How We Know Russia Shot Down MH17

a reply to: BornAgainAlien

The CIA led Ukrainians have to present a report sometime, but the Russians have the real evidence, and instead of the fabricated crap which we have seen up until now and which has been presented by Bellingcat and the MSM, they are going to present it after that.

Ah yes the Russian evidence...



Too good to be true...or just too bad to actually call it evidence, and I am going with bad.

originally posted by: notmyrealname
It is safe to say that the general public is not likely to hear about this matter in a factual manner for quite some time. What we can be sure of is that the US, EU and Russia all have the exact data of what has happened and will not disclose it.

There is an international investigation currently underway, and it's expected that they will release their findings in early 2016.

It's taking a long time, because they want to get it right the first time. To do this they are investigating EVERY possible alternative. They are scouring millions of pieces of information, including theories presented by people on forums like this one, to discount them if nothing else.

Unless this is done, the responsible party can simply claim an alternative conclusion wasn't checked. This way they don't have that opportunity.

As there are several different countries involved in this, and countless individuals from these countries, it's going to be almost impossible for the guilty party to be able to deny their responsibility once consensus has been reached by all those investigating.

I fully expect the result to be reported, and it will be international news when that happens.

From what I read just a couple of days ago, they have already identified several people they suspect may have been responsible for firing that weapon.

Because of the magnitude of the crime, I would not jump to assumptions about what action might or might not be taken. I suspect that when the evidence is presented against the guilty party it will be damning, and I believe the international community will speak with one loud and clear voice against that party.

a reply to: Rocker2013

Very informative post. You are very symphatetic and neutral.

So I reckon that since the report is not finished, your stance is still that both the seperatists and the Ukrainians could have been responsible for shooting MH17 with a BUK?

a reply to: Rocker2013

Oh, puhlease…

We haven't heard enough of ,

"We're talking to some people, we're looking for some stuff, we're figuring it all out… and we'll get back to you."

It doesn't take a long time to investigate a crime to come to the truth, it takes a long time to investigate a crime when trying to cover it up.

I fully expect the result to be reported, and it will be international news when that happens.

We already know what the media prints, they print BS. On this subject they began blaming Putin before the bodies were cold.

Here in the west we are used to hi profile murder investigations getting stalled to provide for a cooling off period. Like Ferguson, Mississippi for instance. The playbook here will_be_the_same.

So far, so goodbad.

That was double speak for you redneck muthas…

a reply to: tsurfer2000h

That satellite pic is badly faked by amateurs. The only thing worse is the propaganda that the Russians generated it as proof.

But go ahead, throw more media poo….

a reply to: intrptr

As has been explained to you time and again even in the best circumstances the investigation into a flight crash will take at least a year. Considering this one is taking place in a warzone it shouldn't be surprising that it will take a little longer. We've known for a while that the final report is due in October.

In regards to releasing evidence... This is an active criminal investigation. Why would you expect key evidence to be released? Any evidence released could tip the culprits off that the axe is about to fall and they'll flee. Not to mention that it could affect the outcome of a trial. If too much info is released before trial it could lead to a biased jury and a mistrial.

a reply to: intrptr

So the state owned Channel One didn't present a segment on it? The host didn't make claims that this proved MH17 want downed by a BUK? Do you really think such a segment would have been presented without Kremlin approval?

a reply to: Xcalibur254

Any evidence released could tip the culprits off that the axe is about to fall and they'll flee.

No need for evidence, everyone already knows Putin did it.

You tell me as much in just about every post you make..

Except you say (for instance), theres no need for black box data to be made public, we got transcripts.

Lulz, call me back when you got something besides phoney baloney.

"We're talking to some people, we're looking for some stuff, we're figuring it all out… and we'll get back to you."

a reply to: intrptr

At this time there's no need for evidence to be made public. That will either come with the final report or the trial.

originally posted by: tsurfer2000h
a reply to: LostAndFound2

Article you posted is propaganda nothing more

You say that yet you post this as a source for the truth...

Here are the real facts on who US is backing

www.globalresearch.ca...

Utterly amazing.

You do understand your source there has proven long before now that they are very anti American, and very pro Russian.

So ?

Every source you post is very anti Russian, and very pro American.

You saying there is a difference here ??

originally posted by: intrptr

It doesn't take a long time to investigate a crime to come to the truth, it takes a long time to investigate a crime when trying to cover it up.

As a matter of fact investigations and forensic processing can result in lengthy delays in investigations. What people see on tv shows like CSI, and how short of time it takes to get results, is no where near to how real life works.

Exactly how many criminal investigations have you been involved in where people were dead?

As for evidence and releasing evidence - that mindset by some just reinforces the fact they have absolutely no idea how criminal investigations go let alone how innocent until proven guilty works. The design of the western legal system presumes innocence until proven guilty and releasing evidence can prejudice those prosecutions to the point of a court throwing the entire case out precluding any further attempts at prosecution.

Secondly it becomes even more complex considering its a criminal investigation and western jurisprudence requires beyond a reasonable doubt to bring charges. Factor in foreign countries and it continues to add layers of complexity. Its one of the main reasons the UN tribunal position was being brought up.

As for the comments about the US refusing to release information you and others are ignoring a key point. The US NEVER claimed to have evidence. Those claims came from Russia with regards to US satellites in the area at the time. Is there any reason you intentionally ignore that fact? Secondly the US and Russia aren't the only nations who have satellites so could it not be possible other nations have evidence? Where is Russia's satellite evidence?


@ other posters about my op -
I stated people would need to make up0 their own minds about the source and the claims made in them. For some reason you guys intentionally ignored that point and once again make accusations against me that you cant support.

Ironic yet not surprising.

a reply to: ParasuvO

Actually yes there is a difference.

What crap, we know Russia didn't shoot it down for so many reasons - most importantly the radar data released by Russia, the Spanish air traffic controller in the Ukrainian control tower, the fact Russia had possibly everything to lose and nothing to gain, whereas it happened conveniently over a country that is a new puppet of NATO, just in time to demonize Russia in preparation for the continued push against her - what do you think NATO wants with Ukraine!!

And the fact our media and leaders have gone dead quiet on the issue - even though it could be used to push their agenda if true, reminiscent of the Syria chemical weapons attack eh?

What total crap, total bull#.

Use your F_ing head before you accuse a country of such a terrible act - I know Russia has been responsible for much worse in the past - and will be in the future, but not this.

a reply to: Soapusmaximus

The radar data released was debunked and the Russian government trotted out the makers of the BUK who stated it was brought down by a BUK.

the makers of the SU25 have stated the plane cant reach those altitudes.

The Spanish air traffic controller was debunked as Russian propaganda.

Ukraine is not a member of NATO nor a puppet of NATO and had the choice to join back in 2010 where Yanukovych opted not to.

In 2014 Russia called for a UN investigation. Now that the theories Russia has consistently put forth and have been debunked Russia all of a sudden doesn't want a UN tribunal.

All info to date shows Russian involvement / Russian rebel involvement.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Thankyou, the main stream has punished everyones reason enough with that dogma. As presented by the main street media, you didn't disagree with them at all there.

Thank goodness alternative websites like ATS offer opinions that differ with yours--- I mean theirs.

Carry on smearing the walls with official poop.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Russia has been asking for a real international investigation and not sham from very early on, but CIA/Kiev/Dutch knew what the outcome would be so they didn't wanted to go along with it.

The whole suggested UN tribunal is nothing more as another sham trying to politicize the whole situation so it can be pinned on the Russians...and of course the Russians are not that stupid, they hold all the cards when there has to be a report presented and Russia can start poking holes in it with undisclosed evidence...

...right now The West doesn't seem to know how they can get out of the mess they have created for themselves...

- Conclusion report : it was The Russians and or The Separatists who did it...and it will be nothing more as an epic facepalm when Russia starts to poke holes in the fabricated crap

- Conclusion report : we don't know exactly what happened and there still could be multiple perpetrators...again epic facepalm after all the propaganda which has gone on about them knowing who did it

Right now they seem to heading in wanting to make a big mess of it, because they don't know how to get out of it anymore without losing their faces big time. The UN tribunal sham is nothing more as a last act of desperation to try and salvage something.

a reply to: BornAgainAlien

Except for the fact the report put out by the Dutch doesn't blame Russia. Its sole purpose was to identify what brought the plane down.

Would you prefer any trial be held at the national level instead of the UN level.

a reply to: Xcathdra

There are two separate investigations going on...

1. What brought down MH17

2. Who were the perpetrators

Knowing our legal system isn't corrupt and would not be politicized, national level trial would be preferable instead of an UN tribunal which have proven in the past to being crap.

However the investigation itself should have been done by the UN, and after that an UN tribunal would be acceptable because the evidence would not have been solely provided by the Ukrainians (CIA).

originally posted by: BornAgainAlien


There are two separate investigations going on...

1. What brought down MH17

2. Who were the perpetrators

yup - one plays on the other. The result of #1 establishes whether or not there is a #2.

originally posted by: BornAgainAlien
Knowing our legal system isn't corrupt and would not be politicized, national level trial would be preferable instead of an UN tribunal which have proven in the past to being crap.

Because of the circumstances a UN action would be better since this involves more than just once nation and the fact a civilian jetliner was downed.

originally posted by: BornAgainAlien
However the investigation itself should have been done by the UN, and after that an UN tribunal would be acceptable because the evidence would not have been solely provided by the Ukrainians (CIA).

A UN tribunal has the benefit of being able to demand and require a country to turn over evidence, including Russia, the US, and any other nation with relevant information. A state action does not have the authority to demand that information and the country its directed at doesn't have to comply with it.

Feel free to show where the information solely came from Ukraine and while your at it please link to your source blaming the CIA.

I would imagine that's the reason Russia is blocking the UN tribunal.