Dutch Investigators Give Results of MH17 Probe to Families

originally posted by: tsurfer2000h
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?

I have adressed these very questions on a few occasions a few pages ago. Tomorrow, you will ask them again? And another time in a couple days for good measure?

originally posted by: Velatropa24

...and?

Remember there are those die-hards that actually believe Russia did not supply any equipment to the separatists. There are also those that refute that Russian military personnel were seconded to the separatists. It makes perfect sense that the separatists would require air defence systems to counter the Ukrainian Air Force. That is why the videos and eye-witness accounts of the "Buk/Buk on a truck" in separatist territory have to be discredited at all cost. They have to be made to go away. Even the Russian Ministry of Defence were caught out on a lie in relation to where the Buk on a truck was filmed in Ukraine. The question is why did they lie and place the footage in Ukrainian held territory when it was filmed in Luhansk? Remember this is the Russian military and intelligence system we are talking about and yet they let themselves be embarrassed by amateur internet sleuths who found the Luhansk location.

The Russians lied and informed the world that the footage was in Krasnoarmeisk which was under Ukrainian military control.

Here they are proudly explaining to the world during a press conference that it was footage from Krasnoarmeisk.



The debunk was so embarrassing that someone ripped off part of the advert off the billboard in the real location of Luhansk.
The Russians claimed that the address on the billboard read (in bold)

The good example of such fact is that some mass media showed transportation of the Buk-M1 missile system from Ukrainian to Russian territory.We can clearly see that its frame-up. These pictures were made in the city of Krasnoarmeisk that is confirmed by a banner situated close to the road. This banner has an address of the car shop situated at the Dnepropetrovskaya, 34. Since May 11 the Krasnoarmeysk city is under control of the Ukrainian Armed Forces.

www.rusemb.org.uk...

The actual billboard in Luhansk where someone has ripped off the actual address banner.



The JIT used the video footage in their report. Not surprisingly there wasn't a peep out of the Russians

a reply to: tommyjo

A Buk sounds like Boom !
Not like like being for seconds in a shred-mill.

If a exploding noise was recorded, we would have heard it over and and over again.

MH-17 was gunned down by an other plane.

The bullet marks are on the wing, so the fire came from the same level.

And now is a an other fake Lockerby courtcase the solution.

In the Lockerby courtcase justice was raped, so now we do it again?

Some have to be out of their f- minds to take that as a serious option?

Even a Jewish shrink would put the one who came with this idea in a strait -jacket and liock the person up, to protect those with some commen sense left.

How more crazy can it get?

Lockerby court-case was a disaster and a rape for justice.

Who can say for serious to do that scam all over again?

Making from mh-17 a Lockerby case...

Loch that man up and throw away the key.

Total mesjogge

a reply to: tommyjo

Remember there are those die-hards that actually believe Russia did not supply any equipment to the separatists.

Skepticism is a bummer, innit?

The Russians pulled a genius stunt in transporting their newest Buk (with radar) into a foreign country. Why use a tarpaulin to protect this high tech toy from curious eyes whilst driving over the border, that's stupid. What they really did is quite the opposite, setting new standarts for SpecOps worldwide.
Their little convoi, composed of said Buk and a bunch of civil vehicles, was probably honking the whole time while they took the scenic route, app. 150 miles through a populated area in bright daylight. Just to make sure everyone got a pic, no need to take the direct way in the dark of the night to keep things hush hush when you could also hide your support in the open.

Well. They're either completely retarded or some sinister geniuses, the barking cat striked again. Thanks for the laugh!

a reply to: Wasta

They have pieces of a SAM at the crash site. The shrapnel found in the victims is consistent with a SAM. The manufacturer of the SAM has said it was one of theirs. Even Russia's latest radar data shows there were only two other airliners in the area at the time. Both of them were commercial and the closest one was 30km away. Why are you trying to continue to push the Su-25 theory when even Russia abandoned it when it no longer became tenable?

a reply to: PublicOpinion

There was no need for them to transport it in secret at the time. It was moving through friendly territory. If the Ukrainian military found out the separatists had a BUK they could just claim they seized it from a military base. At which point no one would really care about following up.

They didn't expect a commercial airliner to be shot down and an international investigation occurring. So why would they need to keep it covered if they didn't think anyone would really care where it originated?

a reply to: Xcalibur254

There was no need for them to transport it in secret at the time

Except that there still is, and always has been, an interest in keeping an alleged direct involvement secret. A clear act of aggression towards a sovereign state via russian military in the Ukraine might (and would) be considered an act of war. That's something entirely different than training militias to use SAMs in order to protect their homes.

Which is precisely what the warmongers are waiting for, remember Poroschenko imagining russian tanks crossing the border? What do you think, why would he do something like that?

a reply to: PublicOpinion

That act of aggression / war declaration occurred when Russia sent their little green men into Crimea. Before people try to argue this point Russian military units NOT attached to the russian forces already stationed in crimea entered crimea, ukraine before any (sham / illegal) vote ever occurred.

That brings us back to direct Russian military involvement via an invasion of Ukraine.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: PublicOpinion

That act of aggression / war declaration occurred when Russia sent their little green men into Crimea. Before people try to argue this point Russian military units NOT attached to the russian forces already stationed in crimea entered crimea, ukraine before any (sham / illegal) vote ever occurred.

That brings us back to direct Russian military involvement via an invasion of Ukraine.

Why point out something Russia does to paint it black when US does the same thing 10 fold all over the world. Before judging another country, sort out your own.

...oh wait, I forgot, offcource everything Russia does is bad, but when US does it, it's for the greater good of the universe. Silly me... *sarcasm*

a reply to: Xcathdra

Thanks for nailing my point.

One Year After Russia Annexed Crimea, Locals Prefer Moscow To Kiev

Who would've thought that.
Wait a second!
Nobody on Ceres cares about the people there, right? Time for another ATO - oligarchs of the world, unite!

a reply to: PublicOpinion

Then they had the choice to move to Russia.

Russia will be sanctioned until they withdraw from the Ukrainian territory they occupy. Putin's latest desperate ultimatum is proof he is unable to live in the now.

a reply to: Velatropa24

You really have no clue what you are talking about do you.

originally posted by: Wasta

MH-17 was gunned down by an other plane.

The bullet marks are on the wing, so the fire came from the same level.

No it wasn't. Not even the Russians are running with the claims of another aircraft or Su-25 as they suggested. Have you not heard that their latest story is Buk only? There are no bullet holes on MH17. Think about it? Why are the Russians only going to pass their recent radar data to the investigation team and not the details from the Ukrainian Air force mechanic? Remember this Ukrainian Air Force mechanic even named the Su-25 pilot! Explain why the Russians are not going down this line anymore? Explain why the recent radar info from the Russians shows no other aircraft in close proximity to MH17?

So please explain why Ukrainian mechanic Evgeny Agapov isn't now part of the investigation?



This is the Ukrainian Su-25 pilot Captain Vladislav Voloshin that the mechanic named.



So please explain why Russia are not presenting this information and eyewitness to the investigation team? Why have the Russians now declared from their recent radar data that there was no other aircraft in the vicinity of MH17?

a reply to: Xcathdra


OldNewsFlash:

US officials have also linked the lifting of the embargo with the peace effort.

Many elements of the Minsk deal have already been put into action, including a break in fighting and withdrawal of heavy weapons. However, Moscow and Kyiv continue to trade blame for the unresolved issues, which include local elections in the rebel-held areas and greater autonomy for the separatist regions.

Kerry hints at lifting of sanctions on Russia

And then there's that:

Ukraine must take the steps to peace agreed a year ago in Minsk, or risk losing the support of the European Union, said Denmark’s foreign minister. Earlier this week other western powers criticized Kiev, following the resignation of a key minister.

Denmark to Ukraine: Follow Minsk agreement, or we could drop Russia sanctions

unable to live in the now.

Never let a great piece of irony go to waste!

a reply to: PublicOpinion

Your sources are from January 2016.

Here is the latest from October 4th 2016 -
Russian Sanctions to Remain Until Crimea Returned to Ukraine – U.S.

Sanctions against Russia will remain in place until Crimea is returned to Ukraine, U.S. State Department spokesman John Kirby said in a press statement Tuesday.

The announcement came on the eve of the second anniversary of the annexation of the Crimean Peninsula.

“We will not accept the redrawing of borders by force in the 21st century. Sanctions related to Crimea will remain in place as long as the occupation continues. We again call on Russia to end that occupation and return Crimea to Ukraine,” Kirby said.

click link for article..

Secondly the minsk protocols require Russia withdraw its forces from Ukraine. In a bigger sense of Irony, that includes Crimea.

Minsk I -

To withdraw illegal armed groups and military equipment as well as fighters and mercenaries from Ukraine.

Minsk I Addendum

To withdraw all foreign mercenaries from the conflict zone

Minsk II -

Pullout of all foreign armed formations, military equipment, and also mercenaries from the territory of Ukraine under OSCE supervision. Disarmament of all illegal groups.

originally posted by: PublicOpinion
a reply to: tommyjo

Remember there are those die-hards that actually believe Russia did not supply any equipment to the separatists.

Skepticism is a bummer, innit?

The Russians pulled a genius stunt in transporting their newest Buk (with radar) into a foreign country. Why use a tarpaulin to protect this high tech toy from curious eyes whilst driving over the border, that's stupid. What they really did is quite the opposite, setting new standarts for SpecOps worldwide.
Their little convoi, composed of said Buk and a bunch of civil vehicles, was probably honking the whole time while they took the scenic route, app. 150 miles through a populated area in bright daylight. Just to make sure everyone got a pic, no need to take the direct way in the dark of the night to keep things hush hush when you could also hide your support in the open.

Well. They're either completely retarded or some sinister geniuses, the barking cat striked again. Thanks for the laugh!

Sorry their "latest Buk"? Where are you getting that from? The Buk on the truck shows a M1 (SA-11) variant TELAR. These first entered service from the early 1980s. The latest variants of the Buk would have been the SA-17s. What Russia supplied was the early variant that was still in service with the Russian Army.

Why on earth would they need to hide it? They didn't cover the Pantsir systems and openly showed them uncovered. The Buk was supplied to counter and deter Ukrainian aircraft that were operating at height. The Separatists had already captured Buks that were unserviceable from Ukrainian depots. They messed up pure and simple when they believed that they had intelligence of a Ukrainian transport and accidently targeted MH17 instead. They were that pleased with themselves they openly bragged about a shoot down until they realised that the wreckage was a civilian airliner. That is why those tweets were removed. Even TASS still has the claim.

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.

tass.ru...

a reply to: tommyjo

I don't think reading that article a third time would change the AIVD/ MIVD report, which completely contradicts the ukrainian version of things on multiple occasions (including Antonov incident and Bellingcat story). Been there, mentioned that as well.

Why on earth would they need to hide it?

Read my other repl... dude, seriously?

a reply to: Xcathdra

Well, I wouldn't put my money on a second anniversary Kirby piece. Would you?
Anyway. Let's just forget the not so amused Danes with regards to the ukrainian part of this Minsk deal. We deny ignorance much today, do we?

Thanks for the fish!

a reply to: PublicOpinion

You are the one who made inaccurate claims about the sanctions and I merely corrected you.

a reply to: Xcathdra

German Chancellor Angela Merkel said on Thursday that the key to ending sanctions against Russia over the Ukraine conflict was the full implementation of September's Minsk agreement, between the government in Kyiv and pro-Moscow separatists.
Speaking in Berlin at a press conference with Ukrainian Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk, Merkel said "the implementation of sanctions had certain causes, and these sanctions can only be lifted when the causes are eliminated again."
...
Merkel said she did not expect separate sanctions tied to Crimea would be lifted, as this would require Russia to reverse its annexation of the territory...

Merkel: no end to Russia sanctions if Minsk agreement not met

German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier was quoted on Sunday as saying the European Union should gradually phase out sanctions imposed against Russia over the Ukraine crisis if there is substantial progress in the peace process.

Merkel insists Russia sanctions tied to Minsk accord

A policy reversal could be an indication that the German leader has recognized the political and economic benefits of mending ties with Russia.

"Germany has always been important to Russia as a kind of bridge – a point of contact between Russia, the US and the rest of the West. If we completely lose Germany – we will lose an influential international mediator," Fenenko said.

Germany’s Merkel Has 'Very Greatest Interest' in Ending Russia Sanctions

Different sanctions, different restrictions. My claims aint inaccurate, that's the wind of change. Some EU members are already pissed about the ongoing bloom of corruption in the Ukraine despite all reform promises. The Maidan was about fighting corruption after all, wasn't it?
Don't expect the EU to back up Kiev in fighting a bloody civil war and giving a ratsass about Minsk. Sanctions against the Ukraine for not implementing their part are already up to debate, just saying. Do I need to cite their obligations now or do you know what I'm talking about?

a reply to: Velatropa24

And...that doesn't change the the reason why I posted what I did.