Kiev can’t keep still about MH-17 Crash for ever

[ThoughtCrimes]

The names are revealed in the Dutch report and other sources. It is the Russians who have blocked them from being questioned in a real court.

Really???)) so maybe you will show us this part of Dutch report? with these NAMES? or this part is like Obama's evidences which nobody have ever seen?

Here is a more precise list and detailed investigation that pinpoints the actual Russian unit and soldiers that need to be questioned and were probably responsible for the shootdown.

www.bellingcat.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/53rd-report-public.pdf

bellingcat?????))))) man, are you serious?)))) who is BELLINGCATex-sailesman of underwears?)) only stupid asshole can eat his shit! and what about REAL PROOFS?! what about Dutch report and JIT work made by ADULTS, not nerds from social networks?

A report over 100 pages long with 169 sourced footnotes and you dismiss it as untrustworthy out of hand? You're either a fool or more likely a shill!

There is a problem with the report right from its outset. The agreement to conduct the investigation gave Ukraine veto powers over what information was released. And second, the report relies heavily on the SBU, not exactly an unbiased participant.
The question is, have you read the report and validated the footnotes, or are you just uncritically accepting the report? The latter would suggest that it is you who is the shill.

The question is, have you read the report and validated the footnotes, or are you just uncritically accepting the report?

You're asking that of the wrong person. You should be asking that to the shill that dismissed the report out of hand without ANY review of the report! I haven't taken the time to revied that long report in detail but I have skimmed it. Further, what exactly do you find not credible about the evidence in say the video of footnote 64? Didn't analyze it did you, smart ass! Ya shouldn't let your mouth overload you ass

 

[Tehon]

Further, what exactly do you find not credible about the evidence in say the video of footnote 64?

The locations given. That the BUK was passing thru Luhansk has been challenged. 60 Minutes Australia went to Luhansk, to the alleged spot, coordinated with Higgins (Bellingcat) and it was shown to be a fraud by a real investigative journalist. The reality is that the BUK could have been anywhere in Ukraine, how would you know if it was in Luhansk or Krasnoarmiis’k?

 

[John McWrice]

So why Ukraine didn't reveal the names of these suspects? Maybe it will be quite difficult to prove their guilt in REAL Court - face to face with Russia?

The names are revealed in the Dutch report and other sources. It is the Russians who have blocked them from being questioned in a real court.

Really???)) so maybe you will show us this part of Dutch report? with these NAMES? or this part is like Obama's evidences which nobody have ever seen?

Here is a more precise list and detailed investigation that pinpoints the actual Russian unit and soldiers that need to be questioned and were probably responsible for the shootdown.

www.bellingcat.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/53rd-report-public.pdf

bellingcat?????))))) man, are you serious?)))) who is BELLINGCATex-sailesman of underwears?)) only stupid asshole can eat his shit! and what about REAL PROOFS?! what about Dutch report and JIT work made by ADULTS, not nerds from social networks?

A report over 100 pages long with 169 sourced footnotes and you dismiss it as untrustworthy out of hand? You're either a fool or more likely a shill!

With Photoshop I can make 100500 footnotes which will show that you are murder, terrorist and psyho))) are you from anti-Trump movement? If yes - I'm sorry... cause it is the reason of your words)))

 

[John McWrice]

Really???)) so maybe you will show us this part of Dutch report? with these NAMES? or this part is like Obama's evidences which nobody have ever seen?

Here is a more precise list and detailed investigation that pinpoints the actual Russian unit and soldiers that need to be questioned and were probably responsible for the shootdown.

www.bellingcat.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/53rd-report-public.pdf

bellingcat?????))))) man, are you serious?)))) who is BELLINGCATex-sailesman of underwears?)) only stupid asshole can eat his shit! and what about REAL PROOFS?! what about Dutch report and JIT work made by ADULTS, not nerds from social networks?

A report over 100 pages long with 169 sourced footnotes and you dismiss it as untrustworthy out of hand? You're either a fool or more likely a shill!

There is a problem with the report right from its outset. The agreement to conduct the investigation gave Ukraine veto powers over what information was released. And second, the report relies heavily on the SBU, not exactly an unbiased participant.
The question is, have you read the report and validated the footnotes, or are you just uncritically accepting the report? The latter would suggest that it is you who is the shill.

The question is, have you read the report and validated the footnotes, or are you just uncritically accepting the report?

You're asking that of the wrong person. You should be asking that to the shill that dismissed the report out of hand without ANY review of the report! I haven't taken the time to revied that long report in detail but I have skimmed it. Further, what exactly do you find not credible about the evidence in say the video of footnote 64? Didn't analyze it did you, smart ass! Ya shouldn't let your mouth overload you ass

Look at that, man, and tell me what can you say about THIS?

 

[Camp]

Here is a more precise list and detailed investigation that pinpoints the actual Russian unit and soldiers that need to be questioned and were probably responsible for the shootdown.

www.bellingcat.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/53rd-report-public.pdf

bellingcat?????))))) man, are you serious?)))) who is BELLINGCATex-sailesman of underwears?)) only stupid asshole can eat his shit! and what about REAL PROOFS?! what about Dutch report and JIT work made by ADULTS, not nerds from social networks?

A report over 100 pages long with 169 sourced footnotes and you dismiss it as untrustworthy out of hand? You're either a fool or more likely a shill!

There is a problem with the report right from its outset. The agreement to conduct the investigation gave Ukraine veto powers over what information was released. And second, the report relies heavily on the SBU, not exactly an unbiased participant.
The question is, have you read the report and validated the footnotes, or are you just uncritically accepting the report? The latter would suggest that it is you who is the shill.

The question is, have you read the report and validated the footnotes, or are you just uncritically accepting the report?

You're asking that of the wrong person. You should be asking that to the shill that dismissed the report out of hand without ANY review of the report! I haven't taken the time to revied that long report in detail but I have skimmed it. Further, what exactly do you find not credible about the evidence in say the video of footnote 64? Didn't analyze it did you, smart ass! Ya shouldn't let your mouth overload you ass

Look at that, man, and tell me what can you say about THIS?

Modern technology has given the media, investigators and the general public access to raw unfiltered data, information, that has changed the way the world gets news and information. Social networks make it possible to retrieve this data through the postings of individuals who are not connected to political groups, the established media, etc. This technology has both negative and positive traits. It has both positive and negative results. Like any source of information, it has to be checked and analyzed.

Social networks are providing data that until now was unavailable. Below is a link to an example of how social networks provided information and evidence of Russian troop involvement in Ukraine.

news.vice.com/video/selfie-soldiers-russia-checks-in-to-ukraine

 

[ESay]

Over the last two years since Flight MH-17 crash in Donbass even the most unsophisticated individuals have understood that neither Ukraine nor the West want conclusion of the investigation. Indeed, it became a way to discredit to Russia in the eyes of international community. So, only true conclusion of true investigation can stop such conjectures and put everyone who withheld the information – Kiev authorities, Dutch officials and former US administration - in the dock.

However, now the situation can be changed to the point that the investigation will be reopened – all depends on President Trump’s Administration. Besides, on January 31, a group of Dutch activists addressed a letter (http://www.dutchnews.nl/news/archives/2017/01/dutch-parliamentary-hopeful-signs-letter-to-trump-urging-new-mh17-probe/ ) to the US President urging him to start a new probe. The letter was signed by 26 persons including German journalist Billy Six, his Dutch counterpart Joost Niemoller and Dutch parliamentary Thierry Baudet who said that there were still unanswered questions about the disaster.

If the new US Administration decides to demand a new inquiry, the reaction of Ukraine will show it involvement to MH-17 crash. Considering that Kiev hinders activities of independent journalists and even facilitates their detainment, it reaction will be quite negative. This is because too many facts are to be explained…

It amazes me how some Russians appear here and there and begin to talk about how everything is bad - evil Ukrainians who shot the plane and who desperately try to hide their crime, the Netherlands and the West as a whole who actively help them do it, and so on. Dude, this stuff has been discussed here numerous times. And you are not the first “правдоруб” here. Instead of wasting your energy here, try to find a way to persuade your officials to push this case. Has Russia proposed the Trump administration to cooperate in investigation of the shooting already?

 

[Camp]

Over the last two years since Flight MH-17 crash in Donbass even the most unsophisticated individuals have understood that neither Ukraine nor the West want conclusion of the investigation. Indeed, it became a way to discredit to Russia in the eyes of international community. So, only true conclusion of true investigation can stop such conjectures and put everyone who withheld the information – Kiev authorities, Dutch officials and former US administration - in the dock.

However, now the situation can be changed to the point that the investigation will be reopened – all depends on President Trump’s Administration. Besides, on January 31, a group of Dutch activists addressed a letter (http://www.dutchnews.nl/news/archives/2017/01/dutch-parliamentary-hopeful-signs-letter-to-trump-urging-new-mh17-probe/ ) to the US President urging him to start a new probe. The letter was signed by 26 persons including German journalist Billy Six, his Dutch counterpart Joost Niemoller and Dutch parliamentary Thierry Baudet who said that there were still unanswered questions about the disaster.

If the new US Administration decides to demand a new inquiry, the reaction of Ukraine will show it involvement to MH-17 crash. Considering that Kiev hinders activities of independent journalists and even facilitates their detainment, it reaction will be quite negative. This is because too many facts are to be explained…

It amazes me how some Russians appear here and there and begin to talk about how everything is bad - evil Ukrainians who shot the plane and who desperately try to hide their crime, the Netherlands and the West as a whole who actively help them do it, and so on. Dude, this stuff has been discussed here numerous times. And you are not the first “правдоруб” here. Instead of wasting your energy here, try to find a way to persuade your officials to push this case. Has Russia proposed the Trump administration to cooperate in investigation of the shooting already?

Unless a report is issued using the same standards as those issued by both official and private entities is made available to the public it is rational and reasonable to accept the reports that have been issued to be accurate and believable. As can be seen in the postings on this thread, the critics of the reports that have been posted do not have valid and acceptable links to refute those reports and investigations that have been issued and published.

 

[Tehon]

Over the last two years since Flight MH-17 crash in Donbass even the most unsophisticated individuals have understood that neither Ukraine nor the West want conclusion of the investigation. Indeed, it became a way to discredit to Russia in the eyes of international community. So, only true conclusion of true investigation can stop such conjectures and put everyone who withheld the information – Kiev authorities, Dutch officials and former US administration - in the dock.

However, now the situation can be changed to the point that the investigation will be reopened – all depends on President Trump’s Administration. Besides, on January 31, a group of Dutch activists addressed a letter (http://www.dutchnews.nl/news/archives/2017/01/dutch-parliamentary-hopeful-signs-letter-to-trump-urging-new-mh17-probe/ ) to the US President urging him to start a new probe. The letter was signed by 26 persons including German journalist Billy Six, his Dutch counterpart Joost Niemoller and Dutch parliamentary Thierry Baudet who said that there were still unanswered questions about the disaster.

If the new US Administration decides to demand a new inquiry, the reaction of Ukraine will show it involvement to MH-17 crash. Considering that Kiev hinders activities of independent journalists and even facilitates their detainment, it reaction will be quite negative. This is because too many facts are to be explained…

It amazes me how some Russians appear here and there and begin to talk about how everything is bad - evil Ukrainians who shot the plane and who desperately try to hide their crime, the Netherlands and the West as a whole who actively help them do it, and so on. Dude, this stuff has been discussed here numerous times. And you are not the first “правдоруб” here. Instead of wasting your energy here, try to find a way to persuade your officials to push this case. Has Russia proposed the Trump administration to cooperate in investigation of the shooting already?

Unless a report is issued using the same standards as those issued by both official and private entities is made available to the public it is rational and reasonable to accept the reports that have been issued to be accurate and believable. As can be seen in the postings on this thread, the critics of the reports that have been posted do not have valid and acceptable links to refute those reports and investigations that have been issued and published.

It is completely reasonable and rational for a person to conclude that the irrefutable evidence that implicates Russia in the downing of flight MH17 doesn't exist. Otherwise we wouldn't be relying on amateurs. And if one was so inclined as to investigate the veracity of the claims made by Higgins, all one would have to do is a quick google search to see that there are plenty of refutations of this mans work. Seeing how everyone participating in this thread has already made up their mind it hardly seems worth while, but here is one just in case.
http://www.segodnia.ru/sites/default/files/pdf/The Falsification of Open Sources About MH17.pdf

 

[Camp]

Over the last two years since Flight MH-17 crash in Donbass even the most unsophisticated individuals have understood that neither Ukraine nor the West want conclusion of the investigation. Indeed, it became a way to discredit to Russia in the eyes of international community. So, only true conclusion of true investigation can stop such conjectures and put everyone who withheld the information – Kiev authorities, Dutch officials and former US administration - in the dock.

However, now the situation can be changed to the point that the investigation will be reopened – all depends on President Trump’s Administration. Besides, on January 31, a group of Dutch activists addressed a letter (http://www.dutchnews.nl/news/archives/2017/01/dutch-parliamentary-hopeful-signs-letter-to-trump-urging-new-mh17-probe/ ) to the US President urging him to start a new probe. The letter was signed by 26 persons including German journalist Billy Six, his Dutch counterpart Joost Niemoller and Dutch parliamentary Thierry Baudet who said that there were still unanswered questions about the disaster.

If the new US Administration decides to demand a new inquiry, the reaction of Ukraine will show it involvement to MH-17 crash. Considering that Kiev hinders activities of independent journalists and even facilitates their detainment, it reaction will be quite negative. This is because too many facts are to be explained…

It amazes me how some Russians appear here and there and begin to talk about how everything is bad - evil Ukrainians who shot the plane and who desperately try to hide their crime, the Netherlands and the West as a whole who actively help them do it, and so on. Dude, this stuff has been discussed here numerous times. And you are not the first “правдоруб” here. Instead of wasting your energy here, try to find a way to persuade your officials to push this case. Has Russia proposed the Trump administration to cooperate in investigation of the shooting already?

Unless a report is issued using the same standards as those issued by both official and private entities is made available to the public it is rational and reasonable to accept the reports that have been issued to be accurate and believable. As can be seen in the postings on this thread, the critics of the reports that have been posted do not have valid and acceptable links to refute those reports and investigations that have been issued and published.

It is completely reasonable and rational for a person to conclude that the irrefutable evidence that implicates Russia in the downing of flight MH17 doesn't exist. Otherwise we wouldn't be relying on amateurs. And if one was so inclined as to investigate the veracity of the claims made by Higgins, all one would have to do is a quick google search to see that there are plenty of refutations of this mans work. Seeing how everyone participating in this thread has already made up their mind it hardly seems worth while, but here is one just in case.
http://www.segodnia.ru/sites/default/files/pdf/The Falsification of Open Sources About MH17.pdf

Well, at least you came up with something. Those interested in this topic now have the opportunity to compare and analyze whether your link meets the standards, independence, diversity and reliability of the official Joint Investigation Team. Your source does have some questionable reliability factors. It is a news source from the same region as those accused of responsibility of the shootdown, owned by a separatist and Yanukovych supporter and seems extremely biased. Readers and researchers can make up their own minds.

 

[John McWrice]

bellingcat?????))))) man, are you serious?)))) who is BELLINGCATex-sailesman of underwears?)) only stupid asshole can eat his shit! and what about REAL PROOFS?! what about Dutch report and JIT work made by ADULTS, not nerds from social networks?

A report over 100 pages long with 169 sourced footnotes and you dismiss it as untrustworthy out of hand? You're either a fool or more likely a shill!

There is a problem with the report right from its outset. The agreement to conduct the investigation gave Ukraine veto powers over what information was released. And second, the report relies heavily on the SBU, not exactly an unbiased participant.
The question is, have you read the report and validated the footnotes, or are you just uncritically accepting the report? The latter would suggest that it is you who is the shill.

The question is, have you read the report and validated the footnotes, or are you just uncritically accepting the report?

You're asking that of the wrong person. You should be asking that to the shill that dismissed the report out of hand without ANY review of the report! I haven't taken the time to revied that long report in detail but I have skimmed it. Further, what exactly do you find not credible about the evidence in say the video of footnote 64? Didn't analyze it did you, smart ass! Ya shouldn't let your mouth overload you ass

Look at that, man, and tell me what can you say about THIS?

Modern technology has given the media, investigators and the general public access to raw unfiltered data, information, that has changed the way the world gets news and information. Social networks make it possible to retrieve this data through the postings of individuals who are not connected to political groups, the established media, etc. This technology has both negative and positive traits. It has both positive and negative results. Like any source of information, it has to be checked and analyzed.

Social networks are providing data that until now was unavailable. Below is a link to an example of how social networks provided information and evidence of Russian troop involvement in Ukraine.

news.vice.com/video/selfie-soldiers-russia-checks-in-to-ukraine

Oh yeah))) social networks) and what about photoes from military satelites? Man, in Syria our DOD show Russians on the next day of their presence. And on that photoes there were TANKS, JETS, SAMS, HELICOPTERS and SOLDIERS. So WHY didn't our DOD show the same in Ukraine? I saw only combatants - but WHY it should be Russian Army? Russians with their war machine can destroy and occupy all Ukraine in couple of days - so why don't they start it? I believe that there can be Russian military advisors - but there are our advisors on Ukrainian side too.

 

[Tehon]

Over the last two years since Flight MH-17 crash in Donbass even the most unsophisticated individuals have understood that neither Ukraine nor the West want conclusion of the investigation. Indeed, it became a way to discredit to Russia in the eyes of international community. So, only true conclusion of true investigation can stop such conjectures and put everyone who withheld the information – Kiev authorities, Dutch officials and former US administration - in the dock.

However, now the situation can be changed to the point that the investigation will be reopened – all depends on President Trump’s Administration. Besides, on January 31, a group of Dutch activists addressed a letter (http://www.dutchnews.nl/news/archives/2017/01/dutch-parliamentary-hopeful-signs-letter-to-trump-urging-new-mh17-probe/ ) to the US President urging him to start a new probe. The letter was signed by 26 persons including German journalist Billy Six, his Dutch counterpart Joost Niemoller and Dutch parliamentary Thierry Baudet who said that there were still unanswered questions about the disaster.

If the new US Administration decides to demand a new inquiry, the reaction of Ukraine will show it involvement to MH-17 crash. Considering that Kiev hinders activities of independent journalists and even facilitates their detainment, it reaction will be quite negative. This is because too many facts are to be explained…

It amazes me how some Russians appear here and there and begin to talk about how everything is bad - evil Ukrainians who shot the plane and who desperately try to hide their crime, the Netherlands and the West as a whole who actively help them do it, and so on. Dude, this stuff has been discussed here numerous times. And you are not the first “правдоруб” here. Instead of wasting your energy here, try to find a way to persuade your officials to push this case. Has Russia proposed the Trump administration to cooperate in investigation of the shooting already?

Unless a report is issued using the same standards as those issued by both official and private entities is made available to the public it is rational and reasonable to accept the reports that have been issued to be accurate and believable. As can be seen in the postings on this thread, the critics of the reports that have been posted do not have valid and acceptable links to refute those reports and investigations that have been issued and published.

It is completely reasonable and rational for a person to conclude that the irrefutable evidence that implicates Russia in the downing of flight MH17 doesn't exist. Otherwise we wouldn't be relying on amateurs. And if one was so inclined as to investigate the veracity of the claims made by Higgins, all one would have to do is a quick google search to see that there are plenty of refutations of this mans work. Seeing how everyone participating in this thread has already made up their mind it hardly seems worth while, but here is one just in case.
http://www.segodnia.ru/sites/default/files/pdf/The Falsification of Open Sources About MH17.pdf

Well, at least you came up with something. Those interested in this topic now have the opportunity to compare and analyze whether your link meets the standards, independence, diversity and reliability of the official Joint Investigation Team. Your source does have some questionable reliability factors. It is a news source from the same region as those accused of responsibility of the shootdown, owned by a separatist and Yanukovych supporter and seems extremely biased. Readers and researchers can make up their own minds.

Independence of the JIT? How does working closely with the SBU and giving Ukraine the ability to censor what information is added to the report equal independence to you? Ukraine is a party to the conflict and a suspect in the case. A couple of posts ago you were portraying yourself as reasonable and rational. What happened?

 

[Camp]

Over the last two years since Flight MH-17 crash in Donbass even the most unsophisticated individuals have understood that neither Ukraine nor the West want conclusion of the investigation. Indeed, it became a way to discredit to Russia in the eyes of international community. So, only true conclusion of true investigation can stop such conjectures and put everyone who withheld the information – Kiev authorities, Dutch officials and former US administration - in the dock.

However, now the situation can be changed to the point that the investigation will be reopened – all depends on President Trump’s Administration. Besides, on January 31, a group of Dutch activists addressed a letter (http://www.dutchnews.nl/news/archives/2017/01/dutch-parliamentary-hopeful-signs-letter-to-trump-urging-new-mh17-probe/ ) to the US President urging him to start a new probe. The letter was signed by 26 persons including German journalist Billy Six, his Dutch counterpart Joost Niemoller and Dutch parliamentary Thierry Baudet who said that there were still unanswered questions about the disaster.

If the new US Administration decides to demand a new inquiry, the reaction of Ukraine will show it involvement to MH-17 crash. Considering that Kiev hinders activities of independent journalists and even facilitates their detainment, it reaction will be quite negative. This is because too many facts are to be explained…

It amazes me how some Russians appear here and there and begin to talk about how everything is bad - evil Ukrainians who shot the plane and who desperately try to hide their crime, the Netherlands and the West as a whole who actively help them do it, and so on. Dude, this stuff has been discussed here numerous times. And you are not the first “правдоруб” here. Instead of wasting your energy here, try to find a way to persuade your officials to push this case. Has Russia proposed the Trump administration to cooperate in investigation of the shooting already?

Unless a report is issued using the same standards as those issued by both official and private entities is made available to the public it is rational and reasonable to accept the reports that have been issued to be accurate and believable. As can be seen in the postings on this thread, the critics of the reports that have been posted do not have valid and acceptable links to refute those reports and investigations that have been issued and published.

It is completely reasonable and rational for a person to conclude that the irrefutable evidence that implicates Russia in the downing of flight MH17 doesn't exist. Otherwise we wouldn't be relying on amateurs. And if one was so inclined as to investigate the veracity of the claims made by Higgins, all one would have to do is a quick google search to see that there are plenty of refutations of this mans work. Seeing how everyone participating in this thread has already made up their mind it hardly seems worth while, but here is one just in case.
http://www.segodnia.ru/sites/default/files/pdf/The Falsification of Open Sources About MH17.pdf

Well, at least you came up with something. Those interested in this topic now have the opportunity to compare and analyze whether your link meets the standards, independence, diversity and reliability of the official Joint Investigation Team. Your source does have some questionable reliability factors. It is a news source from the same region as those accused of responsibility of the shootdown, owned by a separatist and Yanukovych supporter and seems extremely biased. Readers and researchers can make up their own minds.

Independence of the JIT? How does working closely with the SBU and giving Ukraine the ability to censor what information is added to the report equal independence to you? Ukraine is a party to the conflict and a suspect in the case. A couple of posts ago you were portraying yourself as reasonable and rational. What happened?

The JIT, Joint Investigation Team, was comprised of investigators from five nations. Those nations included Netherlands, Belgium, Australia, Malaysia, and Ukraine. You are suggesting that Netherlands, Belgium, Australia and Malasia conspired to allow Ukraine to block evidence from their report. Having so many investigators on the team from the countries whose citizens were lost in the shootdown is what made the team independent. On the other hand, the report you promote was entirely written by people associated with the suspects with not a single independent source to questions the validity of what went into the report or criticize how its many speculations and opinions were included in its report.
The JIT petitioned the UN Security Council, which includes Russia, to review its investigation and methods and use its, the UN Security Council's, authority to question witnesses in a tribunal setting. Again, if Ukraine had used its veto authority to taint or shape the investigation, it would have required the conspiracy of the other four member nations to withhold information about such a veto. Your source did not offer such an analysis of its investigation or methods. Your source is a private news organization owned and operated by a separatist connected group that operates in and serves the separatist-controlled region where the shootdown occurred.

 

[Tehon]

Having so many investigators on the team from the countries whose citizens were lost in the shootdown is what made the team independent.

Independent of what? The investigators field offices are in Kiev and they are reliant on Ukrainian intelligence. For instance, taped phone conversations that were provided by the SBU, how do we know they were all provided to the "independent" investigators and not just those that helped the Ukrainian case. Did the Ukrainians provide the capabilities and the locations of all their anti-aircraft weaponry on that day? Ukraine is a suspect yet they are prominent in the investigation, this is not independent, it's a sham. And mine is a reasonable and rational judgment.