Malaysian Airlines MH317

Originally Posted by XabbaRus

Why would Russia send a BUK system in with a Russian crew, risking detection, to shoot down an airliner and then run it back into Russia? That is the bit I don't get. That a BUK shot it down I don't dispute, that it was Russian crewed no I'm not convinced and I don't care what Eliot Higgins and Bellingcat writes.

But who says the MH17 was targeted on purpose?
It might have been an accident. The radar can't identify the plane, it can just tell 'something's there'. My guess is someone just got trigger happy.
That a passenger jet crashed, quickly spread, so I'd figure they quickly pulled the Buk out of the area again to cover the mishap up.

It was send their due to enemy jets appearing in the area, wasn't it?
I didn't follow the whole mess very much, but that's what I collected.

'Proof' looks different though.

[kraznyi_oktjabr]

I found Yle's article about separatist messages. It is in Finnish and I'm at the moment too busy to translate it (sauna shift) but here it is: http://yle.fi/uutiset/3-7362851

P.S. Original claim was shoot down of Antonov An-26 transport aircraft

[Skybird]

The scenario described in this report, always was the most likely scenario: both regarding the real events, and regarding what such a report would show up to be like even if reality would have been different.

So, we should take it as such - the most likely, the most probable scenario of all stories told. Questions remain, and all sides have an interest to get their wanted view of things believed .

Beyond all and every doubt this report is not, it seems. But the same is true for any other alternative claim: the Russians', the separatists', the pro-Western Ukrainians'. The grey world of intel agencies and political powerplays heavily interfere.

For myself, I conclude today: I know that I do know nothing about this incident for sure.

[HunterICX]

Now to put the last nail in the coffin, Ukraine your radar data of that day please.....

Ukraine...hello?

Well..then Russia...how about yours, you teased some 2 days ago but haven't given jit acces to that raw data.

and thus all that remains is vague information and pointing fingers on both sides but after all this time we know from this report what we already knew the first day that it was fired from a BUK system but who...still remains to be seen if you ask me.

NOTE: I love the typo in all the articles like that of the BBC (I sure hope it is) that they tell it's a 9M83 Missile fired from a buk which can't be because the 9M83 is a missile fired from the S-300 family of long range SAM.

[XabbaRus]

Originally Posted by Nippelspanner

But who says the MH17 was targeted on purpose?
It might have been an accident. The radar can't identify the plane, it can just tell 'something's there'. My guess is someone just got trigger happy.
That a passenger jet crashed, quickly spread, so I'd figure they quickly pulled the Buk out of the area again to cover the mishap up.

It was send their due to enemy jets appearing in the area, wasn't it?
I didn't follow the whole mess very much, but that's what I collected.

'Proof' looks different though.

That was not what I meant. I don't think for one moment MH17 was targeted deliberately. What I'm saying is why would the Russians risk getting themselves conclusively caught supplying and operating such a system whether they hit an airliner or not? It's one thing to supply a system but so overtly? With a full crew too? They way the report reads however is that Russia supplied the system, they accidentally shot down the airliner then went home. If it hadn't been an airliner would they have gone home? Would the sensible thing have been to have left the SAM system in place and have the Russian crew change uniforms and ex filtrate quietly.

Given the height it was flying and direction I'm o the opinion they thought it was a Ukrainian air force transport. Also a lot has been made of the rebels being pushed back and losing ground to the Ukrainian government forces until the miraculous save by Russia. However most of that information seems to come back to bellingcat quoted in the media.

I would like to see the US radar evidence which they claim to have but haven't shown. I would also like to know who theses hundreds of witnesses they interviewed are. That aspect seems to have been lifted from bellingcat.

Just found this.


Just notice the comments and down-votes.
Looks like the RT-staff is doing double shifts...

[Bilge_Rat]

Originally Posted by Nippelspanner

Just found this.


Just notice the comments and down-votes.
Looks like the RT-staff is doing double shifts...

very well done video, I was impressed until 6:32 when it turned out one of their key piece of evidence of the location of the BUK was a photo which has been pretty much discredited as being a fake:

https://7mei.nl/2015/05/18/mh17-buk-...os-are-cheats/

The problem with the investigation is that it has been political from the beginning.

There are two suspects, Russia and Ukraine.

Ukraine is part of the investigation, it has supplied the tapes, photos and witnesses. Why is a suspect part of the investigation? Is it not reasonable to assume Ukraine will conceal any evidence which could implicate it?

Russia and Ukraine both have BUKs. There was one held by the separatists, but Ukraine has 72. Where were they that day? no one knows, Ukraine has never said. Would it not be important to know where the UKR BUKs were located just to make sure it was not the UKR that fired the SAM?

Immediately after the shootdown, Kerry stated the U.S. had satellite images proving the SAM came from a Russian BUK. These images have never been released and as far as I can tell, the investigation team has not seen them either. Why? Do they even exist?

[Bilge_Rat]

again another problem with the video is that to get to the claimed launch site, the Volvo transporting the BUK has to go straight from Donetsk to Torez.

problem is, on that route in july 2014, there was a bridge that was TOO LOW for the Volvo to go under....duh:





http://kremlintroll.nl/?p=605

[Jimbuna]

MH17 missile owned by Russian brigade, investigators say.

The missile that downed a Malaysia Airlines flight over eastern Ukraine in 2014 belonged to a Russian brigade, international investigators say.

For the first time, the Dutch-led team said the missile came from a Russian brigade based in the city of Kursk.

But on Thursday Wilbert Paulissen, a Dutch official from the Joint Investigation Team (JIT), told reporters: "All the vehicles in a convoy carrying the missile were part of the Russian armed forces."

He said investigators had traced the convoy to Russia's 53rd brigade.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-44235402

[Jimbuna]

Four charged with shooting down MH17 plane.

Four men have been charged with murder over the downing of a Malaysia Airlines jet in eastern Ukraine in 2014, killing 298 passengers and crew.

Dutch investigators have accused three Russians, Igor Girkin, Sergey Dubinskiy and Oleg Pulatov, and Ukrainian Leonid Kharchenko of involvement.

Passenger flight MH17 was en route from Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur when it was shot down over conflict-hit Ukraine.

A court case is scheduled to begin in the Netherlands on 9 March 2020.

International arrest warrants have been issued for the four men.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-48691488

[STEED]

I see no hope they will appear in court.

[ikalugin]

It appears that they did not charge anyone who was in Russian service at the time or since then.

[Jimbuna]

Originally Posted by STEED

I see no hope they will appear in court.

Well, when it is in the constitutions of both Russia and the Ukraine that people can't be extradited to foreign countries I think that has always been considered a given, hence the fact the Dutch have already stated they will probably not bother seeking extradition and commence the trial in their absence.

[Skybird]

While some people may tend to focus on the moral justice argument and how great it is that the small, tiny Netherlands dare to confront big, powerful Russia, I think the Netherlands go for high risk here. Charging the four suspects, in absence, for murder, means they have to prove that the intentional and explicit decision was made and carried out to bring down this plane and intentionally, explicitly killing these people aboard. Because the intention to kill these now dead victims is what separates murder from any form of accident or misjudgement in whatever a sense (mistaking this wrong plane for a valid target: another plane). And I think it will be terribly hard to prove this intention. It already starts with the question for the motive. Cui bono? Ironcially, the answer to this question would be: the Ukraine. Neither the rebels nor Russia could have had an interest for the PR desaster this incident meant for them - but the Ukraine.

The likelihood is quite high that either they must give up these charges, letting the state attorney looking bad then, or that they must construct a fictional case to work beyond the impossibility to prove by evidence the intention that MH317 indeed was the target and was decided on to be shot down, and then again the Netherlands and the attorney would look bad.

So I wonder whether they maybe have bitten off more than they could chew here - just so to feel morally good themselves. And that the Russians will not cooperate in any way, can be taken for granted.

[Catfish]

^ oh i am sure the near-deaths of former russian spies in the Uk just happened by accident. Of course other people could have come in contact with those substances, but i guess this can be condoned as collateral damage.
Just like with the plane. Because shooting at something you cannot exactly be sure of, is "accepting errors". "Billigend in Kauf nehmen", i could not translate this properly.

I do not think that the shooting down of a civilian airliner was executed with willful intent, so it is not murder but rather homicide. I think the dead people of flight MH17 would not care much about pettifoggery though.

But how about shooting down the right plane, the Antonov, then? Was that a legitimate target, for Russia?
Russia is still intervening militarily, in the Ukraina.
"In December 2015, Russian Federation President Vladimir Putin admitted that Russian military intelligence officers were operating in Ukraine, insisting though that they were not the same as regular troops. Currently, 7% of Ukraine's territory is under occupation."
I am not sure whether war is declared, so is the death of people in this interval of time murder, homicide or legitimate killing in a war?

B.t.w. Netherlands, Belgium or Russia - international law should always stand above brute force regardless of the nation's size. Should.