This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Just how long does it take to access the information from flight recorders? Surely after a week, if this was so clear cut, they'd be keen to publish any information that corroborates the story that it was shot down by rebel forces?
Have these just been kicked into the long grass?
Have these just been kicked into the long grass?
In reply to woolsack:
Probably being kept back as edvidence for an inquiry as and when it is set up. IIRC the inquiry is being arranged by the Dutch. Also there is talk of a War Crime Commission, possibly even trials, and the data would be required for those.
Probably being kept back as edvidence for an inquiry as and when it is set up. IIRC the inquiry is being arranged by the Dutch. Also there is talk of a War Crime Commission, possibly even trials, and the data would be required for those.
In reply to woolsack:
if MH17 was shot down (and i'm not suggesting anything other than that) what exactly do you expect the flight recorders will show?
I'm by no means any kind of expert, but i'd expect that the first step will be to carefully check every part of the unit to confirm it's operating normally
remove the memory (i believe the 777 has solid state recorder, but again no expert) this hard drive would then be duplicated and then the duplicate inserted into a reader and investigated. all of that takes time and unlike 24hr story hungry news "sources" there is an obligation to get this right before you release to the press. previous releases have taken months, i see no reason why this would be different
if MH17 was shot down (and i'm not suggesting anything other than that) what exactly do you expect the flight recorders will show?
I'm by no means any kind of expert, but i'd expect that the first step will be to carefully check every part of the unit to confirm it's operating normally
remove the memory (i believe the 777 has solid state recorder, but again no expert) this hard drive would then be duplicated and then the duplicate inserted into a reader and investigated. all of that takes time and unlike 24hr story hungry news "sources" there is an obligation to get this right before you release to the press. previous releases have taken months, i see no reason why this would be different
In reply to woolsack:
Probably not. I guess the data extraction is fairly quick and easy from undamaged units, the analysis takes longer and the due process, releasing information through the proper channels at the proper time takes longer still. It's not the AAIBs data to release or discuss.
jk
> Have these just been kicked into the long grass?
Probably not. I guess the data extraction is fairly quick and easy from undamaged units, the analysis takes longer and the due process, releasing information through the proper channels at the proper time takes longer still. It's not the AAIBs data to release or discuss.
jk
In reply to woolsack:
I thought they had published that it was believed to have suffered explosive decompression due to multiple damage sites caused by shrapnel, which is assumed to be from a missile.
Neil
I thought they had published that it was believed to have suffered explosive decompression due to multiple damage sites caused by shrapnel, which is assumed to be from a missile.
Neil
In reply to woolsack:
No they were planning to make an announcement on 1st of August apparently although it looks like they were beaten to it.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/mh17-crash-black-boxes-show-...
> Have these just been kicked into the long grass?
No they were planning to make an announcement on 1st of August apparently although it looks like they were beaten to it.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/mh17-crash-black-boxes-show-...
In reply to woolsack:
If they wait a while they find the conspiracy theories that develop more amusing.
If they wait a while they find the conspiracy theories that develop more amusing.
In reply to Neil Williams:
Very clever analysis especially since the flight recorders hadn't been opened at that stage
> I thought they had published that it was believed to have suffered explosive decompression due to multiple damage sites caused by shrapnel, which is assumed to be from a missile.
> Neil
Very clever analysis especially since the flight recorders hadn't been opened at that stage
In reply to woolsack:
Is there some suggestion that the Ukrainian announcement is anything but a leak? The Dutch investigators don't seem to be contesting what has been said, just when and why.
jk
> Very clever analysis especially since the flight recorders hadn't been opened at that stage
Is there some suggestion that the Ukrainian announcement is anything but a leak? The Dutch investigators don't seem to be contesting what has been said, just when and why.
jk
In reply to MG:
Pmsl
It must be one hell of a smart flight recorder to be able to say "It was Comrade Colonel Mustard, in the conservatory, with an SA 11"
> If they wait a while they find the conspiracy theories that develop more amusing.
Pmsl
It must be one hell of a smart flight recorder to be able to say "It was Comrade Colonel Mustard, in the conservatory, with an SA 11"
In reply to MG:
There's already a good one that MH17 was in fact the missing MH370.
> If they wait a while they find the conspiracy theories that develop more amusing.
There's already a good one that MH17 was in fact the missing MH370.
In reply to woolsack:
There was a spokesperson from the AAIB on the radio a week or so ago. They have a dedicated facility (recently built) to analyse flight recorder data, which includes a specific room with electronic shielding and facilities to ensure the data analysed isn't intercepted by 3rd parties, speakers arranged to mimic aircraft cockpit conditions to allow voice recordings to be analysed, various facilities for retrieving overwritten data on the flight recorders etc.
So sounds a pretty high tech operation, and I would think (or at least hope) that there are some fairly rigorous procedures in place for the retrieval and analysis of such data, which would all take time to process, analyse, check, report, discuss and release.
I wouldn't be concerned that they haven't said anything after a week. At least a month I would think is a more reasonable time frame.
There was a spokesperson from the AAIB on the radio a week or so ago. They have a dedicated facility (recently built) to analyse flight recorder data, which includes a specific room with electronic shielding and facilities to ensure the data analysed isn't intercepted by 3rd parties, speakers arranged to mimic aircraft cockpit conditions to allow voice recordings to be analysed, various facilities for retrieving overwritten data on the flight recorders etc.
So sounds a pretty high tech operation, and I would think (or at least hope) that there are some fairly rigorous procedures in place for the retrieval and analysis of such data, which would all take time to process, analyse, check, report, discuss and release.
I wouldn't be concerned that they haven't said anything after a week. At least a month I would think is a more reasonable time frame.
In reply to woolsack:
Yes it is. We get paid a bonus if there arent any awkward questions so if you could be quiet please so I can afford my holiday I would be grateful.
> Is that your rather clever way of saying there's nothing to see here, move on?
Yes it is. We get paid a bonus if there arent any awkward questions so if you could be quiet please so I can afford my holiday I would be grateful.
In reply to woolsack:
There were pictures on the news of a large section of the plane with lots of shrapnel holes in it. The missile is designed to explode near the target and chuck out shrapnel. Don't think there is much mystery about what happened.
> Very clever analysis especially since the flight recorders hadn't been opened at that stage
There were pictures on the news of a large section of the plane with lots of shrapnel holes in it. The missile is designed to explode near the target and chuck out shrapnel. Don't think there is much mystery about what happened.
In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:
The only remaining question is who fired the missile. The west, the airline etc are all, based on an enormous amount of evidence, c, 99 per cent certain it was a rebel-fired Buk SAM missile, while the Russians claim (with no evidence) that it was a Ukrainian missiel (either SAM or air to air - their theories are inconsistent).
The only remaining question is who fired the missile. The west, the airline etc are all, based on an enormous amount of evidence, c, 99 per cent certain it was a rebel-fired Buk SAM missile, while the Russians claim (with no evidence) that it was a Ukrainian missiel (either SAM or air to air - their theories are inconsistent).
In reply to woolsack:
There are lots of technical reasons why the data might not be able to be read straight away. If the black box has been damaged or tampered with it may require specialist equipment only available at the manufacturer's site to retrieve the original data assuming there is data to retrieve.
There are lots of technical reasons why the data might not be able to be read straight away. If the black box has been damaged or tampered with it may require specialist equipment only available at the manufacturer's site to retrieve the original data assuming there is data to retrieve.
In reply to Gordon Stainforth:
That's not the only question remaining, it's one of many important questions deserving an answer.
As for the West/Airline knows what/whos missile it was vs Russia has no evidence... really? You've been around a while, you know the truth is often just a minor inconvenience when each side of a conflict is presenting their narrative. You'd be equally certain it was a Ukranian state missile if you read Russian news. You don't think it might just be appropriate to sit back and wait to see what the investigation turns up. At the moment all we know is it crashed in a war zone in Ukraine and we're being told it was shot down (which appears believable) by one of at least three different actors all of which are denying responsibility.
jk
> The only remaining question is who fired the missile. The west, the airline etc are all, based on an enormous amount of evidence, c, 99 per cent certain it was a rebel-fired Buk SAM missile, while the Russians claim (with no evidence) that it was a Ukrainian missiel (either SAM or air to air - their theories are inconsistent).
That's not the only question remaining, it's one of many important questions deserving an answer.
As for the West/Airline knows what/whos missile it was vs Russia has no evidence... really? You've been around a while, you know the truth is often just a minor inconvenience when each side of a conflict is presenting their narrative. You'd be equally certain it was a Ukranian state missile if you read Russian news. You don't think it might just be appropriate to sit back and wait to see what the investigation turns up. At the moment all we know is it crashed in a war zone in Ukraine and we're being told it was shot down (which appears believable) by one of at least three different actors all of which are denying responsibility.
jk
In reply to Gordon Stainforth:
Where is the enormous amount of evidence it was the rebels that fired it?
I didn't think there was any evidence that the rebels fired it apart from a load of hot air from the US
> The only remaining question is who fired the missile. The west, the airline etc are all, based on an enormous amount of evidence, c, 99 per cent certain it was a rebel-fired Buk SAM missile, while the Russians claim (with no evidence) that it was a Ukrainian missiel (either SAM or air to air - their theories are inconsistent).
Where is the enormous amount of evidence it was the rebels that fired it?
I didn't think there was any evidence that the rebels fired it apart from a load of hot air from the US
In reply to woolsack:
We will always be reacting to news reports, and both sides of the conflict are pushing propaganda heavily, so I doubt people like us will ever know exactly what happened. We can however make educated judgements.
I was aware of this story before the airliner was brought down.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-28299334
For me, it is too far fetched to suggest that this and other incidents were part of an elaborate conspiracy by Ukraine/Nato leading up to the downing of MH-17. So if we assume that the pro-Russian forces did bring down Ukrainian military planes, the simpler suggestion that pro-Russian forces made a mistake and fired on MH-17 makes more sense.
You will never be convinced as any evidence they could provide could also be forged. However, the US do have the equipment to determine were any missile that might have downed the plane came from, but like I say, if they waved picture round at a press conference it wouldn't convince doubters.
> Where is the enormous amount of evidence it was the rebels that fired it?
We will always be reacting to news reports, and both sides of the conflict are pushing propaganda heavily, so I doubt people like us will ever know exactly what happened. We can however make educated judgements.
I was aware of this story before the airliner was brought down.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-28299334
For me, it is too far fetched to suggest that this and other incidents were part of an elaborate conspiracy by Ukraine/Nato leading up to the downing of MH-17. So if we assume that the pro-Russian forces did bring down Ukrainian military planes, the simpler suggestion that pro-Russian forces made a mistake and fired on MH-17 makes more sense.
> I didn't think there was any evidence that the rebels fired it apart from a load of hot air from the US
You will never be convinced as any evidence they could provide could also be forged. However, the US do have the equipment to determine were any missile that might have downed the plane came from, but like I say, if they waved picture round at a press conference it wouldn't convince doubters.
Post edited at 13:26
In reply to Mike Stretford:
I'm not suggesting the Ukrainians did bring down their own plane on the 14th. The same missile used on the transport plane would be capable of taking out the AN-26 though
Except they haven't waved anything around have they? Just a load of allegations. This from a country with a bit of previous with airliners in 1988
I'm not suggesting the Ukrainians did bring down their own plane on the 14th. The same missile used on the transport plane would be capable of taking out the AN-26 though
> You will never be convinced as any evidence they could provide could also be forged. However, the US do have the equipment to determine were any missile that might have downed the plane came from, but like I say, if they waved picture round at a press conference it wouldn't convince doubters.
Except they haven't waved anything around have they? Just a load of allegations. This from a country with a bit of previous with airliners in 1988
In reply to woolsack:
The transporter (AN-26) was at 21000ft, so from what I've read, would require something more sophisticated than a shoulder launched missile, hence something that could reach a target at 30000ft.
My point is it would be pointless to do so. I'd be more suspicious of a 'dossier', or presentation, especially post 'WMD in Iraq' farce.
Same goes for Russia... if you want to be objective look at this case in isolation.
> I'm not suggesting the Ukrainians did bring down their own plane on the 14th. The same missile used on the transport plane would be capable of taking out the AN-26 though
The transporter (AN-26) was at 21000ft, so from what I've read, would require something more sophisticated than a shoulder launched missile, hence something that could reach a target at 30000ft.
> Except they haven't waved anything around have they? Just a load of allegations.
My point is it would be pointless to do so. I'd be more suspicious of a 'dossier', or presentation, especially post 'WMD in Iraq' farce.
> This from a country with a bit of previous with airliners in 1988
Same goes for Russia... if you want to be objective look at this case in isolation.
Post edited at 13:50
In reply to woolsack:
so what are you suggesting?
Or are you engaging in your normal vague conspiracy waffle.
> (In reply to Mike Stretford)
> I'm not suggesting
> I'm not suggesting
so what are you suggesting?
Or are you engaging in your normal vague conspiracy waffle.
In reply to woolsack:
Besides film taken by locals of the BUK system trundling around in Donetsk and the "we got one!" "which one did we get?" "oh f***" "well they were all spies anyway" postings on Vkontakt, taken down subsequently in a classic social media opps moment.
Besides film taken by locals of the BUK system trundling around in Donetsk and the "we got one!" "which one did we get?" "oh f***" "well they were all spies anyway" postings on Vkontakt, taken down subsequently in a classic social media opps moment.
In reply to woolsack:
I doubt you would accept this as 'evididence' (and why should you?)
http://www.ibtimes.com/mh17-crash-full-transcript-alleged-phone-intercepts-...
but then anything that can be presented to you by the available media could be fabricated or tampered, it comes down to our own judgment.... what is most likely.
> There's no evidence that the rebels fired it is there? None whatsoever.
I doubt you would accept this as 'evididence' (and why should you?)
http://www.ibtimes.com/mh17-crash-full-transcript-alleged-phone-intercepts-...
but then anything that can be presented to you by the available media could be fabricated or tampered, it comes down to our own judgment.... what is most likely.
In reply to woolsack:
Therefore it must have been a special unit of the CIA, or something. Isn't that the way it works?
> There's no evidence that the rebels fired it is there? None whatsoever.
Therefore it must have been a special unit of the CIA, or something. Isn't that the way it works?
In reply to tony:
There are certainly enough private military companies present in Ukraine so the CIA will be in there in reasonable numbers. They never miss a good coup
There are certainly enough private military companies present in Ukraine so the CIA will be in there in reasonable numbers. They never miss a good coup
In reply to Neil Williams:
Some red flag theories abound now..
These muppets think an ground to air missile ploughs straight in when many don't, they do as you explain and then shrapnel holes the plane in many places causing massive decompression..
> I thought they had published that it was believed to have suffered explosive decompression due to multiple damage sites caused by shrapnel, which is assumed to be from a missile.
> Neil
The problem is someone said the holes 'resembled machine gun fire'..Some red flag theories abound now..
These muppets think an ground to air missile ploughs straight in when many don't, they do as you explain and then shrapnel holes the plane in many places causing massive decompression..
In reply to woolsack:
How about the tweet celebrating the shooting down of a jet… later deleted...
Did you also hear the Russians in the UN, blaming Ukraine for diverting the plane there knowing the rebels held anti-aircraft machinery..
What evidence do you want anyway? A plane was shot out of the sky, moments later the rebels celebrate..
http://news.yahoo.com/rebel-suggests-insurgents-shot-down-malaysia-plane-mi...
> There's no evidence that the rebels fired it is there? None whatsoever.
How about the tweet celebrating the shooting down of a jet… later deleted...
Did you also hear the Russians in the UN, blaming Ukraine for diverting the plane there knowing the rebels held anti-aircraft machinery..
What evidence do you want anyway? A plane was shot out of the sky, moments later the rebels celebrate..
http://news.yahoo.com/rebel-suggests-insurgents-shot-down-malaysia-plane-mi...
Post edited at 15:19
In reply to woolsack:
Whilst they might be fairly sneaky I think they might have been spotted carrying a long range SAM. Its not something you can stick in the diplomatic bag.
> There are certainly enough private military companies present in Ukraine so the CIA will be in there in reasonable numbers.
Whilst they might be fairly sneaky I think they might have been spotted carrying a long range SAM. Its not something you can stick in the diplomatic bag.
In reply to IainRUK:
Tweet by whom? Very flimsy evidence from which to start the Third World War don't you think?
Tweet by whom? Very flimsy evidence from which to start the Third World War don't you think?
In reply to IainRUK:
That wont work. Since if I was going to shoot down a plane and blame the other side then I would probably plant some other evidence as well.
Note not that I believe that line just that you aint going to be able to convince someone who believes its an evil plot by the CIA/EU/etc as opposed to a mistake by the pro Russian rebels.
> How about the tweet celebrating the shooting down of a jet… later deleted...
That wont work. Since if I was going to shoot down a plane and blame the other side then I would probably plant some other evidence as well.
Note not that I believe that line just that you aint going to be able to convince someone who believes its an evil plot by the CIA/EU/etc as opposed to a mistake by the pro Russian rebels.
In reply to woolsack:
Yes they do. They're completely incompetent when it comes to coups. If you were to write a book on how to carry out coups, you'd look at the USA and say 'don't do it like this'.
> There are certainly enough private military companies present in Ukraine so the CIA will be in there in reasonable numbers. They never miss a good coup
Yes they do. They're completely incompetent when it comes to coups. If you were to write a book on how to carry out coups, you'd look at the USA and say 'don't do it like this'.
In reply to IainRUK:
Yes, why would Ukrainian ATC divert the plane into a war zone? As Mike S pointed out, Igla system can't attain that altitude. Toby reckons the rebels were carting a BUK system about on a low loader. Or was it the Ukrainian army? Whose lies can be trusted in this?
So you are told by our wonderfully partisan media!
> How about the tweet celebrating the shooting down of a jet… later deleted...
> Did you also hear the Russians in the UN, blaming Ukraine for diverting the plane there knowing the rebels held anti-aircraft machinery..
Yes, why would Ukrainian ATC divert the plane into a war zone? As Mike S pointed out, Igla system can't attain that altitude. Toby reckons the rebels were carting a BUK system about on a low loader. Or was it the Ukrainian army? Whose lies can be trusted in this?
> What evidence do you want anyway? A plane was shot out of the sky, moments later the rebels celebrate..
So you are told by our wonderfully partisan media!
In reply to woolsack:
Everyone uses that same channel… Singapore were also there.. airliners regularly fly over war zones..
Basically you know and we know, you will never accept any version of events which doesn't conclude that this was a act from ukraine to blame the rebels…
They have confirmed they have BUK..
Everyone uses that same channel… Singapore were also there.. airliners regularly fly over war zones..
Basically you know and we know, you will never accept any version of events which doesn't conclude that this was a act from ukraine to blame the rebels…
They have confirmed they have BUK..
In reply to woolsack:
Ukraine would own up to it, they did when they shot down the Russian plane 5 years ago or so..
Ukraine would own up to it, they did when they shot down the Russian plane 5 years ago or so..
In reply to IainRUK:
Yes, whenever Uncle Sam says, you've got to trust us that we've got some really secret information which we can't tell you and some really secret pictures we took from space, I get this deja vu feeling. Weird isn't it?
> Basically you know and we know, you will never accept any version of events which doesn't conclude that this was a act from ukraine to blame the rebels…
Yes, whenever Uncle Sam says, you've got to trust us that we've got some really secret information which we can't tell you and some really secret pictures we took from space, I get this deja vu feeling. Weird isn't it?
In reply to woolsack:
You've got some legitimate concerns in my opinion (Ukrainian ATC), but the above is nonsensical and doesn't help your case. It is no secret the US can detect where a missile was launched from, and they have been completely open that they detected it was launched from rebel held areas, no secrets. If the data was presented in a format a layman could interpret it would look like something I could knock up on a desktop publishing package so what's the point?
> Yes, whenever Uncle Sam says, you've got to trust us that we've got some really secret information which we can't tell you and some really secret pictures we took from space, I get this deja vu feeling.
You've got some legitimate concerns in my opinion (Ukrainian ATC), but the above is nonsensical and doesn't help your case. It is no secret the US can detect where a missile was launched from, and they have been completely open that they detected it was launched from rebel held areas, no secrets. If the data was presented in a format a layman could interpret it would look like something I could knock up on a desktop publishing package so what's the point?
Post edited at 15:40
In reply to woolsack:
Presumably it's the CIA who are preventing the Dutch investigators getting access to the crash site?
> Yes, whenever Uncle Sam says, you've got to trust us that we've got some really secret information which we can't tell you and some really secret pictures we took from space, I get this deja vu feeling. Weird isn't it?
Presumably it's the CIA who are preventing the Dutch investigators getting access to the crash site?
In reply to woolsack:
As far as I am aware they didnt. The only relevant comment seems to be asking them to change height.
Why would they be using a long range SAM? Bearing in mind the rebels have no planes it seems somewhat pointless to have it near the front line, risky as well if the rebels launch a raid. I guess they could use it on the Russians but on the grounds they probably dont want an official invasion seems somewhat unlikely.
As opposed to your neutral sources?
> Yes, why would Ukrainian ATC divert the plane into a war zone?
As far as I am aware they didnt. The only relevant comment seems to be asking them to change height.
> Or was it the Ukrainian army?
Why would they be using a long range SAM? Bearing in mind the rebels have no planes it seems somewhat pointless to have it near the front line, risky as well if the rebels launch a raid. I guess they could use it on the Russians but on the grounds they probably dont want an official invasion seems somewhat unlikely.
> So you are told by our wonderfully partisan media!
As opposed to your neutral sources?
In reply to woolsack:
Whats weird? The US spying on missile launches from a former soviet country? Yeah really weird..
What is weird is you thinking Ukraine fired the SAMs..
Russia's condemnation of Ukraines ATC suggests they know the rebels did it and are trying to transfer the blame..
You seem to switch your view and suggest similar..
As said at the time I think this was a mistake by the rebel forces. But as always with you and Bruce we have to be for or against.. I'm actually far from supportive of Ukraine and have always said the government should be an interim until proper fair open elections are held in the immediate future. This government was not democratically elected so should not be supported like it has been.
Whats weird? The US spying on missile launches from a former soviet country? Yeah really weird..
What is weird is you thinking Ukraine fired the SAMs..
Russia's condemnation of Ukraines ATC suggests they know the rebels did it and are trying to transfer the blame..
You seem to switch your view and suggest similar..
As said at the time I think this was a mistake by the rebel forces. But as always with you and Bruce we have to be for or against.. I'm actually far from supportive of Ukraine and have always said the government should be an interim until proper fair open elections are held in the immediate future. This government was not democratically elected so should not be supported like it has been.
In reply to IainRUK:
Apparently not, this airliner was flying in a different area than most, 200km further North tha previous Malaysia Airlines flights.
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Central_Asia/CEN-01-190714.html
The other question floating around is the presence of fighter jets in the area and the possibility of the plane being shot down by an air to air missile. This would also have led to the same decompression. As said already we have a lot of US and Kiev flak flying about but nothing solid. The triumphant messages could also be people bullshitting, thinking they'd shot down a transport plain - often when "successful" bomb attacks happen several different militant groups try to grab the "glory".
The "amateur videos" of a missile truck rushing Eastwards is on the same par, it proves nothing as if there were such missiles in E Ukraine wouldn't it be pretty sensible to try and hide them? On the other hand we know that the Ukrainian Army does have missile set ups and which, unlike the pro-autonomy rebels, they have the personnel capable of using them at this height and speed... and they have actually done such a deed before, in October 2001, killing 78 people, at first they blamed it on "terrorists" back then too. This doesn't prove they've done it again either.
Why not follow President Putin's wise advice and wait for the investigation to give it's results? Normally the West would say just that but they seem to be in a bit of a media frenzy at present, pushing more "sanctions" before the guilty party has been discovered for certain. Almost as if they knew the spin was just that.
> Everyone uses that same channel… Singapore were also there.. airliners regularly fly over war zones..
Apparently not, this airliner was flying in a different area than most, 200km further North tha previous Malaysia Airlines flights.
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Central_Asia/CEN-01-190714.html
The other question floating around is the presence of fighter jets in the area and the possibility of the plane being shot down by an air to air missile. This would also have led to the same decompression. As said already we have a lot of US and Kiev flak flying about but nothing solid. The triumphant messages could also be people bullshitting, thinking they'd shot down a transport plain - often when "successful" bomb attacks happen several different militant groups try to grab the "glory".
The "amateur videos" of a missile truck rushing Eastwards is on the same par, it proves nothing as if there were such missiles in E Ukraine wouldn't it be pretty sensible to try and hide them? On the other hand we know that the Ukrainian Army does have missile set ups and which, unlike the pro-autonomy rebels, they have the personnel capable of using them at this height and speed... and they have actually done such a deed before, in October 2001, killing 78 people, at first they blamed it on "terrorists" back then too. This doesn't prove they've done it again either.
Why not follow President Putin's wise advice and wait for the investigation to give it's results? Normally the West would say just that but they seem to be in a bit of a media frenzy at present, pushing more "sanctions" before the guilty party has been discovered for certain. Almost as if they knew the spin was just that.
In reply to tony:
Well no actually, it's the Kiev Ukrainian Army who refuse to respect the cease fire declared by the E Ukrainians... you may have seen the photos of building destroyed by artillery? Mind you as they are trained and helped by the CIA I suppose your supposition could be part right.
> Presumably it's the CIA who are preventing the Dutch investigators getting access to the crash site?
Well no actually, it's the Kiev Ukrainian Army who refuse to respect the cease fire declared by the E Ukrainians... you may have seen the photos of building destroyed by artillery? Mind you as they are trained and helped by the CIA I suppose your supposition could be part right.
In reply to Bruce Hooker:
It's a shame he's not doing more to assist the investigation by helping allow the Dutch investigators access to the crash site.
> Why not follow President Putin's wise advice and wait for the investigation to give it's results?
It's a shame he's not doing more to assist the investigation by helping allow the Dutch investigators access to the crash site.
In reply to dissonance:
To be prepared in case the Russians do make a move, that's seems obvious, they have 27 launchers in the area according to the Russian army, which you may not believe although as they supplied them and trained their crews if anyone knows they do.
The present Kiev government isn't exactly a calm stable one, the PM has just resigned and there are still extreme right members in it, who knows what such people are capable of?
> Why would they be using a long range SAM?
To be prepared in case the Russians do make a move, that's seems obvious, they have 27 launchers in the area according to the Russian army, which you may not believe although as they supplied them and trained their crews if anyone knows they do.
The present Kiev government isn't exactly a calm stable one, the PM has just resigned and there are still extreme right members in it, who knows what such people are capable of?
In reply to tony:
Do you think he has much influence with the present Kiev regime?
> It's a shame he's not doing more to assist the investigation by helping allow the Dutch investigators access to the crash site.
Do you think he has much influence with the present Kiev regime?
In reply to woolsack:
So the convenient shooting down of a passenger airliner isn't all part of the plan?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-28551391
What's next? Chemical weapons?
So the convenient shooting down of a passenger airliner isn't all part of the plan?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-28551391
What's next? Chemical weapons?
In reply to woolsack:
Not sure, but it was my initial assumption that the Russians would want to download/copy the data before handing the boxes over, so they had a copy to do their own analysis, and put their own spin on it. However, as I have not heard that this was done, it looks like I was wrong on that one.
> Just how long does it take to access the information from flight recorders?
Not sure, but it was my initial assumption that the Russians would want to download/copy the data before handing the boxes over, so they had a copy to do their own analysis, and put their own spin on it. However, as I have not heard that this was done, it looks like I was wrong on that one.
In reply to woolsack:
In this video two things are shown clearly:
1) That it's Ukrainian army attacks which are preventing access to the crash area.
2) The weight of the shelling by the Ukrainian army, the images of heavy artillery look strangely like the images we are seeing from Palestine of Israeli artillery shelling Gaza.
Not surprising perhaps but maybe those putting all the blame on the Russians should open their eyes a bit.
Over 200 000 civilians have left the area, over a 1000 civilian deaths of whom many children... more similarities, and Obama supports the aggressors in each case, but "Obama is an honourable man"!
In this video two things are shown clearly:
1) That it's Ukrainian army attacks which are preventing access to the crash area.
2) The weight of the shelling by the Ukrainian army, the images of heavy artillery look strangely like the images we are seeing from Palestine of Israeli artillery shelling Gaza.
Not surprising perhaps but maybe those putting all the blame on the Russians should open their eyes a bit.
Over 200 000 civilians have left the area, over a 1000 civilian deaths of whom many children... more similarities, and Obama supports the aggressors in each case, but "Obama is an honourable man"!
In reply to Bruce Hooker:
Forgot the video: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-28551476
It was early.
Forgot the video: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-28551476
It was early.
In reply to woolsack:
Do you happen to know if those tinfoil hats come in a Medium as well as a Large?
Do you happen to know if those tinfoil hats come in a Medium as well as a Large?
In reply to Bruce Hooker:
On the other thread you come over all shocked about how anyone could support Israel still. Here you are quite happy to see the Russians/rebels as victims despite them shooting down a civilian airliner.
On the other thread you come over all shocked about how anyone could support Israel still. Here you are quite happy to see the Russians/rebels as victims despite them shooting down a civilian airliner.
In reply to MG:
Well my whole point is that we don't know that yet... and even those who believe they did say it was an accident, absolutely different to the situation in Palestine, no one says the Israelis are shelling and bombing Gaza by accident... excepting the guns look the same, civilians are being killed and it's all encouraged by the same people - the USA and EU.
> On the other thread you come over all shocked about how anyone could support Israel still. Here you are quite happy to see the Russians/rebels as victims despite them shooting down a civilian airliner.
Well my whole point is that we don't know that yet... and even those who believe they did say it was an accident, absolutely different to the situation in Palestine, no one says the Israelis are shelling and bombing Gaza by accident... excepting the guns look the same, civilians are being killed and it's all encouraged by the same people - the USA and EU.
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Loading Notifications...