A Year Since MH-17 Tragedy

[Sonc]

Experts for all sides can testify and world gets to decide which ones, if any, are credible. These people will be given a chance to tell their story.

What prevents conduct an investigation now?

-To the crash site were admitted all the experts.
-Black boxes have given.
-On the Internet there are 1,000 eyewitness accounts.
-And many experts lead their investigation.

What Russia can yet do to help?

 

[Sonc]

Separatist should not have looted those dead bodies and stolen luggage and belongings of dead people who they left rotting in the hot sun while they searched for personal property to steal. It gave them an identification and branded them as horrible and uncivilized people undeserving of respect.

Was the judgment, and it has been proven?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Experts for all sides can testify and world gets to decide which ones, if any, are credible. These people will be given a chance to tell their story.

What prevents conduct an investigation now?

-To the crash site were admitted all the experts.
-Black boxes have given.
-On the Internet there are 1,000 eyewitness accounts.
-And many experts lead their investigation.

What Russia can yet do to help?

Russia should admit what they did.
Turn over the culprits.

 

[Stratford57]

Russia should admit what they did.
Turn over the culprits.

If Obama really had ANY evidence proving that Russia did it, be sure it would be broadcast all over the world a year ago. Since it hasn't happened, it only means one of two:
- if there is NO evidence yet, then the presumption of innocence has to be held for both sides;
- if Obama DID had evidence and hid it, then it means Ukrainians did it and the USA are covering them because of their geopolitical interests about Ukraine.
See, Toddster, as you claim "math is hard" , but logical thinking always helps. Never hurts to try at least..

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Russia should admit what they did.
Turn over the culprits.

If Obama really had ANY evidence proving that Russia did it, be sure it would be broadcast all over the world a year ago. Since it hasn't happened, it's only one of two:
- if there is NO evidence yet, then the presumption of innocence has to be held for both sides;
- if Obama DID had evidence and hid it, then it means Ukrainians did it and the USA are covering them because of their geopolitical interests about Ukraine.
See, Toddster, as you claim "math is hard" , but logical thinking always helps. Never hurts to try at least..

The "separatists" admitted they shot down the plane.
Putin should admit he gave them the missiles and he should turn them over.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Separatist should not have looted those dead bodies and stolen luggage and belongings of dead people who they left rotting in the hot sun while they searched for personal property to steal. It gave them an identification and branded them as horrible and uncivilized people undeserving of respect.

Was the judgment, and it has been proven?

Fuck you, Ivan.

 

[Sonc]

Separatist should not have looted those dead bodies and stolen luggage and belongings of dead people who they left rotting in the hot sun while they searched for personal property to steal. It gave them an identification and branded them as horrible and uncivilized people undeserving of respect.

Was the judgment, and it has been proven?

Fuck you, Ivan.

Today you drink your Prozak?)))

 

[Stratford57]

Sonc, you must have really got our buddy Toddster since F-word remained his only argument (however his previous arguments were even weaker, ha-ha). Good job, Sonc.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Sonc, you must have really got our buddy Toddster since F-word remained his only argument (however his previous arguments were even weaker, ha-ha). Good job, Sonc.

Go post some more propaganda. Gotta make your quota.
That vodka ain't gonna buy itself, eh comrade?

 

[PK1]

Russia should admit what they did.
Turn over the culprits.

If Obama really had ANY evidence proving that Russia did it, be sure it would be broadcast all over the world a year ago. Since it hasn't happened, it only means one of two:
- if there is NO evidence yet, then the presumption of innocence has to be held for both sides;
- if Obama DID had evidence and hid it, then it means Ukrainians did it and the USA are covering them because of their geopolitical interests about Ukraine.
See, Toddster, as you claim "math is hard" , but logical thinking always helps. Never hurts to try at least..

---
This should be in the final investigative report ...
The pic below shows a satellite view of this strike by the Russian BUK's SA-11 missile:

 

[Sonc]

Public testimony means the whole world gets to hear these people talk.

Public testimony...???

The Ukrainian Veto: Why The MH17 Report Will Not Reveal The TruthOn November 26, 2014 it was revealed by the Dutch news outlet RTL Nieuws that there exists a confidentiality agreement that was signed by the Netherlands, Belgium, Australia and the Kiev regime in Ukraine that gives each of the signatories a veto on any information that comes out of the investigation.


I wonderwhy? What do you think?

 

[Stratford57]

Even in the case of the murder of one person .... the court did not accept such evidence.
Using such evidence, the US government prove one thing - they are not professional.
It does not prove nothing more.

This is why tribunal is required. Public testimony means the whole world gets to hear these people talk. Experts for all sides can testify and world gets to decide which ones, if any, are credible. These people will be given a chance to tell their story.

Translation ^: Should the UN have a Tribunal about Hiroshima and Nagasaki to begin with? It looks like modern politicians have already forgotten about that tragedy...

BTW, 150 thousand people died!

 

[Camp]

Public testimony means the whole world gets to hear these people talk.

Public testimony...???

The Ukrainian Veto: Why The MH17 Report Will Not Reveal The TruthOn November 26, 2014 it was revealed by the Dutch news outlet RTL Nieuws that there exists a confidentiality agreement that was signed by the Netherlands, Belgium, Australia and the Kiev regime in Ukraine that gives each of the signatories a veto on any information that comes out of the investigation.


I wonderwhy? What do you think?

I think it is a normal non disclosure agreement when multiple agencies or nations are investigating a crime. It means information will not be released in bits and pieces by individual entities and that everyone operates as one unit in regards to releasing information to the public.
This is another good reason for the tribunal that was vetoed by Russia. This issue could be publicly addressed in a formal setting, the tribunal, if it were a real or suspected issue.

 

[Sonc]

It means information will not be released in bits and pieces by individual entities and that everyone operates as one unit in regards to releasing information to the public.

No. This means that even if the records were words
- Oh god we attack two Ukrainian aircraft ...
Ukraine can say
- We do not allow to speak about it.
And no one in the world will never know what was on the record.

We do not even know if someone took it right to forbid.

But if today 5 years old child can in 5 minutes to upload 100 songs ... but we still do not know what was in the black boxes ... apparently someone took advantage of this right.

 

[Camp]

It means information will not be released in bits and pieces by individual entities and that everyone operates as one unit in regards to releasing information to the public.

No. This means that even if the records were words
- Oh god we attack two Ukrainian aircraft ...
Ukraine can say
- We do not allow to speak about it.
And no one in the world will never know what was on the record.

We do not even know if someone took it right to forbid.

But if today 5 years old child can in 5 minutes to upload 100 songs ... but we still do not know what was in the black boxes ... apparently someone took advantage of this right.

What you are saying is not true. In a tribunal setting the Russian or any other member or participant can demand any secret files be viewed or discussed. Plus, the agreement seems to only be in effect during the investigation phase.That agreement would be nullified once it transferred from the JIT to the UN Tribunal. The tribunal would have different member nations on it and not just the ones with the JIT. The JIT might be part of the prosecution, but the judges will be determined by the Security Council. The tribunal would have authority to see all files and would be under no obligation to some agreement made by the JIT members.

 

[ESay]

Here have been claims about the recordings of communications between the pilots and air traffic controllers. That they haven’t been released yet and that in other cases such recordings were published almost immediately after the crashes.

Does anybody know when the recordings were released after the 2010 Polish Air Force Tu-154 crash near Smolensk?

 

[Sonc]

Here have been claims about the recordings of communications between the pilots and air traffic controllers. That they haven’t been released yet and that in other cases such recordings were published almost immediately after the crashes.

Does anybody know when the recordings were released after the 2010 Polish Air Force Tu-154 crash near Smolensk?

15 months. to my mind.
But the results were ready much earlier.
Polish military refused to acknowledge guilt, this had to spend more time it would have to prove the cause.

 

[ESay]

15 months. to my mind.
But the results were ready much earlier.
Polish military refused to acknowledge guilt, this had to spend more time it would have to prove the cause.

If I understand correctly, 9 months or so. The recordings were published only after the final report was released.

In any case it is somewhat a little bit longer than “the same day or the next day”, isn’t it?

 

[Stratford57]

The Western move to create an international tribunal on the 2014 Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17 crash in eastern Ukraine was a political instrument used to accuse the Russian government of war crimes, a prominent Canadian international criminal lawyer told Sputnik Wednesday.

"So they will use it [International tribunal on MH17] as a political tool to bash Russia and to try and make the Russian government look like war criminals," Christopher Black told Sputnik.

According to Black, Western countries are trying to blame the crash on eastern Ukrainian militia, which the West believes is armed by Moscow.

"And they also want to, of course, demonize and attack the republics of Donbass, Luhansk and Donetsk," Black stated.

The draft proposal to create a tribunal was put forward despite the ongoing official investigation into the aircraft crash, he added.

"And so, we now know that [the initiators of the tribunal are] pushing for this tribunal without any investigation being concluded, and right at the same time, they are withholding information which they refuse to deliver despite many demands by Russia and many other countries," Black emphasized.

Moscow has asserted it would continue to assist an impartial probe into the tragedy that killed 298 people, insisting upon waiting for the official findings of the Dutch Safety Board, charged with the inquiry into the crash, and the release of their final report.

MH17 Tribunal Designed to Paint Russia as War Criminals Sputnik International

 

[Stratford57]

I have a simple question: why all the West is blaming only Russia for MH-17 and NOBODY ever even thought to suspect Ukraine????????????????????????
It doesn't sound fair, does it?

MOSCOW, July 16 /TASS/. The idea to create a tribunal to investigate the MH17 crash is aimed at punishing those whom the United States considers to be guilty, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said on Thursday commenting remarks by US Ambassador to Russia John Tefft who said the United States allegedly knew who had shot the Malaysian Boeing down.

"I remember the ambassador’s interview in which he said in a very categorical manner that the United States knew for sure who had downed the plane and added that it was waiting for the end of investigation," Lavrov said adding the phrase sounded a bit contradictory given the confidence which the US certainly has.

"But if Washington really thinks like Tefft says, the idea of a tribunal becomes a bit clearer. If they know everything, and the United States has actively supported the idea of tribunal’s creation by a UN Security Council resolution, then perhaps it is easy to put two and two together and understand what goal it [the tribunal] will pursue," the Russian foreign minister stressed.

"It turns out that it should guarantee the punishment of those whom Washington considers to be guilty. Let me leave it to Mr. Tefft’s conscience," Lavrov said.
TASS Russia - MH17 crash tribunal creation aimed at punishing those whom US considers guilty Lavrov

In the telephone conversation with Dutch PM Mark Rutte, Putin detailed Russia’s position on the initiative of a range of countries, including the Netherlands, on establishing the international tribunal to persecute persons responsible for destroying the Malaysian airliner.

Putin said this proposal is "early and counterproductive," the Kremlin press service said.

"The focus was made that to adopt a decision on judicial mechanisms and to bring those guilty in this crime to justice, an active work is needed to complete the international investigation that should be thorough and objective and have an independent and comprehensive character," the statement said.

This should be in full compliance with the provisions of Resolution 2166 of the UN Security Council adopted on July 21, 2014 upon Russia’s initiative, the press service stressed.

The Kremlin press service also said that politicized smear campaigns in the media regarding the causes of the crash were inadmissible.
TASS World - Putin says tribunal on MH17 crash early and counterproductive

MOSCOW, July 15 /TASS/. The Russian Investigation Committee is inclined to believe that an air-to air missile, which was not made in Russia, shot down a Malaysian Boeing (MH17 flight) over Ukraine a year ago.
TASS World - Investigators MH17 shot down over Ukraine by air-to-air missile not made in Russia

THE HAGUE, July 13. /TASS/. The idea of establishing an international tribunal on the crash of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 in eastern Ukraine almost a year ago is at least strange, a Dutch journalist and the author of a book on the tragedy, Joost Niemoller said on Monday.

"It is also very weird. Because you have a situation when the public prosecution is setting up an investigation and now we hear that they still don’t know for which judge they are going to bring it. So what kind of an investigation is that?" Niemoller said.
TASS World - Dutch expert says idea of setting up MH17 tribunal is weird