BBC Says Russia has invaded the Ukraine (10th time)

a reply to: mangust69
I watched the vid but did not understand what was going on !

Maybe you would like to inform us please.

That Berlin wall needs to go back up but this time you need to point the barbed wire the other way and also know that a lot of people in Europe are with you but we have American military bases all over the place and what our politicians are saying has nothing to do with what the man on street is saying and many of us want them to go home and to shut up.

a reply to: VirusGuard

That's easy just watch any old discovery channel from the second world war !

Please recommend a specific one. I am familiar with the research done into the most effective way to armor aircraft against machine gun fire, but I have never heard of research being done to differentiate between different types of shrapnel. Enlighten me.

They knew what got shot down by AA or Air to Air combat or a missile within days all them years ago and residue from chemical based explosives are as easy to test in hour, not years as is measuring the calibre of cannon fire that leaves a row of holes in the metal skin of the planes like MH17.

The is the second time you have made such a claim. I did not ask you to repeat the claim, but prove it. Otherwise, any rational lperson would conclude that you are making this nonsense up to defend the fascist rebels who vandalized the crash site to make a systematic investigation impossible.

if my TV does not switch on because someone throws a brick through it then I don't need an electronics engineer from LG taking six weeks to tell me why my TV does not work but might except this if the TV stopped working due to an internal component going wrong. Flight MH17 was not brought down by an internal fault !

But you need to find the brick. If there is no brick, people might think you kicked it in with your foot. There are pictures of BUK missiles in separatist territories, but it has been proven that the aircraft the Russians claim was in the area did not have the capability of shooting it down.

Incidentally, nice job pulling the thread off target: first, space BS, now MH17 BS. Next,of course, will be the fire FSB operatives set in Odessa.

Edit to add: Let me drag you back on topic. The title of this thread is a deliberate lie. The BBC did not say "Russia has invaded the Ukraine (10th time). What it said, and I qute exactly, is:

A column of 32 tanks and 30 trucks has crossed into eastern Ukraine from Russia, the Ukrainian government says.

The trucks were carrying ammunition and fighters, said a military spokesman, but the BBC cannot confirm his report.

Your original source. [Emphasis mine. --DJW001]

The BBC is not claiming that Russia has invaded Ukraine, it is accurately reporting what a spokesman of the legal government in Kyiv has said. They acknowledge they cannot confirm the claim, which makes the report objective journalism. Your distorting what the BBC actually said is blatant, and worst of all sloppy, propaganda, as it is easily disproved.

a reply to: DJW001

Oh, be quiet already… a jet did this, with cannon fire, on purpose.

a reply to: intrptr

What exactly makes you think the damage depicted in those images is from Canon fire? That's a pretty large hole... Looks like shrapnel damage to me...

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: DJW001

Oh, be quiet already… a jet did this, with cannon fire, on purpose.

What, exactly, are we looking at here and where does it come from?

originally posted by: VirusGuard
a reply to: Xcathdra
I see so these satellites and under cover reporters cannot take any pictures because

"Russia blocks monitoring of more Ukraine border"

Looks like those Russians stole that invisibility cape the wizard of Oz was using.

"Actually I would wager they are getting their supplies from Russia."

Well I hope Russia has big pockets to level the field after the USA spend $5bn on the Kiev side.

" Putin stated as much when he stated the non insignia persons in Crimea were Russian soldiers. "

OK I will play along withy this so answer me how many people got killed before the overwhelming vote of the people in Crimea to side with Russia ????????? Only one according to sources and how many people has the Nazi thugs from Kiev murdered.

well i see your not including the tatars because alot more than one went missing of found dead.

www.npr.org...

Also might want to look at the UN report on how those nice Russians in crimea treated the locals. See the same people that caused trouble in eastern Ukraine started in crimea you know the Russian neo nazis putin sent. Funny you want to call Kiev Nazis yet the people in charge of this Russian caused rebellion are indeed Nazis.

unpo.org...

originally posted by: DeadSeraph
a reply to: intrptr

What exactly makes you think the damage depicted in those images is from Canon fire? That's a pretty large hole... Looks like shrapnel damage to me…

The staccato rip of holes along the wing pointing directly at the cockpit from slightly abeam and behind a big slow airliner, flying straight and level. They are holes alright, right below the window where the pilot sat. The "bigger hole" is cut out with snips in a sloppy effort to hide the smaller frag patterns from explosive tipped, armor piercing, 30 mm cannon shells.

Pretty hard for a missile to do that from the ground.

a reply to: intrptr

I don't think you understand how sam missiles work. Just because a missile is shot from the ground does not mean it will impact it's target from below. It all depends on what direction the target is flying, where the missile was fired from in relation to the target and it's direction, how long the missile had to travel to impact it's target, etc. Many anti-air missiles work by exploding in proximity to their targets, not by impacting them directly. The warheads explode and propel shrapnel at the target. If these images are indeed from the flight in question, there is no reason the trajectory of the damage depicted in that image couldn't be cause by shrapnel from a missile.

a reply to: DeadSeraph

A closer look at the wing…

Image

And an article with all the evidence one needs to see the truth and uncover the cover up.

Link

a reply to: intrptr

The "bigger hole" is cut out with snips in a sloppy effort to hide the smaller frag patterns from explosive tipped, armor piercing, 30 mm cannon shells.

Why would the separatist, who were first on the scene, make a sloppy effort to hide the smaller frag patterns from explosive tipped, armor piercing, 30 mm cannon shells, if those "shells" would exonerate them? Why tamper with the scene at all if they were innocent?

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: DeadSeraph

A closer look at the wing…

Image

And an article with all the evidence one needs to see the truth and uncover the cover up.

Link

Debunked here.

Let's get back to the false accusations against the BBC, shall we?

a reply to: DeadSeraph

The warheads explode and propel shrapnel at the target. If these images are indeed from the flight in question, there is no reason the trajectory of the damage depicted in that image couldn't be cause by shrapnel from a missile.

If the warhead hit the wing it would have blown up there, not on the cockpit window. The wing was like butter to the shells, the nose of the aircrafts is more reinforced to resist bird strikes. Shells penetrated the outer skin of the cockpit and detonated internally causing in and out holes on side of the cockpit.

Missiles don't "target" cockpits they go for either heat on engines or center mass. From behind, they impact the rear portion of the plane, not the front-- just below the pilots window. Tactically, the least amount of cannon fire (deliberately aimed) needed to take down the plane would be aimed at the pilot, no?

originally posted by: DJW001

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: DeadSeraph

A closer look at the wing…

Image

And an article with all the evidence one needs to see the truth and uncover the cover up.

Link

Debunked here.

Let's get back to the false accusations against the BBC, shall we?

You're the one going on about MH117, not me. Linking a thread and claiming "debunked" is not a debunk, either.

Nice try, though. Yah, get back on topic.

a reply to: DJW001

Incidentally, nice job pulling the thread off target: first, space BS, now MH17 BS. Next,of course, will be the fire FSB operatives set in Odessa.

Can you read because if so you need to go back and see where I told you that I am happy to go off topic with you to correct your mistakes and in regards to the brick and TV who said that I didn't have the brick, they are very common

I am familiar with the research done into the most effective way to armor aircraft against machine gun fire,

Good for you but flight MH17 was not a wart-hog and was a civilian plane.

fascist rebels who vandalized the crash site to make a systematic investigation impossible.

I did say boy this was going to be hard.

Would that be the "fascist rebels" who handed the red flight recorders over or the "fascist rebels" that removed the bodies to store them in cold storage on a train to returned to relatives before the rats and crows eat the dead bodies.

I could go along with you using the term "Communist rebels" to describe a people fighting to defend their homes in the east of the Ukraine but you seem to be suffering from confusion because Russians are communists and Nazi's have a funny salute that is banned in Germany.

Let me help you remove this confusion by showing you what Nazi's look like.


Yes these are the Nazis sent by Kiev burring people alive in the east of the Ukraine and are not the rebels as you seem to think, its the rebels that are being burnt alive, look you can see evil in the little girls face even when she's dead.

Calling them Nazi's is an insult to Nazi's and these look more like you regular KKK members with burning torches walking the streets in Kiev



Look you can even see them doing that funny salute in Kiev not that CNN/BBC would ever show these pictures

but it has been proven that the aircraft the Russians claim was in the area did not have the capability of shooting it down.

Nope Russian made jet fighters were never built to shoot down a plane and were designed to drop flower bombs on CND protestors and the dam busters never took off because the payloads were too heavy to be carried by the airframe so lets see what a German "air technology expert Peter Haisenko" has to say.

Surface to air missile attack ruled out

But spin or not, these analyses make sense. The US State Dept has now shifted its position from ‘Russian atrocity’ to ‘tragic accident’. The above opinions suggest that neither are true: they suggest strongly that the Ukrainian air force took out MH17.

Sorry looking at the bullet holes I don't know if the 30mm cannon was from a SU-25 or not and yes I know the debate about the service celling but bullet holes are bullet holes and it does not take a year of investigations to know that much.

a reply to: intrptr

Did you read the thread? I did. Zaphod put this whole thing to bed.

a reply to: DeadSeraph

Zaphod put this whole thing to bed.

I disagree with him a lot, so what?

a reply to: VirusGuard

Let me help you remove this confusion by showing you what Nazi's look like.

And let me show you what one looks like from Russia...



And you do know who that is correct?

Pavel Gubarev.

a reply to: intrptr

I disagree with him a lot, so what?

And yet you can't prove him wrong. If you can that would be something of worth, not that you just disagree with him.

originally posted by: DJW001
Why would the separatist, who were first on the scene, make a sloppy effort to hide the smaller frag patterns from explosive tipped, armor piercing, 30 mm cannon shells

Who said they did and if they had something to hide then they would not had let the press in or handed over the red boxes.

You must remember the people in the area have guns with a few RPGs and are better at fighting in towns and not out in the open against tanks and fighters send by Kiev so any hold on the land is dangerous for them out in the open.

if those "shells" would exonerate them? Why tamper with the scene at all if they were innocent?

The US state department would say that someone walking across the grass to take a picture was tampering with the evidence if it suited them which it does.

I agree with the other poster that points out that a missile could hit a plane from any direction but unless the plane could detect that it was being attacked and was taking evasive action then I think that most planes would be hit from below and many of the holes next to the main impact area of the cabin in the above images were round and indicated 30mm cannon fire.

a reply to: tsurfer2000h



I don't care what anyone else says… I know when I see bullets stitching a wing. Don't you?

Image