Crashes Of Convenience - MH-17 Startling report show Jet downed with Bullets!!

originally posted by: Soapusmaximus
a reply to: douglas5

I believe the Russians themselves denied this claim - but they probably would either way!

It most definitely was diverted a fair amount, but from what I can gather the flight path wasn't too unusual - as other MA flights and other airlines were frequently flying over the area despite it being a war zone.

That is what i remember hearing on the net that it was 200 miles off course and it was put there by air traffic control who then replaced the Spanish controller's

a reply to: flammadraco

I appreciate your points and further investigate upon the morn.

I must admit I have not seen the report , but I trust James Corbett's research abilities implicitly.

And if it turns out to be bunk I will write an extremely sternly worded letter to Mr Corbett asking him why he is pushing false information.

But the other 1000 pieces of evidence point to Ukraine/NATO false flag.

It is a slam dunk , excuse the terminology -we are talking about a complete and utter disaster here, respect is important.

They are classifying the report man - give me one good god damn reason for that and I will at least consider any other points you can show me,

now www.globalresearch.ca... 94 gap of template

originally posted by: mangust69
now www.globalresearch.ca... 94 gap of template

Seems that all the sources are Russian on the link so IMO just an extension to RT, seems that the Russians are just as good at propaganda as the west.

originally posted by: flammadraco

originally posted by: mangust69
now www.globalresearch.ca... 94 gap of template

Seems that all the sources are Russian on the link so IMO just an extension to RT, seems that the Russians are just as good at propaganda as the west.

It doesn't necessarily make it a lie, for what it's worth The Huffington Post mentioned it also. And to be fair, it's not the kind of thing that the West would want spead around imo, if it were true.

If there's no more news on MH-17 then something is definitely suspicious.

shoot down civilian aircraft missile and machinegun finish is necessary to have the philosophy ideology and genetics of superior race which allowed any crime against Aboriginal land and never responsible , it is not a conspiracy of several countries are biologically alien species that menegment these countries

a reply to: Zcustosmorum

Also does not make it true. I've no idea what really happened to MH17 as does no one on this site. What I do see is two camps on ATS,

Russian Sympathisers
Russian haters

What everyone seems to have forgot was innocent men, woman and children lost their lives in this tragic incident.

To add, I give as much credence to the source in the OP as I would RT when it comes to anything to do with this event.

EDIT - To add the OP has not provided any evidence to support their OP when stating the OSCE report states the plane was bought down from gun fire, other than some other Alternative New website with an opinion from a DC 10 pilot.

I will eat my hat, if the OP comes up with further evidence to support his claim, but IMO without said evidence, this thread belongs in Skunk Works or at least Hoax Bin.

a reply to: flammadraco

It's only truly propaganda if it is a lie,

I concede that RT is most definitely trying to influence western citizens - but look how they gained our respect,

By reporting facts in a way we never get in the western media sh*tstorm , that was the only way RT was ever going to be taken seriously.

I am not saying they are infallible , but everyone is always bashing RT and I think they are a great counter source of information to the proven bias coverage of outlets like the BBC or CNN.

Why do the Russians keep talking about it, but western leaders have fallen awkwardly silent on the matter?

Bottom line - I wouldn't trust any of these fake leaders as far as I could throw them, and both sides have been responsible for atrocities and false flags -

But there is no evidence whatsoever to support the western version of events , whereas the Russians have given us actual data instead of rumours mand hearsay.

And we can see the ramping up of the conflict, just as NATO intended - is that in Russias interest?

We just need the eyes to see.

And also am neither a Russian hater or sympathiser and the same goes for the West - and when I say that I mean I hate the structure of power and greed on both sides , and I stand for the innocent people.

Although a large proportion of enablers perpetually continue the cycle of War, Death, Extortion and Exploitation - just by being unwilling to find the truth and stop voting for these scumbags.

We need a 10,000,000 man march for change - and that is not out of the question.

Just an assumption as somebody mentioned there are holes from a shrapnel as well. One assumption that could be made is that the MH-17 might have been hit first with an air to air missile from the fighter jet. Missiles do go for the heat source which would be the engine part of the plane, once the plane lose the engine and sustain damage to the wing it will start loosing altitude very fast , this is where the pilot finished the job with a machine gun before the pilots managed to report the incident, even if the did the tapes have been confiscated anyway. Would be logical if we take into account that the plane was to high for the fighter jet to reach, to follow this series of events. Just my opinion.

a reply to: Laxus

Missiles do go for the heat source which would be the engine part of the plane, once the plane lose the engine and sustain damage to the wing it will start loosing altitude very fast , this is where the pilot finished the job with a machine gun before the pilots managed to report the incident, even if the did the tapes have been confiscated anyway

Well, depends on the missile type - the R60 is an infrared homing missile, with a small (3 kg) proximity-fused warhead - likely it would have tracked one of the engines and detonated very close to, or impacted the engine (a Rolls-Royce Trent 800 - a huge engine, 10 feet in diameter) but certainly even this very small 3Kg explosive could cause fatal damage to the engine's function.

The simple loss of the engine doesn't, however, imply the a/c would start loosing altitude quickly - the 777 can fly quite comfortably with a single engine - the 777 is massively over-engined - though not sure how quickly the pilots or autopilot could correct for the asymmetry in thrust once the engine failed.

This small warhead could also cause some "splatter" damage of shrapnel into the fuselage. Here's an example of a small jet being hit by an R-60 and *not* being destroyed:

On 7 August 1988, a BAe-125 owned by the Botswana Government was carrying the President of Botswana, Quett Masire, and his staff to a meeting in Luanda. An Angolan MiG-23 pilot fired two R-60 (AA-8) missiles at the plane. One missile hit the no. 2 engine, causing it to fall off the aircraft. The second missile then hit the falling engine. The crew was able to make a successful emergency landing on a bush strip at Cutio Bie.

Source: en.wikipedia.org...

Bear in mind, the BAe-125 is a 6-passenger a/c with fuselage-mounted engines - a gnat compared to a 777.

I think many of these theories - shot down by a R60 or cannon fire by a SU25 sound nearly-plausible, but are extremely unlikely - the speed and limited altitude capabilities of a SU25 make an intercept of MH17 impossible in practical terms. A MiG 29 or SU-27, not a problem - but the heavily armored SU-25, climbing above its service ceiling in a tail-chase and overtaking a faster-flying 777 is absurd.

And there's no "cannon" or "machine gun" evidence in the pictures I've seen - those are irregularly-shaped shrapnel holes, caused by an explosive device like a SAM missile warhead. And remember, the 777 is travelling 240m/s - the muzzle velocity of the Gsh 30 is about 900m/s - even if the Su-25 could reach the same altitude and match speed and fire from 1 km away, hitting that 777 with a killing burst still wouldn't easy - I don't have the ballistics data for that cannon, but I'd bet the round would drop 30-50+ feet before it could catch up to the 777, and the round be headed "down" - the Russians claim the SU came within 2 miles - hitting it with cannon fire from that range and speed - even if the SU could reach that altitude and position - would be practically impossible.


The fact the a/c broke up at altitude (with large sections of the fuselage impacting well away from the main body) tells me it was a probably a large explosive device, not some puny R60.

The overwhelming likelihood is that MH 17 was brought down by a large radar guided missile, with accompanying large warhead (the 9M38/9m317 missiles associated with the Buk systems have 70 Kg warheads) detonating close enough to the fuselage for the blast wave and shrapnel to cause a massive structural failure. A second possibility is an explosive device on-board.

Hour-long podcasts full of vague conjecture about murky motives and misinterpreted facts woven together to reach some conclusion notwithstanding.

The cockpit voice and data recorders and examination of the bodies should support tell a story - passengers seated in the area where the blast was focused should have shrapnel wounds, and the cockpit and data recorders should show a near-instantaneous catastrophic failure, and evem a sudden end to both would tend to confirm this. Being plinked by an R60 or cannon fire would likely leave a lot of reaction time for the pilots, declare an inflight emergency, etc.

While there's no definitive evidence released yet, there isn't much sensible empirical evidence to lead to any alternative conclusions than what's already supposed. There may be other explanations - but that's the one that makes the most sense, based on the incomplete data and evidence so far.

a reply to: Soapusmaximus

You are wrong , Russia has not made a direct accusation - if you read your own post you will see they state that the jets are equipped with missiles that could reach that range , they did not say it attacked.

And they never do.

If they aren't saying an Ukrainian SU 25 shot it down, then who are they talking about?

You also understand that when they say a Ukrainian SU25 was following MH17 just before it went down is the way they say it attacked without actually saying it.

a reply to: Soapusmaximus

From what I can gather - the report has not been finalized yet but members of the investigation team have made these comments and it has been confirmed to be accurate.

Please see this link

Confirmed to be accurate is not something that globalresearch.ca knows much about.

a reply to: Soapusmaximus

But the other 1000 pieces of evidence point to Ukraine/NATO false flag.

You really think that was a false flag, and exactly what other 1000 pieces of evidence proves that assertion?

It is a slam dunk , excuse the terminology -we are talking about a complete and utter disaster here, respect is important.

Which is probably why Russia has been pulling it's separatist leadership that is Russians, so you are right about that.

a reply to: squittles

Did a bit of research myself on the armament,engineering and physics that apply to that situations and you are right that the situation of SU-25 bringing it down is highly unlikely. This is why it is crucial to have the experts examine the plane fuselage, engines, tower recording and black boxes to put the puzzle together. So far all these are apparently a secret.

a reply to: tsurfer2000h

Of course I understand this - I am not stupid.

But explain to me where the problem lies with the Russians pointing these facts out?
Aren't western leaders stating explicitly that Putin is responsible for supplying the weapons to the seperatists? Making all sorts of specific accusations, providing social media posts as "evidence", while refusing to release the actual satellite data which could prove it either way?

You seem to believe the official version of events, or maybe you just don't know - and in many cases we never find the truth,

But in this case, the Russians have multiple pieces of evidence to support their assertions wheras the west refuses to show us the evidence they claim to hold?

Do you understand how manipulation and deceit works? In secrecy, that's how -

Who is keeping the secrets?

Who is classifying the findings?

a reply to: Laxus

It may not be able to reach the 30,000 feet mark, but it doesn't actually need to - only the projectiles do.

And it was most definitely in range.

How do the powers that be coninue to get away with hugely obvious atrocities , we have the facts and still get stuffed wow