Dutch Investigators Give Results of MH17 Probe to Families

a reply to: DJW001

Hoi Western Media, that's not how open discussions work. You may censor the comment section in your MSM world if you like, but this is ATS. And thanks for all the recent propaganda btw, but your Information Warfare is a tad too obvious for my taste.
Being in my head, I don't need a point by point debunk of this investigation when I see how our Western Media acts right here, right now. Spin away!


a reply to: AndyMayhew

That was a low flying mil cargo plane, probably shot down with a mobile SAM. You should read the dutch intel report and ask your Western Media outlets to inform the public properly.

originally posted by: DJW001

originally posted by: Velatropa24

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: Velatropa24

Already provided.

Where?

Over the past two years:

www.abovetopsecret.com...


Stop asking for what has been handed to you on a silver platter. Feel free to join any of the threads that dissect the issues, or bring the issues already on the table there, here. Better yet, start your own thread critiquing the JIT report. If you don't do it today, I will do it tomorrow and you probably won't like it because I am as likely to expose Russian lies and bias as I am those of the Western media.

....aaaaaaaand for the 50th time - word legitimate mean anything to you? The definition 9f evidence which I have described a few pages back to you personally mean anything to you? Why you forget so quickly and go back to answering questions that were not asked?

Legitimate evidence proving the accusations beyond reasonable doubt - lets go.

a reply to: Velatropa24

BiB is that you?

The evidence was provided. If you refuse to accept it thats your issue and doesn't change the facts. In a few weeks when Russia comes out with another "theory" thats not supported by reality will you change your tune and defend the new lie?

originally posted by: PublicOpinion

Hoi Western Media, that's not how open discussions work. You may censor the comment section in your MSM world if you like, but this is ATS. And thanks for all the recent propaganda btw, but your Information Warfare is a tad too obvious for my taste.
Being in my head, I don't need a point by point debunk of this investigation when I see how our Western Media acts right here, right now. Spin away!

Specifically what propaganda and can you post sources that refute what you think is propaganda?

originally posted by: PublicOpinion
That was a low flying mil cargo plane, probably shot down with a mobile SAM. You should read the dutch intel report and ask your Western Media outlets to inform the public properly.

No it was MH-17 and it goes back to certain people refusing to accept facts / evidence provided directly by the rebels. Maybe next time they will use secure communications before bragging about downing an aircraft only to then talk about it being a civilian airliner they shot down.

a reply to: Xcathdra

[...]Prior to the crash, the MIVD knew that, in addition to light aircraft artillery, the Separatists also possessed short-range portable air defence systems (man-portable air-defence systems; MANPADS) and that they possibly possessed short-range vehicle-borne air-defence systems. Both types of systems are considered surface-to-air missiles (SAMs). Due to their limited range they do not constitute a danger to civil aviation at cruising altitude.

On 29 June 2014, the Separatists captured a Ukrainian armed forces military base in Donetsk. At this base, there were Buk missile systems.25 These are powerful anti-aircraft systems. This development was reported extensively in the media prior to the crash. The MIVD also received intelligence information on the subject, on 30 June and 3 July 2014 as well as on other dates. During the course of July, several reliable sources indicated that the systems that were at the military base were not operational. Therefore, they could not be used by the Separatists.

[...]

On 14 July 2014, an An-26 military cargo aeroplane (referred to hereafter as: the Antonov), belonging to the Ukrainian airforce, was shot down. The Ukrainian authorities reported the event the same day in a briefing with Ukraine’s presidential administration in Kiev. The MIVD also received a concise report of the briefing from the Dutch Defence attaché. The report revealed that the Ukrainian Minister of Foreign Affairs, Klimkin, declared that the situation in the east had reached a new and dangerous phase because the Russian Federation was now openly providing the Separatists with military support. As an example of the escalation, Klimkin cited the Antonov’s being shot down in the area of Lugansk. Klimkin reported that the Antonov was flying at an altitude of 6,200 metres and could only have been hit with Russian equipment, because the Separatists did not possess this kind of anti-aircraft systems. According to a media report on 14 July 2014 (which the MIVD possessed), the Ukrainian authorities stated that the aeroplane was flying at 6,500 metres and was not shot down by a portable anti-aircraft system but by a more powerful system. This was probably carried out from Russian territory. In the media, the Separatists claimed that they had shot down the aeroplane and taken some of the crew prisoner.[...]

The Separatists’ capacity

SAM only, there you have it. Which is why the investigation came up with this russian Buk spin to begin with. It's not about refusing facts but rather about refusing factoids.
Extraordinary claims need extraordinary proof, you know the drill. Maybe we should ask the US of A for some satellite data or something?

a reply to: PublicOpinion

The rebels thought they were downing a military transport. When they arrived at the scene they discovered it was a civilian airliner. From that moment the rebels / russia have been trying to blame everyone and everything else.

Yes - certain people are ignoring facts simply because they dont support the Russian version of events. As I and others have noted before. How many lies can Russia tell regarding the shootdown before people see and understand they are lying? The west's position has been consistent since the beginning.

Russia / Russian rebels cant make that same claim and they have given multiple "explanations" since day one. When they push a "story", and the story is debunked by the facts, they move on to the next lie.

Prime example - Russia / Russian MoD swore up and down MH-17 was shot down by a Ukrainian military jet. They produced radar supposedly showing it. They even aired an interview with a Ukrainian fighter pilot" who was present in the air when the plane was shot down.

Russia lied... The fake pilot lied... The Russian MoD lied... The radar intercepts were fraudulent... The "picture" showing a mig shooting an air to air missile at Mh-17 was fraudulent...

and people dont understand why Russia is not trusted on this topic.

I trust the Netherlands investigation. I dont trust Russia given their history on this topic.

I firmly believe Russia has culpability in the downing of MH-17 and that is the reason they vetoed the tribunal resolution in the UN. If Russia agreed to the tribunal they knew they couldn't just dismiss it when the report came out.

a reply to: Xcathdra

The rebels thought they were downing a military transport. When they arrived at the scene they discovered it was a civilian airliner. From that moment the rebels / russia have been trying to blame everyone and everything else.

That's your opinion, which reminds me of some vids with rebels at the scene and how the Western Media portrayed them as ruthless killers. Remember that story as well? Pretty sick propaganda and the MSM is full of it.

Which is why I'm here and not there, if you catch my drift.

I trust the Netherlands investigation.

And I have my issues with all that SBU/ Higgins disinfo to be frank.

The Dutch had a keen eye on the Russians, I doubt that they would be able to cross the border without anyone taking notice. A phone call and some Bellingcats is all we get in support of the allegation, that Russia decided to directly mess with this war in Ukraine. And we get Putinista labeled for speaking up, which is pretty hilarious btw. Who's trolling whom now, I'm confused.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: Velatropa24

BiB is that you?

The evidence was provided. If you refuse to accept it thats your issue and doesn't change the facts. In a few weeks when Russia comes out with another "theory" thats not supported by reality will you change your tune and defend the new lie?

Opinions, accusations and propaganda were provided. Not evidence.

So - evidence, lets go, I am still waiting.

a reply to: Velatropa24

Its been provided for you BiB.

What you choose to do with the info is your issue, not mine.

a reply to: PublicOpinion

Well no its from the intercepted phone conversation between the rebels and their handelers when they arrived on scene and realized they shot down a civilian jetliner.

Feel free to specify what "disinfo" you are talking about and refute it please so we can see what you are talking about.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: PublicOpinion

Well no its from the intercepted phone conversation between the rebels and their handelers when they arrived on scene and realized they shot down a civilian jetliner.

Feel free to specify what "disinfo" you are talking about and refute it please so we can see what you are talking about.

How do you know? Because the tv told you so? SBU could have manufactured it. They had the means and 1000 good reasons.

Not saying that they did, the phonecalls could be genuine for all I know, but the possibility is there and the authenticity has not been proven. That makes them a theory, not a fact. Accusations are never based on theories...

a reply to: Xcathdra

Another shady phone call, do you see any pattern yet?

Maybe someone from the rebels believed they shot something down, yes. The actual context of both phone calls is up to debate and only the callers are really in the known, even if the SBU didn't produce this sort of 'evidence'. Which wouldn't be surprising either, would it?

originally posted by: AndyMayhew

More to the point, they admitted at the time (as reported by the Russian state news agency TASS) that they had shot down a large aircraft with a missile.

Why would they have lied? Before they discovered that it wasnt a Ukrainian military aircraft after all .....

This remains the elephant in the room for those who claim that the rebels were not responsible.

Surprisingly TASS still have that article on their website.

They published it July 17, 2014, 20:01

DONETSK, July 17. /ITAR-TASS/. The mlitia of the self-proclaimed Donetsk People’s Republic (DPR) have brought down a military transport Antonov-26 (An-26) plane of the Ukrainian Air Force on the outskirts of the town of Torez, eyewitnesses said. A missile hit the An-26, it fell on the ground and caught blaze, they said. On July 14, militiamen of the self-proclaimed Lugansk People’s Republic downed another An-26 of the Ukrainian Air Force. More: tass.ru...

tass.ru...

The separatists also got their hands on the Pantsir-S1 system. The Pantsir-S1 was never in Ukrainian service so it had to have come from Russia.

The Pantsir-S1 videos and images were geo-located to separatist controlled areas.



en.wikipedia.org...

67viktor.livejournal.com...

www.bellingcat.com...

originally posted by: tommyjo
The separatists also got their hands on the Pantsir-S1 system. The Pantsir-S1 was never in Ukrainian service so it had to have come from Russia.

The Pantsir-S1 videos and images were geo-located to separatist controlled areas.

en.wikipedia.org...

67viktor.livejournal.com...

www.bellingcat.com...

...and?

a reply to: PublicOpinion

Hoi Western Media, that's not how open discussions work. You may censor the comment section in your MSM world if you like, but this is ATS. And thanks for all the recent propaganda btw, but your Information Warfare is a tad too obvious for my taste.
Being in my head, I don't need a point by point debunk of this investigation when I see how our Western Media acts right here, right now. Spin away!

In other words, you cannot debunk the investigation on any specific point, so you will settle for a blanket accusation against western media. That is not how open discussion works, either. As for censoring comments, I have no idea why you brought that up... this isn't Russia, you know.

Anyone calling themselves "Public Opinion" is in no position to accuse someone else of "information warfare!"

a reply to: DJW001

The intel from 2015 contradicts the report, as already mentioned.

And public opinion is the warmongers enemy nr. one, innit? Yeah... let's talk about this magnificent PubOps instead! Err... really?

a reply to: tommyjo

Description: The 57E6-E is a two-stage, solid-fuel, medium-range surface-to-air missile extremely flexible which allows for engagement of airborne threats at ranges from 1.2 to 20 kilometers and altitudes from 5 to 10,000 meters.

www.deagel.com...

Why is the Pantsir even relevant for this debate, Bellingcat derailings? I dunno.

a reply to: PublicOpinion

You seem to miss the fact that a separatist leader admitted to having an operational BUK in the area when MH 17 was shot down...maybe you can answer this question for me...it's one that nobody backing Russia's innocence has answered.

What would Ukraine need to be using a BUK for when the separatists had no aircraft flying in this conflict, but interestingly enough Ukraine did so who had more reason to use a BUK at that time...and who was shooting down aircraft at the time?

Seems you are forgetting that simple part of the equasion.

So you talk about informing the public correctly...when has anything coming from Russia ever been the truth concerning Ukraine...they lied from the beginning...remember these?





These were suppose to be locals helping out...till Putin admitted to sending his little green men to Crimea...so do you really want to discuss who is informing the public properly?

a reply to: PublicOpinion

The intel from 2015 contradicts the report, as already mentioned.

Whose "intel?" Carlos the non-existent air controller? The Donbas ladies who saw several different numbers of aircraft clearly enough to make out their warpaint? What intel?

a reply to: DJW001

Dutch intel report, you'll find one in my reply from the other day.

a reply to: tsurfer2000h

You seem to miss the fact that a separatist leader admitted to having an operational BUK in the area when MH 17 was shot down

You're talking about that interview, in which the Western Media managed to not get the babelfish straight and thus provided a clear piece of misinformation?

And where's the revolution of the crimean people due to this illegal occupation? You really think they wanted to stay with the Ukraine, this glorious place with no corruption whatsoever and much love for the russian majority in the east? Err...right.