Why was MH 17 on that course ?

[BillyB]

Nowhere in the 34 page Dutch Safety Board Preliminary Report will you find the words
“a conclusion supporting a theory that it had been shot down by a ground-based missile.”
In fact, you won’t even find the words “ground-based missile” in the report.
 

 A large number of high-energy objects penetrated the fuselage which they admit and that is the mark of a ground to air missile explosion. That may end up being the conclusion when the final report comes out. This is a "preliminary" report so nobody should jump to conclusions yet. The final report can take a year or longer to complete. There's still many of parts of the plane on the ground in Ukraine. US intel hasn't been used yet in the report, phone call interceptions, records of missile launches, and satellite images of mobile missile launchers.


If someone is guilty of this act and wanted to cover it up, they'd quickly go to the crime scene, secure it, prevent others from getting close, tamper and get rid of evidence and seize the black boxes to make sure there's no data or conversations that would incriminate them. Did the Western powers do that? Did Ukraine do that? Considering Ukraine is trying to get support from the World in their fight against Russia, it would be wise they secure the area and clean up any evidence that would put them in a bad spotlight. It seems the rebels were the ones most motivated to get their hands on the evidence, tamper with it and make some disappear.

[Boethius]

Realy Boethius? 30 mil?!?

The team: 2nd Battalion, 16th Infantry Regiment (2-16), 4th Brigade Combat Team, 1st Infantry Division
Field Commander: Major Brent Cummings
2nd in Command: Captain James Hall
Team Commander: Lieutenant Colonel Ralph Kaularich
Iraq Commander: Gen. David Petreaus
Commanding Defense Secretary: Robert F. Gates 
CIC: President George W. Bush
Country: The United States of America

Operation: Operation Ilaaj


I would like that 30 mil in small denomination please....

You failed to answer the questions.  What you have posted is widely known, just as much about MH17 is widely known.  But the specific questions have not been answered.

[Boethius]

You then generously gave us the link to the article that you lifted the above quote from.
Boe, you have taken a quote from an article written by a news reporter (Michelle Nichols) and twisted it in such a fashion that it puts words into the mouths of the Dutch reporting team!!!
 
This is what the news reporter wrote:
“A preliminary Dutch Safety Board report released last week said MH17 crashed due to a "large number of high-energy objects" penetrating the fuselage, a conclusion supporting a theory that it had been shot down by a ground-based missile.”
 
Nowhere in the 34 page Dutch Safety Board Preliminary Report will you find the words
“a conclusion supporting a theory that it had been shot down by a ground-based missile.”
In fact, you won’t even find the words “ground-based missile” in the report.
 
I sure hope you don’t use this type of misquoting when you practice law.

Kiwil is correct.  You are reading far too technically and literally.  I haven't decided whether you are mildly autistic, or an engineer.

[Faux Pas]

 A large number of high-energy objects penetrated the fuselage which they admit and that is the mark of a ground to air missile explosion. That may end up being the conclusion when the final report comes out. This is a "preliminary" report so nobody should jump to conclusions yet. The final report can take a year or longer to complete. There's still many of parts of the plane on the ground in Ukraine. US intel hasn't been used yet in the report, phone call interceptions, records of missile launches, and satellite images of mobile missile launchers.


If someone is guilty of this act and wanted to cover it up, they'd quickly go to the crime scene, secure it, prevent others from getting close, tamper and get rid of evidence and seize the black boxes to make sure there's no data or conversations that would incriminate them. Did the Western powers do that? Did Ukraine do that? Considering Ukraine is trying to get support from the World in their fight against Russia, it would be wise they secure the area and clean up any evidence that would put them in a bad spotlight. It seems the rebels were the ones most motivated to get their hands on the evidence, tamper with it and make some disappear.

It's actually much simpler than most wish to admit. The terrorist and the Russians were guarding the crash site in which they allow themselves to plunder and rummage through the wreckage before sending it to Moscow for sanitizing. That is pretty damming in who shot the missile IMHO

[CanadaMan]

CanadaMan, the reporter is quite entitled to write what she did.

Absolutely!

Boethius has not misquoted her - you just have to break down the sentence somewhat to see how it should be interpreted.

I never said Boethius misquoted her! Go back and read my post more carefully.
I said she twisted the reporter’s words; “twisted it in such a fashion that it puts words into the mouths of the Dutch reporting team!!!”

Boethius was attributing the entire quote as something that the Dutch reporting team said! That was what I meant by misquoting; misquoting the Dutch team.

This is what Boethius wrote. Read it very carefully:

The Dutch report was not established to fix blame.  However, it stated

a "large number of high-energy objects" penetrati(ed) the fuselage, a conclusion supporting a theory that it had been shot down by a ground-based missile.

That is NOT what the Dutch report stated!!!
The Dutch report only talked about ‘high-energy objects’.
It did not talk about ground-based missiles.

“A preliminary Dutch Safety Board report released last week said MH17 crashed due to a "large number of high-energy objects" penetrating the fuselage, "

This is the actual wording used by the Board.

More precisely, “large number of high-energy objects” were the words used by the Dutch Safety Board.

-a conclusion supporting a theory that it had been shot down by a ground-based missile.”-
This is the conclusion of the reporter writing the story: a conclusion shared by many other people.

Correct.


I had no trouble breaking down, nor understanding what the reporter said.
Allow me to explain why I made my post.

When I read Boe’s quote, something just didn’t ring true with it.
I had read the Dutch report and knew they chose their words very carefully throughout.

So when I read Boe’s quote:

The Dutch report was not established to fix blame.  However, it stated

a "large number of high-energy objects" penetrati(ed) the fuselage, a conclusion supporting a theory that it had been shot down by a ground-based missile.

The following words immediately jumped out at me:
‘ A conclusion’, ‘supporting a theory’, ‘shot down by a ground-based missile’.

I said to myself, the Dutch Board would never use any of those wordings, even if it was something they believed.

So I decided to do some homework.
The first thing I did was find the article that Boe gave a link to.
I discovered that the quote Boe had used was taken from the article written by
Reuters news reporter Michelle Nichols.

Reading the article it quickly became apparent that Ms. Nichols had added “a conclusion supporting a theory that it had been shot down by a ground-based missile.”
I decided to double-check this by going back to the Dutch Report.
Sure enough, nowhere in the report will you find those words, or any mention of a ground-based missile.

[CanadaMan]

...This is a "preliminary" report so nobody should jump to conclusions yet. The final report can take a year or longer to complete. There's still many of parts of the plane on the ground in Ukraine. US intel hasn't been used yet in the report, phone call interceptions, records of missile launches, and satellite images of mobile missile launchers.

Billy I agree in general with your thoughts.

[CanadaMan]

Kiwil is correct.  You are reading far too technically and literally.

Boe, I admire people who are willing to admit they made a mistake.

[lonedrake]

Her quote was in quotation marks.

[Anotherkiwi]

CanadaMan - leaving quoted semantics aside, do you agree that it is reasonable to conclude, based on the Dutch report, that MH17 was shot down by a ground to air missile?  I don't mind if you disagree - I would just like to find out if you have an alternative theory.

[BillyB]

Russia is now protesting the Netherlands report. They probably don't like what the end result will be so they are asking for a new investigation. Also in the article below a high ranking rebel told the AP in an interview in the aftermath of the disaster that the plane was shot down by a mixed team of rebels and Russian military personnel who believed they were targeting a Ukrainian military plane. He's half way there to collecting that 30 million!


http://news.yahoo.com/russia-cites-information-war-malaysian-crash-152447356.html

[calmissile]

Is there a link to the AP interview?

[BillyB]

Is there a link to the AP interview?

I doubt the rebel officer gave his name otherwise he'd be dead by now. According to this earlier article, the intercepted phone calls between rebels support what the rebel officer said, which is that rebels and Russian soldiers launched the missile that down MH17. Also, three hours before the plane was shot down above rebel-held territory in eastern Ukraine, the Associated Press reported on the passage of a Buk M-1 missile system driving through the rebel-held town of Snizhne, near the crash site.

http://nypost.com/2014/09/09/flight-mh17-likely-downed-by-outside-impact-report/

[CanadaMan]

Her quote was in quotation marks.

Nice of you to join in the conversation lonedrake. 

There are two women involved in this: Boethius and Michelle Nichols (the news reporter).
It is not clear who you are referring to in your statement above.

Are you referring to Boethius, and that her quote was
"large number of high-energy objects"?

Boethius’ quote was much larger than that.

The larger quote included the above short quote (taken from the Dutch report) plus a quote that was composed by Michelle Nichols. The part that Ms. Nichols created talked about a theory of a ground-based missile strike; a theory that can not be found in the Dutch report.

[CanadaMan]

CanadaMan - leaving quoted semantics aside, do you agree that it is reasonable to conclude, based on the Dutch report, that MH17 was shot down by a ground to air missile?  I don't mind if you disagree - I would just like to find out if you have an alternative theory.

All the Dutch report said basically was that it appears there were impacts from a large number of high-energy objects from outside the aircraft.

That alone is not sufficient information to conclude it was shot down by a ground-to-air missile.


Pg. 25 of the report states: “Puncture holes identified in images of the cockpit floor suggested that small objects entered from above the level of the cockpit floor.”

This could be consistent with an aircraft firing rounds from above MH17 or an air-to-air missile exploding above the cockpit area.

Unlike most here, I have not drawn any conclusions as to who was responsible for the downing of MH17.

[calmissile]

All the Dutch report said basically was that it appears there were impacts from a large number of high-energy objects from outside the aircraft.

That alone is not sufficient information to conclude it was shot down by a ground-to-air missile.


Pg. 25 of the report states: “Puncture holes identified in images of the cockpit floor suggested that small objects entered from above the level of the cockpit floor.”

This could be consistent with an aircraft firing rounds from above MH17 or an air-to-air missile exploding above the cockpit area.

Unlike most here, I have not drawn any conclusions as to who was responsible for the downing of MH17.

Your correct, the evidence is not bullet proof yet.  However, the most probable scenario is that it was downed by a ground to air missile.  By the very nature of other weapons, experts have ruled out most of the conspiracy stories (air to air, etc).

The terrorists bragging on social media immediately afterward that they had shot down an aircraft is pretty damning evidence.  Not until it was discovered that civilians were aboard, did they remove the claims on social media.

Will we ever find out who pulled the trigger?  Maybe.  I would suspect that the Russians have already located the guilty men and they are now buried in an unmarked grave.   It is far too important to Russia to leave witnesses around to bring the whole world down on Putins neck.  My guess is that either the guilty parties are in hiding or have been eliminated.  That leaves us with the only likely hope.  Someone that witnessed the firing of the missile was not eliminated and will eventually talk about it.  This would go for whichever side shot down the plane.

[Brasscasing]

I promised myself when I finally decided to stop lurking and start posting it would be on a more positive note but I need some assistance with translation.

It concerns a newspaper report that has come to my attention. According to Google translate this article confirms that pro-Russian militia were in possession of and using a BUK (ZRK 9K37M1) on the day of the shoot down. Note the date on the article and I've confirmed to the best of my ability that this is a Russian website.

Further, I've got information on dispatches from Strelkov and his website at the time of the shoot down (pre scrub) but can't confirm anything from the Russian end because I don't speak or write the freakin' language...

http://www.vz.ru/news/2014/7/17/696045.html

Also, someone should screen grab this ASAP because I'd guess as soon as western ips start coming in they'll realize this article is still archived for public consumption and remove or block it, thanks.

1) Is this a legitimate newspaper/website originating from Russia?

2) Does the article report a an AN-26 being shot down at the approximate time/location and date of the MH17 shoot down (lends itself to mistaken identity as there was no AN-26 shot down that day)?

Google translate of Para 5

"Украинские военные утверждают, что потери были вызваны действиями со стороны России. Ополченцы уже опровергли эту информацию, уточнив, что сбили самолет из ЗРК «9К37М1» (более известного как «Бук»)."

"Ukrainian military claimed that the losses were caused by the actions on the part of Russia . The militia has denied this , adding that the plane was shot down from the air defense system " 9K37M1 " ( better known as the "Book ")."

Brass

[Gator]

CanadaMan - leaving quoted semantics aside, do you agree that it is reasonable to conclude, based on the Dutch report, that MH17 was shot down by a ground to air missile?  I don't mind if you disagree - I would just like to find out if you have an alternative theory.

Unlike most here, I have not drawn any conclusions as to who was responsible for the downing of MH17.

Canadaman, I assume you believe there are at least four working theories:


1.   Ground-to-air missile fired by rebels/Russian crew.
2.   Ground-to-air missile fired by Ukrainian military.
2.   Air-to-air missile or cannon fire from a fighter jet.
3.   Other. 


I agree that none of the four can be proven with certainty based simply on the Investigation Team's finding of "high energy objects."   Although most of the air-to-air missiles in service in the Ukrainian military are reported to be infrared (i. e., heat seeking and more apt to explode only after striking the airliner), it is possible that the military also has more modern missiles.  However, there is much other evidence.  Some of the evidence is circumstantial, e. g., the social media quote attributed to Igor Girkin, the photo of a BUK returning to Russia with one missile missing.  Some of it is scientific yet reported by agencies of NATO governments without independent verification for security reasons, e. g., US analysis of heat plume of missile launch and trajectory.  There are also many witness accounts. 


It seems to me an armchair yet intelligent investigator can start putting such facts together to analyze the plausibility of the different theories.   What does the preponderance of the evidence suggest to you?  I. e., which working theory is the most likely explanation for the downing pf MH-17?  What is second?  Please assign a percentage probability to each, with the sum of the four percentages equaling 100%.


I trust you are not one of those people who finds fault in any alternative, claiming that nothing is absolutely certain?

[Doll]

(Reuters) - Survivors of German victims of Malaysian Airlines flight MH17 downed over Ukraine plan to sue the country and its president for manslaughter by negligence in 298 cases, the lawyer representing them said on Sunday. Professor of aviation law Elmar Giemulla, who is representing three families of German victims, said that under international law Ukraine should have closed its air space if it could not guarantee the safety of flights. "Each state is responsible for the security of its air space," Giemulla said in a statement emailed to Reuters. "If it is not able to do so temporarily, it must close its air space. As that did not happen, Ukraine is liable for the damage."
Bild am Sonntag Sunday mass newspaper quoted Giemulla as saying that by not closing its airspace, Ukraine had accepted that the lives of hundreds of innocent people would be "annihilated" and this was a violation of human rights. The jetliner crashed in Ukraine in pro-Russian rebel-held territory on July 17, killing 298 people, two-thirds of them from the Netherlands. Four Germans died in the crash.
Ukraine and Western countries have accused the rebels of shooting the plane down with an advanced, Russian-made missile. Russia has rejected accusations that it supplied the rebels with SA-11 Buk anti-aircraft missile systems. Giemulla planned to hand his case to the European Court of Human Rights in about two weeks, accusing Ukraine and its President Petro Poroshenko of manslaughter by negligence in 298 cases. He would also push for compensation of up to one million euros ($1.3 million) per victim, Bild am Sonntag reported.
So far, the airline has offered survivors of each victim $5,000 in financial assistance but has said that would not be taken off final compensation or affect families' legal rights to claim.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/09/21/us-ukraine-crisis-mh17-germany-idUSKBN0HG08520140921

[BillyB]

"Each state is responsible for the security of its air space,"

How did that work out for the victims on the Korean airliner after the USSR mistakenly thought the passenger plane was a military plane? How much did Russia pay the victims families?

[Anotherkiwi]

(Reuters) - Survivors of German victims of Malaysian Airlines flight MH17 downed over Ukraine plan to sue the country and its president for manslaughter by negligence...

Is there any such thing under Ukrainian law?  And where could you hold the trial?  The Hague?

Although his motives may not be totally cynical, the description "ambulance chaser" comes to mind when seeing stories like this.  How about picking on the actual perpetrators once the final report is released, rather than taking aim at indiscriminate targets in the meantime?  It appears that, from the "best advice" which all airlines were given, there was believed to be no threat to commercial air traffic at international flight levels.  I can't imagine that any sane person would have expected somebody to shoot down an airliner travelling at 33,000 feet.

[Doll]

I don't know. Probably the same way USA paid the families of killed in  Iraq or Vietnam

[Doll]

Giemulla planned to hand his case to the European Court of Human Rights

[BillyB]

How about picking on the actual perpetrators once the final report is released,

Doll's article doesn't cover it but the family's attorney said they will be suing Russia once the report is complete. I don't see Ukraine or Russia paying. Russia will continue to deny it and they have a record of not compensating downed passenger planes when it's their fault. Ukraine made reasonable efforts to keep their airspace under their control. Some would even claim the airspace doesn't belong to Ukraine, it belongs to New Russia. The organization in charge of flights cleared many passenger planes for flight over Ukraine with the knowledge there is conflict there and trusted Putin when he said he wasn't giving the rebels any advanced weapons.

I don't know. Probably the same way USA paid the families of killed in  Iraq or Vietnam

When an American soldier kills civilians in an act of murder, America should pay the victim's family. "Collateral damage" in an act of war is a different story, victims families won't get compensated, and probably be applied in the MH17 disaster.

[Doll]

Doll's article doesn't cover it but the family's attorney said they will be suing Russia once the report is complete. I don't see Ukraine or Russia paying. Russia will continue to deny it and they have a record of not compensating downed passenger planes when it's their fault. Ukraine made reasonable efforts to keep their airspace under their control. Some would even claim the airspace doesn't belong to Ukraine, it belongs to New Russia. The organization in charge of flights cleared many passenger planes for flight over Ukraine with the knowledge there is conflict there and trusted Putin when he said he wasn't giving the rebels any advanced weapons.



 

Reasonable control in the state of war? Give me a break.
What New Russia, dear? There is no such a state as New Russia.
Ukraine should have CLOSED the airspace totally.

[calmissile]

Reasonable control in the state of war? Give me a break.
What New Russia, dear? There is no such a state as New Russia.
Ukraine should have CLOSED the airspace totally.

And the propaganda machine just keeps giving and giving.