Ukrainian Separatist commander comes right out and admits they had a BUK from Russia

a reply to: DeadSeraph

If the US provided evidence, I would probably evaluate it and if it looked right I would accept it. But they say they have evidence but do not show it to us. Why can't they show it to the American people?

If our government didn't lie to us so often lately, I would believe them right away. It seems that in the last twenty years they have got much worse at their deceptions. I won't discount the seperatists doing this, but I also will not discount the new Ukranian government doing this either. I doubt if the US government had anything to do with shooting down that jet, but they may be covering up what really happened also. The missile launchers are also the type that the New Ukrainian government has. Who shot the missile that brought down that plane is the important truth to find, and if it was intentional or an accidental misidentification is also an issue. Seems like everyone is pointing at everyone else, someone is lying, maybe the international court can figure it out.

But I think there is a lot of real observations out there that are being ignored, observations by real people that witnessed it. I know someone out there knows what happened. Will they be allowed to talk though?

a reply to: DeadSeraph

If they are merely "local self defense forces" and not being armed by the Russians as moscow claims, where did they get the weapons to bring down military aircraft?

Well. a little logic might help you to determine the answer.

The Separatists took over every Military base in the Crimea. Many of the soldiers at these bases switched sides. These bases contained WEAPONS! That is what you have in military bases.

Russia does not have to supply the separatists with weapons because they already have them!

What is so hard to understand.

P

a reply to: pheonix358

Oh. Right. So the same "Local Self Defense Forces" that took over Crimea (despite all the clear evidence it was the Russians, including their subsequent annexation of Crimea despite their promises not to do so), single handedly dominated the Ukrainian military in the region, including taking over airbases full of fighter jets armed with active munitions, and then transported those weapons to the eastern part of Ukraine to support the separatist movement there, but presumably didn't transfer the BUK systems they claim the Ukrainians had in the first place, because logic.



ETA: I also like how you completely skipped over my entirely logical question about the double standard of "social media" as evidence when it comes to Russian agendas.

a reply to: DeadSeraph

And Americas agendas

Why doesn't Russia simply say that Rebels shot down the aircraft intentionally and that those responsible will be placed before a firing squad.

After all, this is a war situation. Nothing wrong with supplying allies (the Rebels) with whatever firepower they need to combat your mutual enemy. The USA would do the same thing.

Why is Putin over-complicating things by denying what happened? As a former head of the KGB, he should be a Non-BS type of guy.
cwm

a reply to: DeadSeraph

ETA: I also like how you completely skipped over my entirely logical question about the double standard of "social media" as evidence when it comes to Russian agendas.

Because it was just so much crap I didn't think it deserved an answer.

Your agenda here is as plain as day. You will not look at ALL of the evidence (what tiny amount we actually have to work with) only those parts you wish to push.

As to who shot this aircraft down, I have no evidence either way.

It could have been an attempt to get Putin's aircraft.

It could have been to get rid of a hundred specialists delving into the mysteries of AIDS.

It could have been the separatists in a boo boo moment.

It could have been the Illegitimate Government in Kiev operating by orders from their US puppet masters.

The only thing I am sure of .... It was not Russia!

P

originally posted by: carewemust
Why doesn't Russia simply say that Rebels shot down the aircraft intentionally and that those responsible will be placed before a firing squad.

After all, this is a war situation. Nothing wrong with supplying allies (the Rebels) with whatever firepower they need to combat your mutual enemy. The USA would do the same thing.

Why is Putin over-complicating things by denying what happened? As a former head of the KGB, he should be a Non-BS type of guy.
cwm

Because it would further expose him as a liar. He has been stating repeatedly for months now that the Russians are not supplying separatists with weapons or any other sort of support, and that all rebel actions within the Ukraine are completely localized (despite the clearly available evidence to the contrary). He has to keep lying, or his entire propaganda fueled charade falls apart.

Tell me... Have you ever known someone in your life that was a liar? How many times did they come clean? Did they ever do so without being caught first?

a reply to: pheonix358

I never said it was Russia. EVER. I think it was the separatists, who were provided with Russian equipment. Whether or not the man who fired the missile was from Russia, or a genuine eastern Ukrainian, I cannot know (and nobody ever will).

You talk about my agenda yet it is clear there is an agenda on this very site. So yes, I have an agenda, and it's to present the other side of the story when it's clear this website has been infiltrated by a large influx of pro-russian trolls. I make no apologies for that when it's obvious that nobody wants to answer any of the questions I keep asking.

a reply to: DeadSeraph

I think it was the separatists, who were provided with Russian equipment.

The separatists gained their weapons from the Crimea Bases they took.

You seem to just don't want to even consider that. You are the one claiming others have agendas and are trolls.

I have no idea who shot down the airliner.

But you seem to know, for sure, your absolutely certain.

As for your claims of tweets, anyone could have sent those and then removed them including the CIA who have their grubby paws all over this Ukrainian situation.

P

originally posted by: DeadSeraph
a reply to: pheonix358

I never said it was Russia. EVER. I think it was the separatists, who were provided with Russian equipment. Whether or not the man who fired the missile was from Russia, or a genuine eastern Ukrainian, I cannot know (and nobody ever will).

You talk about my agenda yet it is clear there is an agenda on this very site. So yes, I have an agenda, and it's to present the other side of the story when it's clear this website has been infiltrated by a large influx of pro-russian trolls. I make no apologies for that when it's obvious that nobody wants to answer any of the questions I keep asking.

Hey, I hate to burst your bubble that only one side has an agenda, but seeing as I made this post on another Ukraine thread, thought it may be worthwhile sharing here:

Ukraine’s “Democratic Coup d’Etat”: Killing Civilians as a Pretext for Regime Change Global Research, February 26, 2014 With the support of Washington, Ukraine’s opposition “transitional government” headed by the parliament’s speaker Oleksandr Turchinov has issued an arrest warrant directed against the democratically elected President Viktor Yanukovych, accusing him of having ordered the “mass murder” of civilians during the bloody riots and clashes with police forces on Maidan Independence Square. This “mass murder” for which he is accused bears the fingerprints of the Right Sector and Neo-Nazi party Svoboda, which is supported and financed through various channels by the US and the EU. The Maidan riots as well as the riots organized in other parts of the country were carefully staged with a timeline and specific political objectives in mind. Civilian casualties were part of this staged agenda, with a view to accusing president Yanukovych of “mass murder”, thereby providing a justification for regime change on humanitarian grounds.

www.globalresearch.ca...

It didn't actually work out too well though, as some Ukranians (namely those in the east), didn't want to be a part of the EU.

You can ignore this part if you like but how far would the west go to get all Russian influence out of the Crimea (including Ukranians if necessary) and how would they do it? Based on the above information, I'm assuming that was the game plan.

Russia had absolutely nothing to gain from this incident, maybe pro-separatists did shoot it down by accident, but I still don't think Russia would have been complicit in that.

Ukraine Rebel Leader Admits Fighters Did Have BUK Missile

DONETSK, Ukraine, July 23 (Reuters) - A powerful Ukrainian rebel leader has confirmed that pro-Russian separatists had an anti-aircraft missile of the type Washington says was used to shoot down Malaysia Airlines flight MH17 and it could have originated in Russia.

In an interview with Reuters, Alexander Khodakovsky, commander of the Vostok Battalion, acknowledged for the first time since the airliner was brought down in eastern Ukraine on Thursday that the rebels did possess the BUK missile system and said it could have been sent back subsequently to remove proof of its presence.

Before the Malaysian plane was shot down, rebels had boasted of obtaining the BUK missiles, which can shoot down airliners at cruising height. But since the disaster the separatists' main group, the self-proclaimed People's Republic of Donetsk, has repeatedly denied ever having possessed such weapons.

Alexander Khodakovsky is a real person, to the poster above who asked if he even exists.

Khodakovsky is a former head of the "Alpha" anti-terrorism unit of the security service in Donetsk, and one of the few major rebel commanders in Donetsk who actually hails from Ukraine rather than Russia.

There has been friction in the past between him and rebel leaders from outside the region, such as Igor Strelkov, the Muscovite who has declared himself commander of all rebel forces in Donetsk province.

The Russian military had previously congratulated the separatist groups in Donetsk and Torez on capturing BUK systems (at least 3 such systems). Source: Break in the case of who shot down MH17 (you'll have to watch the video with Chris Hayes.)






But hold on, after making these admissions to Reuters, Khodakovsky then issued a retraction through a Russian state news agency claiming he was "misquoted" and only floated "versions" of his story to Reuters...




Seems as though the Russian "reporters" can be a convincing bunch...

"Life News" and "Russia Today" have been going overboard with the Kremlin Propaganda, a good summary of their increasingly far-fetched claims are here: From Russia With Lies: See The News With A Kremlin Spin

originally posted by: DeadSeraph
Smoking gun evidence that surely won't be good enough for Moscow's apologists.

You shouldn't be so quick to call something a smoking gun these days...

www.businessinsider.com...

DONETSK Ukraine (Reuters) - A powerful Ukrainian rebel leader has confirmed that pro-Russian separatists had anti-aircraft missiles of the type Washington says were used to shoot down Malaysia Airlines flight MH17.
In an interview with Reuters, Alexander Khodakovsky, commander of the Vostok Battalion, acknowledged for the first time since the airliner was brought down in eastern Ukraine on Thursday that the rebels did possess the BUK missile system.

He also indicated that the BUK may have originated in Russia and could have been sent back to remove proof of its presence.

Incredible. What will the excuses be now from the internets army of pro-putin shills? Is this man merely a shape shifting lizard person, in league with the illuminati? An alien? A CIA agent? Or is what he says true, and now it's the Ukrainians fault (even though the separatists clearly shot the plane down with a Russian supplied weapons system)?

This link has been posted in other threads, but I feel this deserves it's own thread. It will be comical to read the excuses.

ETA:

It would seem the Russian spin masters are already at it:

niqnaq.wordpress.com...

Clearly, this man is a traitor, and nothing more, and he is lying. Of course. Didn't see that coming a mile away.

This thread is a perfect example of why people shouldn't be so lustful to uncover "smoking gun" evidence.. and just wait for things to pan out before making concrete accusations when it comes to such critical matters.

As it turns out this source is not at all a "smoking gun" I will even source MSNBC for this one, of all outlets... Fast forward to the 2min mark..

www.msnbc.com...

it just shows how the interviewer will manipulate the conversation and bend the dialog to fit their agenda. This goes for both sides of the conflict...

I am not saying the rebels didn't do it.. but it isn't morally objective to place a guilty verdict on anyone for killing nearly 300 innocent people without solid proof, regardless of their associations.

a reply to: Blackmarketeer

And still... there is no evidence of ANYTHING

a reply to: Zcustosmorum

You might be surprised to learn that I was against the wests meddling in the Ukraine. I did not support the Kiev uprising and freely admitted on this very site that there were large sums of money and support coming from western nations. I even pointed the finger squarely at the IMF and world bank as being involved, largely as a ploy to enslave the Ukraine to the EU and the globalists.

I claimed all of this on ATS during the uprising in Kiev, and I still feel the same way. So no, I am not some pro-western troll that believes the western agenda is always right, and that anything CNN says is automatically true. I have been in support of Russian stances on a number of issues, probably the biggest of which is Syria.

But I am capable of seeing lies for what they are, and knowing a cover up when I see one. I find it frightening how so many amongst the "conspiracist community" are unable to do so when it is the Russians that are guilty, and not the U.S for a change.

From a psychological standpoint, I think it has become a case similar to the boy who cried wolf. A large number of the "conspiracy community" (those who aren't blatant Russian shills) have become so used to U.S foreign policy blunders, false flags, and corruption, that when it's not present during an international crisis and the other party is actually lying, they refuse to believe it. At the very least, they can point to the maidan as the source, when the real issue here is that the rebels killed 298 innocent international civilians (likely with Russian weapons).

It's absurd to me that anyone could suggest the "self defense forces" received all of their weapons from those ceased in Crimea when the Crimean peninsula is...well... a peninsula and was sealed off at the border after the Russian annexation. None of these facts matter to Russian apologists, however. It's like history is irrelevant because the U.S is (admittedly) a global goon.

a reply to: SUBKONCIOUS

i will add this to your post, but everyone will say it is propaganda, of course. because in such things they think it's better to listen to only one side.

Too fast to jump to conclusions basing on mass media.

Hodakovsky talks about Reuters

a reply to: Blackmarketeer

interesting angle on that... funny how were were both writing that post at the same exact time...

a reply to: DeadSeraph

Fair words and star for it

I still say Russia had nothing to gain from this, doesn't make sense to me other it being in error without Russian complicity.

Additonally, the U.S. want to put military bases everywhere these days (Ukraine included), I shudder to think about their overall game plan

originally posted by: rickymouse
The guy says that he heard that they had it after the plane was shot down. He did not see it. I am sure the US military satellited would have pictures of it leaving the country if it did leave, it is not something that you cannot see. There are spy satellites stationed over that area. I think that maybe this guy was bought off, if he actually even exists. This sort of tactic is used by lots of governments around the world, it usually flops. Nowadays people can communicate better and someone will be telling the truth shortly, if they aren't too scared to say something.

They do and saw it go back and could see one missile missing.

originally posted by: Zcustosmorum
a reply to: DeadSeraph

Fair words and star for it

I still say Russia had nothing to gain from this, doesn't make sense to me other it being in error without Russian complicity.

Additonally, the U.S. want to put military bases everywhere these days (Ukraine included), I shudder to think about their overall game plan

My personal opinion is that it was an accident. I firmly believe it was the separatists that shot that plane down, but I don't think they did it on purpose. I'm not sure how much footage you have seen of the conflict, but they like their booze over there. Seems entirely plausible to me some drunken asshole thought he was going to bag himself a Ukrainian military transport plane and shot down MH17 instead. Thats what all the evidence I've seen seems to indicate, and none of the alternate theories offer a simpler solution.

a reply to: DeadSeraph

Thankyou for setting me straight on that. As an average American, I only follow news when something flares up. I didn't know that Putin was pretending that Russia is not supplying the Rebels.

But I still don't understand why he would be so squeamish, as to lie about his intentions. There's nothing wrong with helping rebels advance your agenda. What Russia's doing is in plain sight to the World and the World isn't doing anything about it, so why bother lying?

And speaking of "plain sight", it's being said that a number of satellites "saw" the missile en-route to the airliner. If satellites spotted and recorded this brief event, why couldn't they spot the Malaysian Air MH-370 as she flew for hours and hours (supposedly) before (supposedly) running out of fuel and crashing?
-cwm