainian jet prompted rebels to fire at the military jet, accidentally bringing down the civil airliner. All of the above however, is and will remain painful speculation and the answers cannot be forthcoming unless all evidence from all of the involved parties is made available to the bereft and to media. That is, certified evidence that can be independently tested and evidence than can stand in a court of law.

Why should the bereft or media “believe” that the transcripts from the cockpit voice recorder or communications between the air crew and air traffic controllers are genuine. Won’t the wife of the pilot be in the best position to say whether or not the voice on the cockpit voice recorder is that of her now deceased husband?

Won’t the families of the aircrew not be the best to judge whether the voices of the flight crew, while speaking with air traffic control are that of their deceased family members? Won’t their lawyers not be the best to have independent experts analyze the recordings to see whether voice morphing or other falsifications have been used?

Considering that flight data recorder data can be fabricated, why are the media not provided with certified copies of the comma separated variable file from the data recorder to see whether or not the data have been tempered with or whether or not they are consistent with all of the other alleged evidence that nobody other than a select few who won’t release it to the public have had access to?

 

[barbos]

I don't think ukrainian stubborn refusal to release recordings necessary points toward conspiracy.
If it was a BUK (and everybody agrees now it was) then pilots had no time to say anything.
But the interesting fact which nobody is paying attention to is the the number of planes being shot down prior to this disaster.
Were they shot by BUKs? The answer is clearly not. These were all low flying targets which were brought down by portable "stingers", one helicopter was shot by RPG-7. Rebels had no use for BUKs and Russia would never supply them anyway. So the only option is that captured BUK. Unfortunately ukrainians said it was disabled before rebels had it captured. Of course they could have lied about that.
Truth is, it could have been rebels but not from Snezhnoe, but since Kerry said it was Snezhnoe they stuck with Snezhnoe.

 

[bilby]

There is a cover up going and many people recognize this.
MH17: Lack of Evidence and Political Chess Games

Taking into consideration that 16 Ukrainian planes and helicopters were brought down by the rebels in the weeks up to the downing of Flight MH17 one may ask whether a Ukrainian jet prompted rebels to fire at the military jet, accidentally bringing down the civil airliner. All of the above however, is and will remain painful speculation and the answers cannot be forthcoming unless all evidence from all of the involved parties is made available to the bereft and to media. That is, certified evidence that can be independently tested and evidence than can stand in a court of law.

Why should the bereft or media “believe” that the transcripts from the cockpit voice recorder or communications between the air crew and air traffic controllers are genuine. Won’t the wife of the pilot be in the best position to say whether or not the voice on the cockpit voice recorder is that of her now deceased husband?

Won’t the families of the aircrew not be the best to judge whether the voices of the flight crew, while speaking with air traffic control are that of their deceased family members? Won’t their lawyers not be the best to have independent experts analyze the recordings to see whether voice morphing or other falsifications have been used?

Considering that flight data recorder data can be fabricated, why are the media not provided with certified copies of the comma separated variable file from the data recorder to see whether or not the data have been tempered with or whether or not they are consistent with all of the other alleged evidence that nobody other than a select few who won’t release it to the public have had access to?

Your repeating of this vile crap disgusts me.

You should be deeply ashamed of yourself.

 

[Jayjay]

Jayjay, You behave like typical western propganda hack
report says:

"Calculated by JSC concern Almaz-Antey using NLR/TNO data"

Almaz-Antey have calculated no such thing, period.

Yes, they did. The map that Almaz Antey provided is right there. And you have not shown a single shred of evidence to point otherwise, onlya poorly translated article that referred to a "diamond-shaped" region, which is not what we are talking about.

 

[Jayjay]

Of course you can complain why the DSB report doesn't include "both sides" of the argument, but that's just like teaching creationism controversy in science class: the detonation point suggested by Russia is not consistent with the damage on the plane, so whatever launch sites one could derive from it is counter-factual. It's like running a simulation based on assumption "what if MH17 was actually flying over Kentucky" and then using that to implicate US military.

Actually it is the DSB who act like creationists. They cherry picked AA's analysis and tried to (mis)use part of it to back up their own case whilst ignoring AA's other data and overall case.

This is just what creationists do, they quote mine a real scientist to make it look like they agree with their position

Nonsense. You'll note that they didn't just listen to the Almaz-Antey, they did their own estimate of the flight path independently. And it roughly agrees with the results that they got from Almaz-Antey. This means that there is no question about the flight path, if the detonation position is what the DSB suggests. It's not misleading, it closes one loop in the chain of reasoning.

The report doesn't ignore Almaz-Antey's analysis. Their comments are addressed, and they Dutch did plug in the numbers provided by Almaz Antey in their simulation of the damage on the plane. What use would it be to include a flight path based on a position that is not consistent with the observed damage? You are basically complaining that a science book doesn't include possible habitats of dinosaurs before the flood, and ignore everything we know about dinosaur fossils or the fact that a global deluge is completely at odds with geology.

 

[Jayjay]

I have mentioned before that nobody here is qualified to read that report and discuss every tiny point/details in it.
Nobody here have an actual BUK rocket to test.
All we can do is to look at obvious stuff like this obvious case of distortion on the part of dutch.

Yet, you have failed to do so. You're right that we are not talkign abotu gritty technical details, but stuff like "Is there a picture provided by Almaz Antey on page 146? Yes/No?" And even after I've showed you wrong dozen times, you go on about some alledged "distortions" that you for some mysterious reason can never quite pinpoint.

In theory, both sides have reason to lie here, but as have said before Almaz-Antey have much less as opposed to dutch.

Almaz-Antey has way more reasons to lie. They are under sanctions from EU due to their involvement in providing the missiles that downed the plane, so they have financial incentive to do everythign they can to prove otherwise. Also, they are owned by Russia, who is one of the parties of the conflict in Eastern Ukraine, and has been caught lying and obstructing the investigation multiple times already.

And the Dutch? 170 Dutch citizens were killed in the attack. They represent the victims, and have way more reason to find out the truth than spin it. It's delusional to think that "both sides have reason to lie" in even remotely equal measure.

Almaz-Antey is not the guilty party here, they merely made the weapon. And it is clear that Russia did not supply the system to the rebels so Russian government can not be blamed either. It is true that Russia would be glad to put the blame directly on current Ukrainian regime, but they would not fabricate the evidence, that would be too risky. I think what really happened is Almaz-Antey really believe what they are saying, that missile did not come from where dutch and John Kerry claim it came.

You speak of Almaz-Antey as if it was a person. And of course, in order to lie effectively, you can't completely fabricate everything.

 

[Jayjay]

I don't think ukrainian stubborn refusal to release recordings necessary points toward conspiracy.
If it was a BUK (and everybody agrees now it was) then pilots had no time to say anything.
But the interesting fact which nobody is paying attention to is the the number of planes being shot down prior to this disaster.
Were they shot by BUKs? The answer is clearly not. These were all low flying targets which were brought down by portable "stingers", one helicopter was shot by RPG-7. Rebels had no use for BUKs and Russia would never supply them anyway. So the only option is that captured BUK. Unfortunately ukrainians said it was disabled before rebels had it captured. Of course they could have lied about that.
Truth is, it could have been rebels but not from Snezhnoe, but since Kerry said it was Snezhnoe they stuck with Snezhnoe.

It was most likely a BUK manned by Russian specialists. Apparently it takes 5-year training to operate it. Also, according to both Ukrainian government and Rebels, the BUK's they "captured" were basically scrap metal.

 

[Will Wiley]

It was most likely a BUK manned by Russian specialists. Apparently it takes 5-year training to operate it. Also, according to both Ukrainian government and Rebels, the BUK's they "captured" were basically scrap metal.

That doesn't seem to make sense though.
There seem to be three hypotheses.
1.Shot down by a rogue element of the Ukrainian army (probably under the control of Kolmoisky). This is suggested by Robert Parry via his sources in US intelligence. These guys had buks and they had the training.

2. Shot down accidentally by rebels. These guys did not have the 5 year training you suggest, and there are no dated photos or videos of such a buk.

3. Shot down by trained Russians. But if they were trained then they would not have done it by accident.

So, correct me if I'm wrong but you are suggesting the Russian army deliberately shot a passenger plane down?

 

[Ford]

3. Shot down by trained Russians. But if they were trained then they would not have done it by accident.

Trained to operate the missile system. Not necessarily trained to discern between civilian and military targets.


The people who launched the missile were in fact very competent. They hit their target dead on. This wasn't some farm boy who'd stumbled across the missile system and figured out how to launch one.

They didn't fire the missile by accident. It was fired on purpose, and targeted at the airliner.

 

[barbos]

Jayjay, You behave like typical western propganda hack
report says:

Almaz-Antey have calculated no such thing, period.

Yes, they did. The map that Almaz Antey provided is right there.

No, they did not.

And you have not shown a single shred of evidence to point otherwise,

I have shown enough. You on the other hand, have not addressed the point.

onlya poorly translated article that referred to a "diamond-shaped" region, which is not what we are talking about.

For automatically translated it's pretty good, And there were human translated links too.
"diamond-shaped" should be ignored it's attempt to translate name of the company, "Almaz" is "diamond" in russian.

anyway, it's clear to me that you decided to be dense for some reason. All the evidence was provided to you and neither you nor dutch have explained themselves.

 

[barbos]

I don't think ukrainian stubborn refusal to release recordings necessary points toward conspiracy.
If it was a BUK (and everybody agrees now it was) then pilots had no time to say anything.
But the interesting fact which nobody is paying attention to is the the number of planes being shot down prior to this disaster.
Were they shot by BUKs? The answer is clearly not. These were all low flying targets which were brought down by portable "stingers", one helicopter was shot by RPG-7. Rebels had no use for BUKs and Russia would never supply them anyway. So the only option is that captured BUK. Unfortunately ukrainians said it was disabled before rebels had it captured. Of course they could have lied about that.
Truth is, it could have been rebels but not from Snezhnoe, but since Kerry said it was Snezhnoe they stuck with Snezhnoe.

It was most likely a BUK manned by Russian specialists. Apparently it takes 5-year training to operate

I have better theory, it was dutch specialists.

it. Also, according to both Ukrainian government and Rebels, the BUK's they "captured" were basically scrap metal.

Of course they both say that now.