MH17 Update: Missile That Took Down Airline ‘Undeniably’ Provided By Russian – (Unofficial)

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: Rosinitiate

The fallacy in your argument is they dont get refuted.

Refuting my post would require a person to actually link to information that contradicts what was posted. Instead I get called names and accused of being something im not.

Simply coming into a thread you dont like and launching personal attacks is not refuting the post.

I pointed out the unofficial nature and explained in the OP of what I was wanting out of this thread. Its apparent people have either failed to read / understand what im looking for or just wanted to derail something they cant refute.

Well that's the wonders of the internet huh? People get to pick and chose what source they feel is creditable. You have been on here long enough to where I have seen countless times where sources were presented, you chose not to accept it because you find "that" source not creditable, all the while posting "unofficial" story lines.

I say hey, to each there own.

Just worth noting, you can't start a new thread and think all the counter arguments from previous threads don't count. ......no do-overs.

a reply to: Xcathdra
I understand what you are saying.

However, posting evidence or sources to support your hate preaching - using that source to promote hate - amounts to the same thing.

In addition, using a source that is so questionable (a source that uses social media and blog comments to build its case of evidence) underscores an apparent need to make the story serve your narrative.

This means that given the obvious failings of the news source item any intelligent person would deduce its lack of credibility. This totally underlines the fact you have used such a dubious source to serve your own interest (i.e. the preaching of hate toward Russia and President Putin).

So no, you have not posted information to support your position. You have posted a collation of a second-hand collection of blog postings and social media comments/pics which destroys your own credibility and demonstrates your hateful agenda.

a reply to: tsurfer2000h

You don't understand constructive sarcasm mate?

To put it into terms easy to understand, the OP was listing yet more tiresome anti-Russian propaganda as per usual.

He wrote a thread, in his own admission, based on a totally unreliable, unofficial and completely unverified so-called report that you, me, he or just about any kid in his bedroom could have produced on the fly and released as propaganda.

I did the same thing, on the fly, in the space of a couple of minutes specifically to illustrate how utterly useless, pointless (in any meaningful, non-propaganda way) and untrustworthy this so-called report is...yet, you don't see the connection between the OP's and my own 'unofficial report'?

I propose this thread is thrown into the hoax bin where it belongs with the rest of the trash.

a reply to: Blister

Once again you need to read the OP and go from there. Just because you dont think the information is valid does not make it so and vice versa.

Sometime back we had a debate about Crimea and who the non insignia soldiers were. The pro Russians swore up and down they were not Russian soldiers. A short time later Putin stated they were.

The same holds true for MH17 and its downing.

Bitching about the source is not refuting it. Making baseless accusations against me is not refuting the information. We are now on page 3 of this thread with page 1 having the most posts about the op. You guys have bitched and accused me of this and that with for the remaining without addressing what this thread is about.

If you dont like me, my position or my threads I say I dont care. This is not a popularity contest. The theme of this site is deny ignorance, not embrace it. Nor is it to demand I be silenced and my threads moved to the hoax bin based solely on your position.

Why is it impossible to get you guys to engage in debate and discussion as opposed to derailing threads?

Please come back to the topic or move along. You made your position clear.

a reply to: Xcathdra
Read my posts - I explain why your OP is so #.

Don't just ignore our complaints. Explain why we are wrong. Your source and where their information came from is so untrustworthy that I am staggered you are even trying to use the source.

I suppose you will use anything with the right headline, just to promote your hate.

Please don't post any more anti-Russia anti-Putin threads.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Once again you need to read the OP and go from there. Just because you dont think the information is valid does not make it so and vice versa.

Strange then, that this wasn't your attitude while you were arguing the toss along with your in-thread supporters, about the '286 Women (allegedly) found raped and murdered at the hands of Ukrainian Irregular special Army group Dnepr-1' thread..isn't it?

You didn't think the information was valid, but i don't remember you or anyone else in that thread saying that 'Just because you don't think the information is valid does not make it so and vice versa.'...not once, how strange.

Or does the above quote only apply to your own views, and nobody else's?

originally posted by: Blister
Read my posts - I explain why your OP is so #.

No you explained why you dont like me while ignoring the op.

originally posted by: Blister
Don't just ignore our complaints. Explain why we are wrong. Your source and where their information came from is so untrustworthy that I am staggered you are even trying to use the source.

yet you offer nothing o refute what was provided. I think the op makes some valid observations and conclusions based on their investigation. You are the one who does not like it yet you dont refute it. You just bitch about it and want it moved.

originally posted by: Blister
I suppose you will use anything with the right headline, just to promote your hate.

Once again you launch a personal attack while ignoring the op.

originally posted by: Blister
Please don't post any more anti-Russia anti-Putin threads.

I think I will post what I want and if it happens to be anti Putin you will just have to deal with it. I do look forward to you imposing your same standards on the pro russian arguments though. I noticed you ignored that when I brought it up in response to one of your earlier posts.

a reply to: Blister

Agreed.

Look, we all have our own views, and i support a healthy HONEST debate among those with alternative or differing points of view...but honesty in many of the threads posted, particularly the politically motivated threads is sorely lacking of late i feel.

Yes, we want to stamp our bias and views on our own posts, but there has to be a level standard of integrity accompanying such viewpoints or else ATS will become just a soap box for political posturing and propagandising and degenerate into the chaos of a slanging match of increasingly empty opposing political ranting and manipulation...perhaps it already has become that.

Personally, in my view, Xcathdra regularly crosses the line between reporting truth in an honest way to get information out there to the membership, and bare-faced cherry picking information snippets that could conceivably, however tenuously support his personal crusade of bias and negative points of view against both Russia and it's leadership.

That isn't honestly reporting anything in my opinion, it is trying to persuade the reader to join the OP in his negative crusade by hook or by crook.

Before I spend my precious time,which is limited,on reading this report,tell me first-is it absolutely reliable? Is this undeniable proof that Mr.Putin is responsible for bringing down MH17? Because,and I am not attacking you now,I just wish to be honest,when I see an OP by Xcathdra,first thing that goes through my mind is:"Uugh more fanatical hatred of Mr.Putin,more anti-Russian propaganda." This is not name-calling,or evading the issue.I cannot debate which I have'nt read-and to be honest,I do not know how reliable this long report is.I am very reluctant to assume this bellingcat journalist person with his crowdsourcing report is on the level,Have they got irrefutable proof of the guilt of Mr.Putin,that he basically made this happen,that he saw to it himself? That the Russian government made this happen,gave the orders for a civilian plane to be shot down? Just because the device that brought down the plane was manufactured in Russia does not corellate Russian responsibility for the tragedy.Or that Mr.Putin is responsible.Before I spend time reading a long report,can you guarantee me that this report is worth my time,in the 1st place? And I'm not afraid of being name-called-I love Russia and I like Mr.Putin-so you're welcome to call me a Putinista.It's not something I'm ashamed of.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Well lets review -

I specificall stated -
OTICE - This is not an official report. It examines the evidence to date and goes from there. I added the not official to the title of this article so its more accurate in terms of what its discussing.

I then stated -
The report is broken down into 3 sections. Section 1 deals solely with the sources used to put the report together.

An interesting read..


Followed by -
This is just one possible version of what could have occurred. If you wish to participate by discussing / debating the report and the info it contains please join in. If all you want to do is bitch and launch personal attacks on people please don't bother posting.

The report is 35 pages long and includes links to the sources they used.


Please point out where I stated the report is fact and that the info it contains is fact. I stated I found their investigation compelling.

This is what happens when you guys launch personal attacks while completely ignoring the op article, its sources and the fact I stated what I stated. I get the impression some of you just responded to me without even reading the article or its contents.

You guys have done nothing but attack me simply because I dont share your love of Putin. You ignored the information. You ignored my op. You ignored the request I made about what I was wanting.

So yes - you guys are launching personal attacks because I dont share your view. You guys have spent more time bitching about me and making demands than the thread topic.

Ive stated I dont like Putin... Just as you guys dont care for the other side of the fence. I find it hypocritical and sad you guys are demanding I be silenced when it comes to something you dont like. You guys have the opportunity to respond to the op. However what I am posting and the manner its being posted is not propaganda. i have not edited titles of article nor have I chopped up paragraphs, leaving out information to change the intent of the paragraph. Those antics have come from pro russians on this site.

along the way I have challenged people to disprove information posted. I have posted information and specifically requested for people on the opposite of the fence to post their info if they have something different.


After all this you guys still are bitching.

Respond to the op and remain on topic or leave - you made your positions clear. Its as simple as that. You guys are doing nothing now but derailing the thread.

**ATTENTION**

Discuss the TOPIC, not each other.

Further violations will result in posting bans.

Do not reply to this post.

~Tenth
ATS Super Mod

Well yes if you ignore that a German expert said after looking at MH17 that it seems to have bullet holes all over it then yes it must had been a missile since the Ukraine army had some near to where the flight got shot down.

It does not take a year to decide if it was a missile or 30mm cannon fire so why are they delaying

Undeniably’ Provided By Russian – (Unofficial)

Undeniably and Unofficial are not two words that sit well together and I am as you know still wafting to see the "Unofficial" invasion by Russia that the BBC keeps banging on about and yes I think Russia should invade the Ukraine to bring back law & order before more innocent people are burnt alive by the Nazi's from Kiev

a reply to: VirusGuard

Seems to have is not definitive.

secondly I am going to assume you have never worked a complicated criminal investigation dealing with the deaths of 300 people of varying nationalities.

I dont know where you are from but in most western countries if a person is charged and those charges are dismissed based on lack of evidence / technical issues usually the person cannot be retried for those crimes. Secondly the crime scene is in the middle of a war zone so its not the most ideal location.

You have the rebels who broke up chunks of the plane and removed them from the scene.

Its not an open and shut case. I would rather the investigation takes it time if it can secure convictions than half ass it because people demand it allowing those responsible to walk.

a reply to: Xcathdra
You keep trying to hide behind the law but seem to forget that nothing the SS did in 1930s Germany was against the law and according to American law every child shot and killed in Gaza by Israel was a human shield.

Not sure I like your laws and the USA does not have a monopoly on what is the law and what is not even though it acts like it does when invading people on the other side of the world.

Truth is a hard thing to resist you know, it nearly always wins in the end

secondly I am going to assume you have never worked a complicated criminal investigation dealing with the deaths of 300 people of varying nationalities.

Nothing complicated about looking at chunks of metal and deciding if the plane has bullet holes all over it or not or knowing who had missiles in the area when the plane got shoot down, one death or a thousand does not change hard physical facts.

a reply to: VirusGuard

Which is why I stated in "most" western countries - not all.

Secondly Im not hiding behind anything, including the law. I explained briefly the intricacies involved in a situation like this. Its not really my concern on what you think about them. I am telling you they are the ones being used so if you are going to just dismiss them out of hand then you are going to be lost as this mess progresses.

This thread is not about the ME so please leave the ME comments at the door please.

Secondly the law is required in this case since it determines who does what. Since the bulk of the deaths were dutch, the dutch took the lead on the investigation. US law is not being used with the possible exception of an airplane default (the manufacturer is US).

This is what I am talking about, your comment on US law and monopoly, when you guys assume something without fully understanding whats involved.

As for US foreign policy again leave it at the door. This thread is about the MH17 and the unofficial investigation.


Your viewpoint on the scene / investigation not being complicated is problematic and here is why -

* - You have umpteen nations involved.
* - You have the country where the plane crashed involved.
* - You have the country where the plane originated from involved.
* - You have the destination country involved.
* - You have the nation where the aircraft was made involved.
* - You have the nation where the carrier is based involved.

You have international law and treaty agreements not only involved but inter-meshed with the individual national laws.

That does not include the autopsies, determination of what occurred that caused the event, determination of how it occurred, determination of what killed the individuals on board (explosive decompression / missile fragments / for argument sake bullets / blunt force trauma / death on impact since one person possibly had an oxygen mask on / etc), determination of who did it, determination if a coverup was executed, determination on who gave the order, who carried it out, tampering with the scene and why, who tampered with it.

Above all I dont think they are going to be able to put the aircraft back together for a reconstruction to assist in the investigation. Thats critical since it can assist in answering a lot of the questions above.

The above is the basics and does not include forensic testing etc.

So yes, its very complicated.