Malaysia Airlines MH17 Crash: Boeing 777 Crashed in Ukraine Near Russian Border

[Balthazar]

I thought that Reuters are trustworthly. Well, now they're hypocrite faggots, just like a rest of corporate media.

[deisik]

Cracks in rebels story: one of the their commanders, Alexander Khodakovsky, admitted that his forces had Buk SAM, that it might had been supplied by Russia, involved in shooting down MH17, and then smuggled back over the border. He also said that although it is expected from him to represent the side he is fighting for, this doesn't mean that it must always reflect his own views: "This causes real discomfort to my soul."

Article: http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/mh17-ukraine-rebels-admit-having-moscow-supplied-buk-missile-system-1458032

The interview appears to be modified/perverted:
http://zaytivk.ru/slavyansk2014

B cpeдy aгeнтcтвo Peйтep pacпpocтpaнилo интepвью c Aлeкcaндpoм Xoдaкoвcким, в кoтopoм oн зaявил, чтo y oпoлчeнцeв якoбы мoг быть кoмплeкc «Бyк», пpимeнeниe кoтopoгo былo cпpoвoциpoвaнo yкpaинcкими cилoвикaми, пpeдпpинявшими oбcтpeлы c вoздyxa пo нaзeмным цeлям.

Кoмaндиp бaтaльoнa «Bocтoк» Aлeкcaндp Xoдaкoвcкий oтpицaeт, чтo гoвopил в интepвью aгeнтcтвy Peйтep o якoбы пpимeнeнии oпoлчeнцaми нa вocтoкe Укpaины cиcтeмы «Бyк», зaявил в cpeдy PИA Hoвocти иcтoчник в oкpyжeнии кoмaндиpa.

«Я нe гoвopил ничeгo пoдoбнoгo „Peйтepy“, и y мeня ecть зaпиcь paзгoвopa», — пpoцитиpoвaл coбeceдник aгeнтcтвa cлoвa Xoдaкoвcкoгo.

Paнee в cpeдy aгeнтcтвo Peйтep pacпpocтpaнилo интepвью c Aлeкcaндpoм Xoдaкoвcким, в кoтopoм oн зaявил, чтo y oпoлчeнцeв якoбы мoг быть кoмплeкc «Бyк», пpимeнeниe кoтopoгo былo cпpoвoциpoвaнo yкpaинcкими cилoвикaми, пpeдпpинявшими oбcтpeлы c вoздyxa пo нaзeмным цeлям.

In short, Hodakovskij declines saying that the resistance used Buks in the East of Ukraine. In his statement he said: "I haven't been saying anything like this to Reiter , and I have a recording of our conversation".

And how hard is it to publish that recording? Just saying evidence exists doesn't prove anything!

I think it is now Reuters' business to prove that Hodakovskiy had actually said what they wrote. An interviewee has by far more trust regarding what he says, since if he answers questions voluntarily, why would he deny his own words in the first place if not because of their misrepresentation by an interviewer?

[Paya]

He admits that rebels had Buk, that's where he was clear. The rest is all "might", "could" and "maybe". I think I've put it quite well in my post.

You may put whatever you want in your posts, but I quoted the text from the article. If you don't see the difference between "suggested" (i.e. mentioned as possible) and "admitted" (i.e. conceded as true), then it makes no sense talking any longer. Think as you please, I just point out the discrepancy between what you posted and the actual wording.

And now it turns out that Reuters have changed the meaning of his words too (just like you did).

He said (citation): "I knew that a BUK came from Luhansk. At the time I was told that a BUK from Luhansk was coming under the flag of the LNR." Where are "suggestions" in this part? Man is leaving no doubt that rebels had Buk and that he knew about it. Only later he is starting to speculate about possible origins, where could it have gone after the accident, was it even used for shooting down MH17, etc.

But yeah... he is now telling that the journalist who interviewed him twisted his words so we're back to square one anyway.

[Nemo1024]

So in the first part you take the side of the one giving the interview and in the second you trust what the reporters have published from the second interview.

Taking clear sides again...

No, that's you attributing such behaviour to me. You might have noticed that Paya, while being as you describe it, pro-Russian, still brought forth the news that are not favourable to the resistance. I brought forth other news that debunk the previous item. Just trying to get to the truth, whatever that truth might be, and in the absence of truth reporting the facts so far.

Be careful, niothor, lest you start behaving like the Western MSM outlets. Reporting the news should not be the same as taking sides. To remind you, in one of my earlier posts on the subject, I voiced my doubts that it could have been regular Ukrainian Army doing the shooting. Does that make me take the Ukrainian side?

Btw, thanks for the links.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/10983074/Relatives-anger-at-treatment-of-MH17-bodies.html

It was quite telling reading the first short article:

The nephew of a Briton killed in the MH17 crash has condemned the "degrading and inhumane" treatment of victims by pro-Russian rebels.

Jordan Withers, whose uncle Glenn Thomas, a World Health Organisation (WHO) spokesman and former journalist, was among those on the downed passenger jet, said the the family was getting most of its information from the media.

Hmm... So, he is angered at "pro-Russian rebels" just because the media programmed him to be so, without any hard facts.

PS:
Rebels... "Rebel alliance of Lugansk and Donesk". I like the sound of that. "Rebel alliance" bears a strong positive connotation in the Western pop culture, from Star Wars.
Oh, and Western MSM should dispose of the label "pro-Russian" and replace it with "ethnically Russian", then they'd be one step closer to the truth.

[Hell-raiser]

He admits that rebels had Buk, that's where he was clear. The rest is all "might", "could" and "maybe". I think I've put it quite well in my post.

You may put whatever you want in your posts, but I quoted the text from the article. If you don't see the difference between "suggested" (i.e. mentioned as possible) and "admitted" (i.e. conceded as true), then it makes no sense talking any longer. Think as you please, I just point out the discrepancy between what you posted and the actual wording.

And now it turns out that Reuters have changed the meaning of his words too (just like you did).

He said (citation): "I knew that a BUK came from Luhansk. At the time I was told that a BUK from Luhansk was coming under the flag of the LNR." Where are "suggestions" in this part? Man is leaving no doubt that rebels had Buk and that he knew about it. Only later he is starting to speculate about possible origins, where could it have gone after the accident, was it even used for shooting down MH17, etc.

But yeah... he is now telling that the journalist who interviewed him twisted his words so we're back to square one anyway.

There have been photos of a BUK captured by the rebells prior to the Malaysian Airlines MH17 crash, and he might have actually been talking about this one.

[Paya]

Is this a joke? World's only all-around superpower, country which is spending more than 50 billion $ per year on various intelligence agencies and God knows how much more to maintain their huge network of spy satellites, uses anonymous posts on social medias like Youtube, Facebook and Twitter as top proof to accuse pro-Russian rebels for downing MH17? I was ashamed to watch this press conference, and I am not even an American...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oQRvINebeok

[Tusk]

Is this a joke? World's only all-around superpower, country which is spending more than 50 billion $ per year on various intelligence agencies and God knows how much more to maintain their huge network of spy satellites, uses anonymous posts on social medias like Youtube, Facebook and Twitter as top proof to accuse pro-Russian rebels for downing MH17? I was ashamed to watch this press conference, and I am not even an American...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oQRvINebeok

The lunatics have taken over the asylum, can they not see how stupid this makes them look
 

[Tzupy]

From an Aviationweek blog:

Which is just about my reaction to the Sovi... er, Russian explanations, official and otherwise, for the shootdown of MH17. Let's take two that have floated around the Internet.

The first is that the Ukrainian air force shot the Boeing 777 down itself, using a Sukhoi Su-25 Frogfoot carrying an R-60 Aphid air-to-air missile (the only AAM normally carried by the Su-25). This would require some remarkable timing and a pilot immune to nose-bleeds, because the Su-25 can manage Mach 0.82 flat out, on a good day, and a 777 can do 0.89, and furthermore the Su-25 is unpressurized and has a normal service ceiling of 23,000 feet. No doubt coincidentally, on the day this claim was published, a Wikipedia editor with a Russian address was found trying to insert a 33,000-foot ceiling on the Su-25 page. As for the R-60, the 3 kg warhead's ability to assure a kill on a large aircraft with highly redundant systems is dubious at best.

A second theory is that two Ukrainian Su-27 fighters trailed the Boeing and somehow drew the missile on to it. Aside from the fact that the Buk-M1 is about as discriminating as a Rottweiler with ADHD, and that it could be activated at such a short range that the Su-27s would be inside its no-escape zone, the weakness of this story is its extreme similarity to the KGB-disseminated excuse for the shootdown of KAL 007, 31 years ago. The story then was that an RC-135 was deliberately shadowing the civilian 747, possibly using it to "ring the fire alarm" and gather data on Soviet air defenses.

[E-valuta]

Is this a joke? World's only all-around superpower, country which is spending more than 50 billion $ per year on various intelligence agencies and God knows how much more to maintain their huge network of spy satellites, uses anonymous posts on social medias like Youtube, Facebook and Twitter as top proof to accuse pro-Russian rebels for downing MH17? I was ashamed to watch this press conference, and I am not even an American...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oQRvINebeok

All you need is to make the majority believe. What opposition communist/terrorists thinks is not as important. They get a majority of People screaming for Putins head that will be enough to escalate it further.

[Nemo1024]

A second theory is that two Ukrainian Su-27 fighters trailed the Boeing and somehow drew the missile on to it. Aside from the fact that the Buk-M1 is about as discriminating as a Rottweiler with ADHD, and that it could be activated at such a short range that the Su-27s would be inside its no-escape zone, the weakness of this story is its extreme similarity to the KGB-disseminated excuse for the shootdown of KAL 007, 31 years ago. The story then was that an RC-135 was deliberately shadowing the civilian 747, possibly using it to "ring the fire alarm" and gather data on Soviet air defenses.

And that story was false, as we now know. There is an overwhelming evidence that KAL-007 was shot down in the Sea of Japan, mush further south, than Sakhalin. For example, debris found there could not have travelled against the current. At least 3 American war planes and possibly a number of Soviet fighters were on the other hand downed over Sakhalin, in an aerial battle both sides were loath to admit to.

http://www.amazon.com/Incident-Sakhalin-True-Mission-Flight/dp/1568580541

I don't hold much hope of the MH-17 mystery being solved within the next 10-15 years...

[Hell-raiser]

From an Aviationweek blog:

Which is just about my reaction to the Sovi... er, Russian explanations, official and otherwise, for the shootdown of MH17. Let's take two that have floated around the Internet.

The first is that the Ukrainian air force shot the Boeing 777 down itself, using a Sukhoi Su-25 Frogfoot carrying an R-60 Aphid air-to-air missile (the only AAM normally carried by the Su-25). This would require some remarkable timing and a pilot immune to nose-bleeds, because the Su-25 can manage Mach 0.82 flat out, on a good day, and a 777 can do 0.89, and furthermore the Su-25 is unpressurized and has a normal service ceiling of 23,000 feet. No doubt coincidentally, on the day this claim was published, a Wikipedia editor with a Russian address was found trying to insert a 33,000-foot ceiling on the Su-25 page. As for the R-60, the 3 kg warhead's ability to assure a kill on a large aircraft with highly redundant systems is dubious at best.

A second theory is that two Ukrainian Su-27 fighters trailed the Boeing and somehow drew the missile on to it. Aside from the fact that the Buk-M1 is about as discriminating as a Rottweiler with ADHD, and that it could be activated at such a short range that the Su-27s would be inside its no-escape zone, the weakness of this story is its extreme similarity to the KGB-disseminated excuse for the shootdown of KAL 007, 31 years ago. The story then was that an RC-135 was deliberately shadowing the civilian 747, possibly using it to "ring the fire alarm" and gather data on Soviet air defenses.

The Ukrainian air force uses a modernized Su-25, which has a pressurized cabin (service ceiling up to 10,000 meters) and bears more powerful weapons. Also, the MH17 could have been downed by a jet fighter (like SU-27), for which it would make an easy target.

[bitsmichel]

From an Aviationweek blog:

Which is just about my reaction to the Sovi... er, Russian explanations, official and otherwise, for the shootdown of MH17. Let's take two that have floated around the Internet.

The first is that the Ukrainian air force shot the Boeing 777 down itself, using a Sukhoi Su-25 Frogfoot carrying an R-60 Aphid air-to-air missile (the only AAM normally carried by the Su-25). This would require some remarkable timing and a pilot immune to nose-bleeds, because the Su-25 can manage Mach 0.82 flat out, on a good day, and a 777 can do 0.89, and furthermore the Su-25 is unpressurized and has a normal service ceiling of 23,000 feet. No doubt coincidentally, on the day this claim was published, a Wikipedia editor with a Russian address was found trying to insert a 33,000-foot ceiling on the Su-25 page. As for the R-60, the 3 kg warhead's ability to assure a kill on a large aircraft with highly redundant systems is dubious at best.

A second theory is that two Ukrainian Su-27 fighters trailed the Boeing and somehow drew the missile on to it. Aside from the fact that the Buk-M1 is about as discriminating as a Rottweiler with ADHD, and that it could be activated at such a short range that the Su-27s would be inside its no-escape zone, the weakness of this story is its extreme similarity to the KGB-disseminated excuse for the shootdown of KAL 007, 31 years ago. The story then was that an RC-135 was deliberately shadowing the civilian 747, possibly using it to "ring the fire alarm" and gather data on Soviet air defenses.

The Ukrainian air force uses a modernized Su-25, which has a pressurized cabin (service ceiling up to 10,000 meters) and bears more powerful weapons. Also, the MH17 could have been downed by a jet fighter (like SU-27), for which it would make an easy target.

True, modern jet fighters can go off the radar these days.. but still I think it doesn't make any sense to shoot down a passenger airplane for either side. I think either it was a set up by a secret service or an accident. 
 

[Hell-raiser]

From an Aviationweek blog:

Which is just about my reaction to the Sovi... er, Russian explanations, official and otherwise, for the shootdown of MH17. Let's take two that have floated around the Internet.

The first is that the Ukrainian air force shot the Boeing 777 down itself, using a Sukhoi Su-25 Frogfoot carrying an R-60 Aphid air-to-air missile (the only AAM normally carried by the Su-25). This would require some remarkable timing and a pilot immune to nose-bleeds, because the Su-25 can manage Mach 0.82 flat out, on a good day, and a 777 can do 0.89, and furthermore the Su-25 is unpressurized and has a normal service ceiling of 23,000 feet. No doubt coincidentally, on the day this claim was published, a Wikipedia editor with a Russian address was found trying to insert a 33,000-foot ceiling on the Su-25 page. As for the R-60, the 3 kg warhead's ability to assure a kill on a large aircraft with highly redundant systems is dubious at best.

A second theory is that two Ukrainian Su-27 fighters trailed the Boeing and somehow drew the missile on to it. Aside from the fact that the Buk-M1 is about as discriminating as a Rottweiler with ADHD, and that it could be activated at such a short range that the Su-27s would be inside its no-escape zone, the weakness of this story is its extreme similarity to the KGB-disseminated excuse for the shootdown of KAL 007, 31 years ago. The story then was that an RC-135 was deliberately shadowing the civilian 747, possibly using it to "ring the fire alarm" and gather data on Soviet air defenses.

The Ukrainian air force uses a modernized Su-25, which has a pressurized cabin (service ceiling up to 10,000 meters) and bears more powerful weapons. Also, the MH17 could have been downed by a jet fighter (like SU-27), for which it would make an easy target.

True, modern jet fighters can go off the radar these days.. but still I think it doesn't make any sense to shoot down a passenger airplane for either side. I think either it was a set up by a secret service or an accident.

As someone has said before, there is no unity inside the Ukrainian authorities, so the downing of the MH17 flight may come as a result of the covert struggle between Ukrainian oligarchs (for example, Kolomoiskiy vs Poroshenko).

[Nemo1024]

http://www.globalresearch.ca/framing-russia-fabricating-a-pretext-to-wage-war-flight-mh-17-and-operation-northwoods/5393113

It sprang to my mind as the propaganda war after the the airplane tragedy in eastern Ukraine was unleashed. While at the time the Northwoods document was produced by the US military its implementation was rejected by then US President John F. Kennedy, circumstances have changed and I cannot help but ask myself if the MH-17 incident is a re-run of ‘Operation Northwoods’ with today’s technology on a bigger scale. This time not trying to frame Cuba but Russia.

[ABitNut]

So the USA basically said, "We have evidence. And we won't publish it."

Congratulations, USA. You are consciously obstructing the investigation.

[redHeadBlunder]

So the USA basically said, "We have evidence. And we won't publish it."

Congratulations, USA. You are consciously obstructing the investigation.

Publishing the information would likely give away information about how capable our intelligence capabilities are

[ABitNut]

So the USA basically said, "We have evidence. And we won't publish it."

Congratulations, USA. You are consciously obstructing the investigation.

Publishing the information would likely give away information about how capable our intelligence capabilities are

Fact is that the USA is obstructing the investigation. Rationalizing it doesn't change that fact. Just calling it as it is.

[chopstick]

So the USA basically said, "We have evidence. And we won't publish it."

Congratulations, USA. You are consciously obstructing the investigation.

Publishing the information would likely give away information about how capable our intelligence capabilities are

Fact is that the USA is obstructing the investigation. Rationalizing it doesn't change that fact. Just calling it as it is.

It is obvious why they aren't publishing the information. It's because it would incriminate the Ukraine government and not the separatists. There was a military jet flying near the passenger plane at the time it was shot down. They also confiscated the Air Traffic Control records and refuse to release them. These are both major red flags that indicate the Ukrainian government, and not the separatists, are at fault here.

Obvious false flag is obvious.

[chopstick]

WATCH THIS VIDEO. It is a video of a female militia member describing the fact that the Ukrainians were using the tactic of hiding behind passenger jets using military jets to PURPOSELY PROVOKE THE REBELS INTO FIRING ON THE PASSENGER JET.

This video was uploaded June 18th, a full month before the disaster happened. There is no way it could have been faked.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aKKoKmUtQXE

Smoking fucking gun. The Ukraine government did this on purpose.

The people who are behind this coup in Ukraine are so maniacal.. so greedy and totally lusting for power... that they don't mind killing 290 innocent civilians and then lying about who did it, all so they can continue to gain power.. it is truly sick, and disgusting, and it makes me weep for this world.

[chopstick]

Furthermore, the Ukrainian government's air force PRACTICED DRILLS where they purposely shadowed civilian jets to disguise themselves

they practiced this shit and trained for it

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=6vYaRtY27iY