Flight MH17 - Searching for the Truth

a reply to: Xcalibur254

Why do you guys keep naming them rebels, they are just Separatist?

Rebels is just being used by some Western Media because it has more of a negative load (so it`s just propaganda).


- We have had BBC supposedly finding launch location of the BUK M1 Separatists between some flats with witnesses

- After that we had the Telegraph finding the supposed launch site South of Snizhne proved by the "launch" picture, and even in December they were trying to make that claim again in The Netherlands with all kinds experts looking at the supposed high resolution image which was now in the possession of a big Dutch news site (RTL)

- German Intelligence Service (BND) claiming it wasn`t the Russians, according to Der Spiegel in October

- Followed by Dutch Reporter (the video) link making again the same the The Security Service of Ukraine claim, yet raising a lot of questions also about it the Separatists were behind it

- The Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) and Poroshenko saying for almost half a year they have satellite images which proof without a doubt the Separatists were behind it (debunked by the head investigators themselves) . But after half a year they are saying it might have been an Air-to-Air missile and Poroshenko writing a letter to the family of the AN-26 pilot about it being have been shot down by AAM a few days prior to MH17(the whole time is has been said it was downed by a BUK)

- And after the Dutch RTL news regurgitated the whole Telegraph BUK launch site story with a the now in possession high res. photo launch photo and new experts, which got debunked by a video of a Grad missile system firing, we now again have a different launch site and all of sudden the Russians are responsible

They just make it all up along the way so it seems to simply fit what they wants us to believe.

a reply to: BornAgainAlien

I don't care what you call them, a SAM hit fits the evidence. An air to air kill doesn't.

a reply to: Zaphod58

According to the Ukrainians themselves and Poroshenko it were Russian Mig-29s who were shooting them down besides the MANPADS.

a reply to: BornAgainAlien

Which means Russia has invaded.which means they get military support.

But wait...didn't you just say they lied about satellite images for months? But they are telling the truth about Russia actively invading them?

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: BornAgainAlien

I don't care what you call them, a SAM hit fits the evidence. An air to air kill doesn't.

What evidence is that exactly ?

I`m still waiting for solid evidence to that claim.

- Witnesses who could have been bought ?

- Some pictures about a transport which doesn`t say anything about launching ?

- Damage to the MH17 wreckage which, according to experts, could have come also from Air-to-Air missiles ?

- Politicians claiming ?

- Western media claiming ?

- Secrete services from two countries claiming ?

- An US resolution ?

I have no idea what solid evidence you talk about.

a reply to: BornAgainAlien

Show me a single IR missile that will detonate above the fuselage. Show me a single AAM that will for that matter. Most SAMs are programmed to to maximize damage.

Show me a single AAM capable of hitting the cockpit and blowing any plane apart instantaneously. This isn't Hollywood.

Show me why ANY trained pilot fires from ahead of a target tgat is at a fixed speed, on a fixed course. Anyone with minimal training would wait and fire from behind, especially with an IR missile.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Not openly, the English version of Poroshenko letter has left it out conveniently looking at the official Ukrainian site.

I don`t know what the reason might be, but there have sure being made claims of that.

a reply to: Zaphod58

I will take the words of the real experts over yours about it being possible, and they have been telling it the whole time.

So presenting yourself as proof isn`t proof when it`s being contradicted by lots of actual experts.

a reply to: BornAgainAlien

So when they say Separatists, which doesn't get them much aid, they're lying. But when they say Russian fighters, which gets them lots of aid, they're being honest.

Got it.

a reply to: BornAgainAlien

Because they don't rule anything out until the final report is issued. That's the point of an investigation.

And when the report comes out saying it was a SAM, then what. That going to be a coverup too?

a reply to: BornAgainAlien

I will take the words of the real experts over yours about it being possible, and they have been telling it the whole time.

Would those same experts be the ones who say a 30 mm cannon from an SU 25 brought down MH 17, or was it brought down by a missile the SU 25 doesn't use the R 27 AAM.

And because you have quoted many so called experts it's hard to keep up.

a reply to: Zaphod58

I wasn`t talking about the investigators themselves, but about experts who are interviewed in the news.

a reply to: BornAgainAlien

And those experts don't have access to the information the investigators do.

Hell I watched three so called experts talk about how low ground speed proves that the AirAsia plane that just crashed stalled. The aircraft did stall, but ground speed is utterly irrelevant to anything.

Expert does not mean infallible.

a reply to: Zaphod58

And those experts don't have access to the information the investigators do.

..and you do ?

You don`t have anymore as I do, unless you`re part of the investigation team.

So you speculate just as I do about different theories and your speculation isn`t much proof.

a reply to: BornAgainAlien

Never said I did, did I. However, I do have more experience than the average person when it comes to antiair weapons and their effects. So it's informed speculation, not just agreeing or disagreeing because of who said what.

An updated Bellingcat article.

SU-25, MH17 and the Problems with Keeping a Story Straight

a reply to: Zaphod58

However, I do have more experience than the average person when it comes to antiair weapons and their effects.

All I know from you that you have worked as an mechanic on an Air-Force base which doesn`t qualify as having more knowledge about these things as to a lot of people.

So care to explain why you actual have more knowledge as to the experts so you are able to determine better as them what has happened without actual solid proof?

a reply to: BornAgainAlien

I also haven't said that, have I. I disagree with them, but so do a lot of other experts that you ignore.

a reply to: Zaphod58

I don`t ignore them when they say it`s possible when asked, so I don`t discard either theory, how about you?

originally posted by: Xcathdra
An updated Bellingcat article.

SU-25, MH17 and the Problems with Keeping a Story Straight

Thanks for the link!