Angry families of MH17 crash victims seek U.N. investigation

a reply to: BornAgainAlien

And in other news, head of the investigation told US still hasn`t handed over the satellite pictures which they really would like to have.

Well its a rock and a hard place !

If they say they don't have any images then they must admit that the system does not work and if they do then it might show the SU-25 or what ever it was.

Missiles leave a vapour trail that hangs around for about ten minutes but no one could take a picture of these trails near flight MH17 so these PUK missiles must have stealth trails that blow up and pepper the plane with 30mm cannon fire.

I bet our freind will have an excuse for the satalite images turning up like five months late

a reply to: VirusGuard

US has the ability to see a BUK going up for sure as has being told by experts in The Netherlands. The excuse is they won`t release it because it would show off their capabilities, but it`s being told on public television as being the case, so that`s a bunch of crap as an excuse.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: Salander

Because a release of information can contaminate the evidence. It can contaminate a jury pool. Under western standards 2 areas that can result in an argument of an unfair trial resulting in charges being thrown out.

Unlike Russian standards where the verdict is known before the trial even starts western standards use a court of law and not a court of public opinions.

Talking about it or looking at pictures of it can contaminate the evidence? R U kidding? Much of it, most of it, sat in that field for months.

I'm not sure what country you live in, but American juries are notoriously pro-government. They don't even indict cops that are videotaped committing murder.

originally posted by: BornAgainAlien
a reply to: VirusGuard

US has the ability to see a BUK going up for sure as has being told by experts in The Netherlands. The excuse is they won`t release it because it would show off their capabilities, but it`s being told on public television as being the case, so that`s a bunch of crap as an excuse.

No show is the same thing as having no evidence. You should know that. When you accuse you should also put up evidence, You know how it Works.

Russia already knew that the US had a spy satelite over Ukraine. Russia knows that the US can observe a BUK missile so its hardly a Secret. The thing is that the US dont have any evidence. The US have said them selves that their evidence are based on information from the Public media. In other Words the US are playing the publick up against eachother. MH17 has become a conspiracy case where the US dont have to do anything but play along. The US have People like you giving them leverage.

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: Xcathdra

I am curious about how an investigation might be jeopardized by the public having knowledge of what happened?

Because in western style judicial systems a person is considered innocent until proven guilty. Releasing information that can adversely affect a persons rights can result in a loss of ability to prosecute a person.

It becomes prejudicial in that the person / persons charged would not receive a fair trial, regardless if they are Ukrainian, Pro Russian rebels or Russia.

You have to view the investigation thru the eyes of the Dutch, who laws are the ones being used.

originally posted by: BornAgainAlien
a reply to: Salander

No you didn`t, his only interest is not the truth, but still being to blame it on Putin...he doesn`t care about the victims getting to know what has happened but only his anti-Putin agenda...so you actual read it right.

How about you not speak for me, especially since you fail miserably at reading and comprehending posts.

What I am saying is any person should be given the benefit of presumed innocence until proven guilty. The agreement specifically protects that concept by not allowing nations who receive information from broadcasting it to the media.

It has absolutely nothing to do with hiding the investigation or the results of it.

It is up to the Dutch investigators / prosecutors to put a criminal case together and not the governments of other involved nations.

As I have stated many times now I have assisted other agencies in investigations and as such am exposed to their investigative results. Its inappropriate (and in some cases illegal) for me to release my knowledge of the investigation to the media. That responsibility belongs to the investigating agency and the prosecutor responsible for charges.

a reply to: VirusGuard

Not really..

Russia is the one making the claim about US satellites. Just because Russia says something doesn't make it true.

Is there any reason Russia has not released its satellite images of the incident?

but there won't be a release of the report because the guilty party ( putin was not a party ) exercised their release veto so the truth doesn't come out
or has that changed?

(Canada's Harper regime and the U$ and the Ukraine puppet regime voting pro Nazi at the UN recently really tells the tale though)
we all know what Nazis are all about when it comes to false flags

a reply to: Danbones

All right.. one more time.

The investigation can not be vetoed.
The prosecution cannot be vetoed.

Are people really that unfamiliar with western jurisprudence or are they simply and intentionally ignoring it because it does not support the idiot ass conclusion people make by claiming a nation can veto it.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Because the agreement is not public it`s not clear if the Ukraine can veto evidence that it doesn`t want to be made public.

And because there needs to be consensus with all parties about what evidence maybe used in the investigation, the Ukraine has the ability to block evidence which is damaging to the Ukraine according to sources.

The Dutch Minister of Justice & Security keeps avoiding the question if the Ukraine has that ability.

So without knowing exactly what is in the agreement, no one knows if the Ukraine can actually veto evidence which is incriminating to them.

So no, they can`t stop the investigation being made public, but they might be able to scratch everything out of it which can be damaging to them, making it a completely useless outcome.

The agreement should be made public, so we know if the Ukraine has the ability to veto evidence !

Refusing to making the agreement public doesn`t convince anyone there isn`t a cover up going on...and because, even when made public, they still can choose not to make evidence public, there is no need to keep it from being made public unless there`s stuff in it which the public should not see.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Well the Putin fans have already shown they hate freedom of speech by calling anyone against Russia's resolution Nazis. What makes you think they would support a person's right to a fair and inpartial trial?

a reply to: Xcalibur254

While not being a Putin fan, I as a Dutch person still demand to have a fair investigation about what happened to people of my country, wouldn`t you want the same thing about what has happened with 9/11?

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: Danbones

All right.. one more time.

The investigation can not be vetoed.
The prosecution cannot be vetoed.

Are people really that unfamiliar with western jurisprudence or are they simply and intentionally ignoring it because it does not support the idiot ass conclusion people make by claiming a nation can veto it.

It is already vedoed not to og Public With any information as long as the US/UN and EU have sanctions against Russia.
Their chosen Words are that they will not go Public as long as the investigation is ongoing.

You will figure that out when they have the next Public confrence next year. Because they are not going to reveal anything.
They are not going to go public saying that they have vetoed either. And they dont have to as long as their statment is that the investigation is still ongoing. The invetigation parties are not going to go Public and state that they know the cause, but have vetoed not to go Public. They can not do that because of the sanction and the Wests claim that Russia helped the pro-Russian acquier BUK missile systems. THe Public will smell a rat if they veto and go Public.

originally posted by: BornAgainAlien
a reply to: Xcalibur254

While not being a Putin fan, I as a Dutch person still demand to have a fair investigation about what happened to people of my country, wouldn`t you want the same thing about what has happened with 9/11?

Sorry but you are not going to get a fair investigation. Do to the sanctions we have against Russia. The MH 17 is being used politically to put sanctions on Russia. If the truth really came to light at this stage the sanctions would fall appart. Is this really that hard to see?

If the truth came to light. The EU would have to ask ask Russia to deliver gass to europe again do to Public pressure. The EU is not doing that good With these sanctions. You do watch the News?

a reply to: spy66

I know, I`m not an idiot, but I`m sure telling people who I speak about what is going on.

This disgusted piece of crap had about my whole country fooled with this...

At least now some people have already been woken up.

a reply to: Danbones

we all know what Nazis are all about when it comes to false flags

And we all know about Russia when it comes to false flags now don't we?

www.wanttoknow.info...

And as for the Ukraine puppet regime...the candidate that the US backed lost and the people voted who they wanted in, Also it might be of some interest in looking at the Yanukovych regime (you know the Russian puppet regime).

Also care to point out the Nazi's in the Ukranian government, because you seem to want to say they are there... who are they?

a reply to: BornAgainAlien

While not being a Putin fan

Wow, sure doesn't sound like it from your posts.

You sure seem to bash anyone and everyone for having problems with what you have portrayed as the new world savior, but your not a fan of his...really?

a reply to: spy66

Do to the sanctions we have against Russia. The MH 17 is being used politically to put sanctions on Russia.

Except the fact the sanctions were in place before MH 17 was shot down, so are you saying they put the sanctions there only because of MH 17?

You do understand that the reasons for the sanctions was because of their involvement in Crimea and eventually the east and their support for the separatists?

a reply to: BornAgainAlien

I know, I`m not an idiot, but I`m sure telling people who I speak about what is going on.

And do you tell them that it's the truth, or do you tell them that is your opinion, or the way you see things going, because you have shown that your version of things aren't what is really happening.

originally posted by: BornAgainAlien
a reply to: Xcalibur254

While not being a Putin fan, I as a Dutch person still demand to have a fair investigation about what happened to people of my country, wouldn`t you want the same thing about what has happened with 9/11?

What would you consider to be a "fair investigation?" If an international committee concluded that the damage was consistent with that caused by a BUK missile, but, since both Loyalists and Rebels have access to such weapons, and given the fluid nature of the battlefield, it is impossible to determine which side fired it, would you accept that conclusion? (That is the most likely result given what is reliably known about the incident.) Or would nothing short of a condemnation of Kyiv, NATO and/or the United States satisfy you?

As you know, there was an investigation of the 9/11 terror attack, and people who support Islamic jihad, dislike the United States or despise the Bush administration refuse to accept its conclusions. There are others who have less irrational objections, but, ultimately, such a politically charge report will never be universally accepted. You might as well start objecting the the results of the investigation now, because it is likely to incriminate the well meaning rebels.