MH17: 'Russian missile parts' at Ukraine crash site

a reply to: tsurfer2000h

Fact is nobody has been able to prove that a 30 mm cannon made those holes...and many more before you have tried and failed miserably...just as you have done.

I failed? You didn't post a single piece of evidence that those holes were made by a BUK warhead. I posted visual evidence that shows that the damage to MH17 clearly resmbles 30mm cannon damage.

I would say that is 1-0 for me.

Does anyone know what the blast pattern of a BUK looks like?

a reply to: Xcalibur254

How has Russia's story changed? They turned over tapes about a week after it happened, to the international group headed up by that Canadian fellow, sorry I can't remember his name? Russia hasn't changed their story--neither the US nor Kiev has turned over a shred of evidence to support their silly story.

I'm no expert, but any system can be defeated if one spends enough time trying, and most radars can be spoofed, including the Russians. Could have been 27, and I think one pilot is on the record about that angle.

We will never find out because a cloak of secrecy has covered over the truth, at least for the uninformed public.

a reply to: tsurfer2000h

Well according to the preliminary report it was hit on the left side around the cockpit area. www.onderzoeksraad.nl...

Where does it say it was hit with a BUK on the left side, or even that it was hit from the left side?

a reply to: Salander

Every other week they keep changing their mind as to whether it was a BUK or an Su-25 that downed MH17. There's was even a point where Russian state media was pushing both theories at the same time. Then let's not forget all the false information that has been pushed only to disappear when proven wrong. Such as the claim that MH17's flight path was diverted. And then there was that laughable Photoshop job that was pushed as a satellite images. These aren't the actions of an innocent party. These are the actions of someone trying to muddy the water.

I'm almost expecting that when the final report comes out and the separatists are found responsible that Russia will claim the results don't count because evidence was tampered with. Even though it was the separatists that were cutting pieces of debris and shopping them off to god knows where and shooting other pieces of debris.

a reply to: Xcalibur254

I'm almost expecting that when the final report comes out and the separatists are found responsible that Russia will claim the results don't count because evidence was tampered with.

There will be no final report in which any guilty party will be put forth.

a reply to: LesBrocknar

Where does it say it was hit with a BUK on the left side, or even that it was hit from the left side?

I take it you didn't read the report I linked where it discusses the parts of the left side of the cockpit are the only pieces they found that had the damage from the shrapnel...you know what you insist are bullet holes without any evidence to back the claim.

I guess actually reading it is a bit too much for you.

a reply to: Salander

I'm no expert, but any system can be defeated if one spends enough time trying, and most radars can be spoofed, including the Russians. Could have been 27, and I think one pilot is on the record about that angle.

One problem there. Other planes were in the area at the time with one only 15 miles away and none of them reported any military planes flying in the area at the time.

Also why wouldn't MH 17 report the military jet flying that close to them...and no pilot has discussed the SU 27 as being a plane near MH 17...because there was no plane there, as that is Russian propaganda at it's finest.

We will never find out because a cloak of secrecy has covered over the truth, at least for the uninformed public.

No you may never know because Russia is doing it's best to keep the truth from actually coming out...and I can't imagine why.

There is no secrecy covering the truth...another conspiracy theory that has nothing to back the claim.

a reply to: tsurfer2000h

Again, where does it say BUK, or that the high velocity objects came from the left side? Nowhere in that report.

originally posted by: LesBrocknar
a reply to: tsurfer2000h

Again, where does it say BUK, or that the high velocity objects came from the left side? Nowhere in that report.

Where does it say the holes were caused by 30mm rounds?

a reply to: LesBrocknar

Again, where does it say BUK, or that the high velocity objects came from the left side? Nowhere in that report.

And where does any expert say it wasn't?

I have still yet to see you provide anything from any expert that says they are in fact holes from a 30 mm cannon, but you seem to insist that, so where are these experts that seem to know more than the true experts...AKA the manufacturers.

a reply to: DJW001

Where does it say the holes were caused by 30mm rounds?

Been trying to get that posted for a while now to no avail.

Seems he is more worried about trying to prove it wasn't a BUK than he is to actually providing anything to back his claims.

a reply to: tsurfer2000h

No expert did say it came from the left. You claimed it did. You claimed it was in the report. It is not.

You are making stuff up, obviously, otherwise you would have been able to qoute the parts where it says so, instead ofdiverting attention away from the false claim you made.

I backed up my claims with visual evidence and the damage bears a stiking resemblance to 30 mm cannon fire damage.

You have provided no evidence at all that supports the notion that these holes were caused by a BUK, or that the high energy objects came from the left.

Did you notice how they are refered to as "high energy objects" and not BUK shrapnel?

a reply to: DJW001

Where does it say the holes were caused by 30mm rounds?

I never claimed that report drew that conclusion, or that the impact came from a certain side.

I did provide evidence that the damage resembls 30mm cannon fire damage. You could try to trump ths by posting pics of BUK damage that is even more similar to the MH17 damage.

originally posted by: LesBrocknar
a reply to: Xcalibur254

I'm almost expecting that when the final report comes out and the separatists are found responsible that Russia will claim the results don't count because evidence was tampered with.

There will be no final report in which any guilty party will be put forth.

My bet is that if and when a "final report" is issued, the "guilty party" will be Russia or its agents.

Been trying to get that posted for a while now to no avail.

This is the third time I posted my evidence.

originally posted by: LesBrocknar
Su25 30mm cannon test.

*What are the smaller holes?

www.youtube.com...


That 30mm cannon damage sure does resemble the damage on the MH17 piece.


And if anyone can tell me, at what position did the BUK explode in relation to the plane? Above, below, to the left or right or dead on?

Can you post evidence that shows BUK missile damage that looks even more similar?

a reply to: tsurfer2000h

I have not been able to listen to, or read transcripts of, the radio transmissions of MH17. Have you?

So, I don't know what the crew said in the moments before, but it's safe to say the crew DID NOT EXPECT to be shot from the sky. Like other long distance cockpit crews, they were looking down or straight ahead, not behind looking to see if military aircraft were maneuvering for a shot.

a reply to: LesBrocknar

I assume you did not see the picture last year of the upper surface of the outboard section of the left wing.

I did, but that is apparently one of those photos that has been "taken down" from the internet. As straight as a chalk-line, it was a crease through the paint, lined up perfectly with the cockpit. One round out of many made that perfect crease.

a reply to: LesBrocknar

Can you post evidence that shows BUK missile damage that looks even more similar?

Ah that's right RT is your evidence...the Kremlin mouthpiece.

How about you show an expert that isn't paid by the Russian government that backs your claim, because Russia is the last country that wants the truth out there.

Here is the funny thing...Russias own maker of the BUK has said it was a BUK but seemingly you know more than them I see, you do understand that your evidence comes from early on in this investigation and the fact that Russia has changed their tune several times shows they are grasping at straws just as you are.

Here you go some pics that may help you understand the difference between a 30 mm cannon holes, and what SAM damage looks like.

www.whathappenedtoflightmh17.com...

SO what exactly made these 30 mm holes you keep insisting they are without actually providing evidence they are in fact what you say they are?

We already know it isn't the SU 25...so where did they come from?

a reply to: tsurfer2000h

It would be very cool if the US government would offer some sort of evidence that backs up ITS claim, more than a year old now.

And because it has not, and apparently will not offer such evidence, and considering its notoriety for mendacity, common sense suggests that Pinochio is at work there, and his nose has been growing for a year now.