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

[barbos]

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.

You have not shown anything, and nobody asked you to show anything. You were asked to explain, not to show.

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.

Actually they are not really under any extra special sanctions. That's what western media pointed out. The whole country is under sanctions.

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.

Dutch have all the reasons to have a sham investigation because finding out ukrainian army was responsible will be a giant geo-political and financial loss to the West. And this report does not help to dis-spell my suspicions at all.
I really don't care who actually is responsible. I want to know the truth but it's hard to believe this "investigation" when they can't even relay who said what. This "report" and western reporting of this issue in general is hurting West credibility and helps russian propaganda. Russian "propaganda" basically show clips and says "You see what they are saying?"

 

[Will Wiley]

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

Of course they both say that now.

On or around June 26 2014 it was reported that the rebels captured a buk. This was reported to have been disabled.

Then we don't hear too much about buks until July 17, the day the plane was shot down. Then some strange things happen.
A convoy is seen and photographed and videoed passing through rebel controlled areas. This convoy has a couple of tanks, but no buks. There are many photos and videos which confirm this.
What also happens is very strange. Some people on Twitter who have links to Ukrainian Nazi groups tweet that they saw the convoy and there was or might have been a buk in the convoy. These reports pop up on social media, but none of the photos or videos of the convoy show this to be true.
Later that day, just after the plane has come down but before they know about it the Ukrainians are holding a press conference, and they are asked about the reports from that day on social media about the rebels having a buk or buks.. Andrei Lysenko tells the press that yes they do have information about the rebels having buk and they want to destroy them. He also puts his foot in his mouth by saying they have video of a buk in Luhansk already, on the 17th!! (what a blunder )
[YOUTUBE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qe7pIaOBPfw[/YOUTUBE]
This can be seen around the 21 minute mark

Later, on Dutch TV the Ukrainain foreign affairs Minister tells the show that Ukraine had no evidence that the rebels had a buk!
http://mh17.eenvandaag.nl/index.php/mh17/58939/crash_mh17_we_wisten_niet_dat_er_een_buk_raket_was_

 

[Ford]

I have better theory, it was dutch specialists.

Well Dutch specialists have been known to operate in Eastern Ukraine, and as we all know the Dutch are very well versed in Russian missile launcher technology.


They're obviously guilty of shooting down the aircraft. End of story. No need to investigate further. All the fault of the Dutch!

 

[Will Wiley]

Dutch have all the reasons to have a sham investigation because finding out ukrainian army was responsible will be a giant geo-political and financial loss to the West.

NATO went in and orchestrated a regime change in Kiev. Earlier in the year John Brenna, head of the CIA tried to sneak into Ukraine but was spotted and had to admit it.
CIA director admits he visited Kiev,

John Brennan, the head of the CIA, said in an interview he did go to Kiev “a few weeks ago” to talk to Ukrainian “partners and friends.”

Now if it is true that a rogue element of the Ukrainian military shot down the plane, that will look awful for the US and NATO. Awful. How can they deal with their "friends and partners" shooting down a passenger plane?
So the USA has been accusing Russia whilst refusing to release the evidence they have which could solve the whole mystery.

 

[Ford]

NATO went in and orchestrated a regime change in Kiev.

At the behest of the Dutch, of course.

 

[barbos]

NATO went in and orchestrated a regime change in Kiev. Earlier in the year John Brenna, head of the CIA tried to sneak into Ukraine but was spotted and had to admit it.
CIA director admits he visited Kiev,

John Brennan, the head of the CIA, said in an interview he did go to Kiev “a few weeks ago” to talk to Ukrainian “partners and friends.”

Now if it is true that a rogue element of the Ukrainian military shot down the plane, that will look awful for the US and NATO. Awful. How can they deal with their "friends and partners" shooting down a passenger plane?
So the USA has been accusing Russia whilst refusing to release the evidence they have which could solve the whole mystery.

Also, if we assume Russia did it and US has all the evidence to prove it then US can/should simply show it privately and that would shut them up for good. But that clearly did not happen. Russians are acting as if there is no evidence implicating them.

And John Brennan is a raging idiot and a gift to russian propaganda.

 

[Will Wiley]

NATO went in and orchestrated a regime change in Kiev.

At the behest of the Dutch, of course.

This wasn't on Fox News so you are likely unaware. But a former CIA analyst nailed it
Ukraine: One ‘Regime Change’ Too Many?

 

[Ford]

At the behest of the Dutch, of course.

This wasn't on Fox News so you are likely unaware.

So you're saying Fox News is run by the Dutch?

 

[dystopian]

This wasn't on Fox News so you are likely unaware.

So you're saying Fox News is run by the Dutch?

It would be a case of brilliant misdirection! All those Fox News comments and items on how the Netherlands is a modern socialist/anarchist/islamist/liberal sodom on the verge of collapse over the years were all just to convince people that they're not secretly controlled by us in order to manipulate the Americans into doing our bidding.

Now stop asking questions and invade Russia for us.

 

[Jayjay]

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.

Is there any evidence to support this? This was one of the first conspiracy theories floated around before there was a good idea what happened, but haven't heard anything about it since.

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.

Agreed.

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?

No, I question the premise that "they would not have done it by accident". Military accidents happen all the time. All it takes is for the operators to not be particularly sensitive to the fact that there may be civilian planes in the air. They were expecting for a Ukrainian military plane, and when they saw a blip on the radar they thought that might be it.

 

[Will Wiley]

No, I question the premise that "they would not have done it by accident". Military accidents happen all the time. All it takes is for the operators to not be particularly sensitive to the fact that there may be civilian planes in the air. They were expecting for a Ukrainian military plane, and when they saw a blip on the radar they thought that might be it.

They were shooting down plenty of planes with manpads.

Can you produce one, just one, just one photo or video of this "mystery buk" that can be dated or verified. All I'm asking is for ONE that can be verified and dated. Just one

We have photos and videos of the convoy which supposedly had the buk in it that can be dated, but this "mystery buk" isn't in any of them.

 

[barbos]

No, I question the premise that "they would not have done it by accident". Military accidents happen all the time. All it takes is for the operators to not be particularly sensitive to the fact that there may be civilian planes in the air. They were expecting for a Ukrainian military plane, and when they saw a blip on the radar they thought that might be it.

It would not have been a blip, it would have been bunch of blips from multiple civilian planes flying above 10,000 meters

 

[Will Wiley]

No, I question the premise that "they would not have done it by accident". Military accidents happen all the time. All it takes is for the operators to not be particularly sensitive to the fact that there may be civilian planes in the air. They were expecting for a Ukrainian military plane, and when they saw a blip on the radar they thought that might be it.

It would not have been a blip, it would have been bunch of blips from multiple civilian planes flying above 10,000 meters

Those evil Russians. They sent a team of buk specialists in with 5 years training each, at least, and tell them to shoot at planes flying above 10,000 metres even though there are many passenger planes flying at that height.
They apparently smuggled it in without anyone being able to take a verifiable photo or video of it, then smuggled it out before anyone could take a verifiable photo or video too. It was able to pass under a bridge that seems too low, and was magically invisible in a satellite photo taken of the area on the 17th July at a time it should have been seen. It seemed to be travelling at remarkable speeds too, and strangely take unnecessarily long detours, detours that unnecessarily took it right past or through areas controlled by the Ukrainian army

 

[barbos]

There is no need for rogue element in the ukrainian army, just dumb element and I can assure you that there is plenty of dumb elements in the ukrainian army. Ukrainian army shot down Russian passenger plane during training exercises and they dropped Surface-to-Surface rocket on the apartment building too

 

[Jayjay]

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

No, they did not.

Then where did that map come from? Why does it look exactly like the maps that Almaz Antey used in its own presentation? Are you suggesting that the Dutch made an incredibly elaborate forgery of a map, yet didn't bother to fix their own estimate that was on the same map? Do you realize how ridiculous that sounds?

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.

You have claimed that the report says something it clearly doesn't. You are pretending that there is no Almaz Antey map on page 146, or that it doesn't say on some page in plain English that the map was based on detonation position and missile orientation calculated by TNO. Anyone here can pick up the report and see that you are wrong.

This argument seems to go as follows: I provide evidence, you say "no it doesn't", I provide more evidence, you say "no it doesn't" and so on. That's a juvenile debate tactic. Your dumbass point has been addressed a dozen times already but you're just arguing back for arguing's sake (or because, like a child, you've noticed that being facetious gets you the attention of adults).

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.

Alright, point abotu diamond shaped region conceded. But still, all that the article shows that Almaz Antey is at best misrepresenting the Dutch report, and at worst outright lying. We know that the map is in the DSB report, and we know it was provided by Almaz-Antey, we know what data that map is based on, and we know it looks like other maps from Almaz Antey. What more do you need?

 

[barbos]

No, they did not.

Then where did that map come from? Why does it look exactly like the maps that Almaz Antey used in its own presentation? Are you suggesting that the Dutch made an incredibly elaborate forgery of a map, yet didn't bother to fix their own estimate that was on the same map? Do you realize how ridiculous that sounds?

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.

You have claimed that the report says something it clearly doesn't. You are pretending that there is no Almaz Antey map on page 146, or that it doesn't say on some page in plain English that the map was based on detonation position and missile orientation calculated by TNO. Anyone here can pick up the report and see that you are wrong.

This argument seems to go as follows: I provide evidence, you say "no it doesn't", I provide more evidence, you say "no it doesn't" and so on. That's a juvenile debate tactic. Your dumbass point has been addressed a dozen times already but you're just arguing back for arguing's sake (or because, like a child, you've noticed that being facetious gets you the attention of adults).

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.

Alright, point abotu diamond shaped region conceded. But still, all that the article shows that Almaz Antey is at best misrepresenting the Dutch report, and at worst outright lying. We know that the map is in the DSB report, and we know it was provided by Almaz-Antey, we know what data that map is based on, and we know it looks like other maps from Almaz Antey. What more do you need?

You are being ridiculous. Put your Dutch made "I_hate_russia" glasses and think.

 

[Jayjay]

You have not shown anything, and nobody asked you to show anything. You were asked to explain, not to show.

And i have explained, several times, but here it is again (memories are short and nobody reads the whole thread anyway):

The Dutch used simulations to assess possible orientation and position of the missile. They gave these numbers to Almaz-Antey, and asked it to calculate what are the possible launch coordinates within those parameters. At the same time, they made their own estimate, as did the Ukrainians. Almaz-Antey churned the numbers through their fligth path simulation, and submitted the map on 146 as a result. All three areas are roughly in the same region near Snizhne, which confirms that the simulations used by the Dutch and Ukrainian teams are roughly accurate. The report explicitly says all this, and doesn't misrepresent Almaz-Antey's role or what data Almaz-Antey simulation was based on in any way.

Now what part of this do you deny exactly? You haven't really explained your reasoning, apart from "no it's not" denialism.

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.

Actually they are not really under any extra special sanctions. That's what western media pointed out. The whole country is under sanctions.

Wrong. Almaz-Antey is currently in process of appealing to European Court of Justice for the sanctions, and the critical part of that is to prove that the missile used was of older type that is not produced by Almaz-Antey or used in Russia. But don't take my word for it:

https://www.rt.com/news/263953-almaz-antey-buk-mh17/

Russia’s air-defense systems manufacturer Almaz-Antey is to reveal on Tuesday the findings of its own investigation, which it says refutes data that led to the company being placed on the Western sanction lists over the Ukrainian crisis.

On May 22, Almaz-Antey filed an appeal at the European Court of Justice against European Union sanctions imposed on the company.

The restrictions against Almaz-Antey – as well as a number of other large Russian defense firms – were introduced shortly after Malaysia Airlines flight MH17 crashed in eastern Ukraine on July 17 last year, killing all 283 passengers and 15 crew members.

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.

Dutch have all the reasons to have a sham investigation because finding out ukrainian army was responsible will be a giant geo-political and financial loss to the West. And this report does not help to dis-spell my suspicions at all.
I really don't care who actually is responsible. I want to know the truth but it's hard to believe this "investigation" when they can't even relay who said what. This "report" and western reporting of this issue in general is hurting West credibility and helps russian propaganda. Russian "propaganda" basically show clips and says "You see what they are saying?"

Were did the investigation not relay who said what? They correctly relayed the information provided by Almaz Antey at least. The published documentation also includes complete list of all the points raised by Russian Federation, and rationale whenever those suggestions were not adopted. Go look it up and find a single point that was not adequately addressed. You are basing your opinion solely on ignorance of the content of the report, and blindly believing what Russia or its military-industrial complex is feeding you.

 

[Jayjay]

Of course they both say that now.

On or around June 26 2014 it was reported that the rebels captured a buk. This was reported to have been disabled.

Then we don't hear too much about buks until July 17, the day the plane was shot down. Then some strange things happen.
A convoy is seen and photographed and videoed passing through rebel controlled areas. This convoy has a couple of tanks, but no buks. There are many photos and videos which confirm this.
What also happens is very strange. Some people on Twitter who have links to Ukrainian Nazi groups tweet that they saw the convoy and there was or might have been a buk in the convoy. These reports pop up on social media, but none of the photos or videos of the convoy show this to be true.
Later that day, just after the plane has come down but before they know about it the Ukrainians are holding a press conference, and they are asked about the reports from that day on social media about the rebels having a buk or buks.. Andrei Lysenko tells the press that yes they do have information about the rebels having buk and they want to destroy them. He also puts his foot in his mouth by saying they have video of a buk in Luhansk already, on the 17th!! (what a blunder )
[YOUTUBE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qe7pIaOBPfw[/YOUTUBE]
This can be seen around the 21 minute mark

Later, on Dutch TV the Ukrainain foreign affairs Minister tells the show that Ukraine had no evidence that the rebels had a buk!
http://mh17.eenvandaag.nl/index.php/mh17/58939/crash_mh17_we_wisten_niet_dat_er_een_buk_raket_was_

Didn't we have this conversation three months ago? It's like I'm living in a freaking time loop.

The video in Luhansk that Lysenko is referring to may or may not be the same one that was published. And actually, that video alone could be suspect and filmed on some other day, but it doesn't explain the multiple other BUK sightings. Also Lysenko may have been mistaken about having video at all, or Ukraine may be hiding evidence of having known that there were BUKs in the region because then Ukraine would be partially guilty of what happened because it didn't close the airspace from civilian traffic. But that in no way disproves that it was Russia who actually shot the plane down.

As for "Ukrainian Nazis", everyone in Ukraine is a nazi if you listen to Russian propaganda.

 

[Jayjay]

NATO went in and orchestrated a regime change in Kiev. Earlier in the year John Brenna, head of the CIA tried to sneak into Ukraine but was spotted and had to admit it.
CIA director admits he visited Kiev,

John Brennan, the head of the CIA, said in an interview he did go to Kiev “a few weeks ago” to talk to Ukrainian “partners and friends.”

Now if it is true that a rogue element of the Ukrainian military shot down the plane, that will look awful for the US and NATO. Awful. How can they deal with their "friends and partners" shooting down a passenger plane?

Brennan visited Kiev in mid-April. Are you suggesting they planned to shoot down MH17 three months in advance, before the war had even begun? As for orchestrating a regime change, that happened in February, before Brennan's visit. Are you suggesting that CIA has a time machine, and they plotted a regime change in April, then hit 88 miles per hour on a DeLorean to depose of Yanukovich? That must be the second or third craziest Ukraine vs Russia theory I've heard so far!

This is typical of conspiracy theorist thinking: you take some random event or a visit and point to it saying "aha! CIA is afoot!" regardless of common sense or in which order events actually happened.

So the USA has been accusing Russia whilst refusing to release the evidence they have which could solve the whole mystery.

The satellite evidence is probably not as conclusive as Kerry made it sound, or it doesn't exist. However it's irrelevant because we have a massive body of other evidence that all point to the same direction.

 

[barbos]

Jayjay, stop repeating the same nonsense over and over.