MH17 - The Joint Investigation Team and (Obvious) Conclusions

[jone]

July 17th, 2014 was the day that MH17 was shot out of the sky in Eastern Ukraine.



A Joint Investigation Team (JIT) was established to ascertain what happened, and, if possible, to assign guilt. 

The team consists of members from countries that had passengers and crew on board and Ukraine, which is where the shoot-down occurred.

Most of the available evidence was collected, however interviews with likely participants in the shoot down  have not happened, primarily because these people were not available, living either in Eastern Ukraine or Russia.

The JIT created a video history of evidence it has collected as an enticement for people to add to the knowledge already obtained.  Russia, typically, tried to discredit this video.

The link to the YouTube video follows:



While the JIT refuses to name this line of investigation as their only focus, the video repeatedly states that it is the scenario that the team is giving focus to.

I have lived my whole life surrounded by legal investigations.  When a video with this much evidence is created, there is reason to believe that the circumstantial evidence is present.  But the team is looking for a smoking gun.

Russia, on the other hand, maintains that Ukraine is responsible for the shoot down.  Of course, since there are direct contacts with Russian authorities in the conversations cited, and Russia still is playing the Big Soviet Lie, it is expected that Russia would never admit to putting a Buk in Ukraine with a Russian crew manning it.  Even if Strelkov came forward and stated that such happened.

[mendeleyev]

They may now have that smoking gun.

http://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2015/04/01/russian-officer-recognized-on-tape-by-dutch-investigation-team-mh17/

[AkMike]

The US appears to have finally released radar and satellite images to the Dutch..
[/size][/color]
[/size]http://www.nu.nl/vliegramp-oekraine/4201737/openbaar-ministerie-heeft-genoeg-radarinformatie-crash-mh17.html[/color]

[msmobyone]

The US appears to have finally [msmoobyone queries the use of 'finally']  released radar and satellite images to the Dutch..

http://www.onderzoeksraad.nl/uploads/phase-docs/1006/debcd724fe7breport-mh17-crash.pdf

Pages 36 onwards seem relevant 

The pdf of the Dutch enquiry specifically mentions that NATO - I thought thatincluded the US - were asked for radar info and were told the two flying AWACS were over Poland  and Romania ..MH17 was off their radar when it met it's fate...

They are / were not looking for more info to determine the cause of the crash



 

[Shadow]

Recent news here shows a picture of incompetence from the researchers.
They do not have the primary radar and do not feel like trying to get them.
They have not interviewed the traffic controllers.
They seem to rely on ´secret´ information of US intelligence, and from a dubious social network investigation.

All seems to point at making the expected accusation of Russian involvement, but in such manner that no prosecution will ever be viable.
My opinion remains the same as it was from the beginning. A mistake by one of the rebels who was improperly trained and did not know how to separate between military and commercial aircrafts.

[Gator]

My opinion remains the same as it was from the beginning. A mistake by one of the rebels who was improperly trained and did not know how to separate between military and commercial aircrafts.

Exactly. 

The bigger question - how did the rebels acquire the anti-aircraft missile system? 

I assume Russian military supplied it.  If so, one would think Russia also  supplied operators considering the sophistication of the weapon, the ragtag training typical with rebels,  and the fast pace at which the weapon was deployed.  If so, this would mean the Russian operators were complicit in the downing.

If Russia did not supply operators, this is equivalent to a parent giving alcohol to a 16-yo child and handing them the keys to a car. 

[mendeleyev]

The only problem is that the rebels were not in control of BUK systems. Those take years of training and their limited use inside Ukraine has consistently been with Russian crews. They were rotated in and out, never staying for long.

The smoking gun, which the commission has, is the feeds from LifeNews (Kremlin controlled) with a reporter rejoicing that another Ukrainian plane had been shot down. Several days earlier they had taken out a UA fighter jet, and a helicopter gunship. Based on the initial Russian television reporting, the BUK had brought down a UK transport plane. When it became painfully clear that the transport plane was a civilian aircraft, the Russians quickly walked back their initial reporting.

Not surprisingly however, a month or so later the initial LifeNews TV reporter embed with the unit was flown to Moscow where he received a medal from President Putin for bravery in the field.

[Gator]

Shadow points his finger at "rebels" while Mendy says "Russia."   One would think only ill-trained operators could make such a mistake, suggesting they were rebels.   However, American military have made such mistakes in the past.

Does deploying Russian military (in this case, BUK operators) make them "rebels" rather than "Russians?" 


BTW, I recall sometime ago that Russia claimed "Ukrainian military" had such missiles and used them to bring down MH-17.  Was this option eliminated by the research?

[JayH]

Shadow points his finger at "rebels" while Mendy says "Russia."   One would think only ill-trained operators could make such a mistake, suggesting they were rebels.   However, American military have made such mistakes in the past.

Does deploying Russian military (in this case, BUK operators) make them "rebels" rather than "Russians?" 


BTW, I recall sometime ago that Russia claimed "Ukrainian military" had such missiles and used them to bring down MH-17.  Was this option eliminated by the research?

It needs noting that Shadow has repeatedly asserted that there are no Russian troops in Ukraine- so he is hardly likely to be able to acknowledge being wrong all along!

[mendeleyev]

Even the locals know the difference between rebels and Russian rebels. That is why it is laughable that some still contend that Russian troops are not operating in Ukraine. From Russian television news reports, to dead bodies coming home, to the silly contention that we are asked to believe that last month's coal miners are today operating sophisticated weaponry and equipment, to the new equipment the rebels are operating, to the lack of insignia on vehicles and uniforms, I find it mind-boggling that there are those so blind to the obvious.

I recall one battle in which soldiers were firing grenades, many using what the Russians call the GP-25. Modeled after early American rifle/launchers, it fires single grenades which are top loaded and ejected. It is old and slow when compared to NATO equipment. There were some soldiers using the newer and much improved GP-34. The soldiers firing the old units looked and carried themselves like last month's coal miners. The more modern equipment was used by soldiers with insignia stripped, identified only by a cloth armband, and they carried themselves like highly trained professional soldiers.

It is also very easy, and if you are in the wrong place your life depends on quickly knowing who is who, to identify soldiers by BOOTS, camo uniforms, helmets, and the equipment they carry and operate. The 40 year old guy with mining boots, old Soviet issue camo, and old army helmets was a coal miner last month. He is the most dangerous to encounter because he is untrained (and it shows) and he throws his authority around as he is trying to prove himself.

The guys with new Russian issue camo known as "Flora," and the rebels don't get the new stuff. He has standard issue boots (he wasn't a logger or coal miner last month, the helmets are bulletproof, the kits are the new Russian "Ratnik" issue, with standard compact encrypted radio units hanging over their shoulders. You will not find this stuff on the rebels, especially the personal encrypted radios and the sleek helmets that come standard with night vision googles.

When you see these guys, they're not speaking Russian with any regional Ukrainian tainted accents, they are speaking Russian as it is spoken back home, commonly called the Moscow accent in part because of the way the letters a and o are treated. When you see these guys in Ukraine, they've been rotated in from bases in places like Rostov, Kursk, Voronezh, etc.

[mendeleyev]

Gator, the few BUK systems retained by Ukraine were not in the East, verified by Satellite imagery. At the time they were assigned to protect Kyiv given fears of a full scale Russian air assault, and the fear of capture by the Russians. At the onset of war, valuable Ukrainian equipment was simply surrendered to the Russians by Ukrainian soldiers of ethnic Russian backgrounds.

The UA BUKs are the older versions of the weapon, Buk M1. The Russians use the more modern M2 and the weapons system are the newest Russian versions called the SA-11 (9К37 Бук) and the SA-17. The SA-11 is what downed MH 17. That is consistent with videos made of the BUK moving back toward the Russian border after he plane was downed.

Based on what I know, the BUK was fired by Russian crews. If nothing else, ask any member of the LifeNews crew that initially reported that the plane had been shot down. Those facial expressions will reveal all you need to know.

A compelling case: http://www.bellingcat.com/tag/mh17/

[Shadow]

It needs noting that Shadow has repeatedly asserted that there are no Russian troops in Ukraine- so he is hardly likely to be able to acknowledge being wrong all along!

Live in hate all you want. I am not going to play with idiots.

[BC]

Now that the accident investigation is published and over, guess we'll have to wait for the criminal investigation report.

[calmissile]

Live in hate all you want. I am not going to play with idiots.

Well,......... then there is the consideration you are one of them?
     

[Shadow]

Well,......... then there is the consideration you are one of them?
     

In that case I have to stop playing with myself.

[BillyB]

Now that the accident investigation is published and over, guess we'll have to wait for the criminal investigation report.

What good will the criminal report do?  Who's going to enforce international law? Obama's best efforts have not stopped Russia, China, and ISIS all making gains. The EU doesn't want more sanctions on Russia cause it hurts them. The costly investigation by the West is to show the public they care but in the end, nothing will happen to Russia.

 Russian soldiers operated the BUK missile system. Putin admits Russian soldiers were in Ukraine but he didn't send them. They followed their heart. Like the soldiers the tanks and missiles also followed their heart into Ukraine.

[calmissile]

What good will the criminal report do?  Who's going to enforce international law? Obama's best efforts have not stopped Russia, China, and ISIS all making gains. The EU doesn't want more sanctions on Russia cause it hurts them. The costly investigation by the West is to show the public they care but in the end, nothing will happen to Russia.

 Russian soldiers operated the BUK missile system. Putin admits Russian soldiers were in Ukraine but he didn't send them. They followed their heart. Like the soldiers the tanks and missiles also followed their heart into Ukraine.

I agree with your conclusions.   It would seem that Putin cannot be criminally charged and prosecuted in an international court while he is in office.  After removal from office, it might be a different matter.

Hitlers followers were not prosecuted until after the war.  It would  be impossible while they are still the leader or ruler of a nation.

There is currently one area that the free world can use to punish Putin for MH17.   In fact it is currently in use.....sanctions!  If the EU were to be not so dependent on Russian trade and instead focused on the bigger picture,  Russia could be brought to economic collapse as it was earlier.  Short of a 'hot' war, it is the only way I can see to stop Russian aggression.

[BCKev]

BTW, I recall sometime ago that Russia claimed "Ukrainian military" had such missiles and used them to bring down MH-17.  Was this option eliminated by the research?

This issue was addressed in an indirect way:  An analysis was done to determine the location of the missile launch. Based on the trajectory of the plane, and the damage patterns, the Dutch report concluded that the missile was launched from rebel held territory. It contained a map showing the likely launch area.

[Gator]

My opinion remains the same as it was from the beginning. A mistake by one of the rebels who was improperly trained and did not know how to separate between military and commercial aircrafts.

At least you admit the plane was 1) downed by a missile and 2) the missile was launched from rebel territory.  This was the general conclusion on the day MH-17 crashed in Ukraine.   

Recent news here shows a picture of incompetence from the researchers.......All seems to point at making the expected accusation of Russian involvement, but in such manner that no prosecution will ever be viable.

While you admit the plane was downed by a sophisticated BUK,  you still deny Russia committed an act of gross negligence or willful blindness resulting in the tragic loss of innocent lives, many from your native country.   

Shadow, if you truly believe this, please explain the REASONABLE DOUBT about the researchers evidence.  In a court the defense can not simply claim "incompetence."   The defense must attack each set of evidence and convince the jury of reasonable doubt. 


I did not read the investigation, yet reviewers here  show a solid base of evidence revealing the  Russian military was involved.  It is stronger than circumstantial evidence.  The world will never hear a confession, yet many a criminal defendant claiming he is innocent has been found guilty by a jury of his peers.


 So what is your defense?  An intelligent man such as yourself should be able to summarize:

1.  Why the evidence does not show "MEANS, MOTIVE, and OPPORTUNITY" for Russia to have deployed the BUK in the rebel territory (do you recall the photos of the BUK entering and leaving the area at the time of the downing).

2.  Why Russia would not have its own military actually operating the BUK or supervising the operation?

Frankly, you sound like a Hillary Clinton supporter - no matter how much dirt is revealed about her, the supporter, in knee-jerk fashion, claims such is not proven and ignores the dirt.   Most don't even hold their nose when voting for her.  Do you hold your nose when writing your defense of Russia? 

[BC]

 So what is your defense?  An intelligent man such as yourself should be able to summarize:

1.  Why the evidence does not show "MEANS, MOTIVE, and OPPORTUNITY" for Russia to have deployed the BUK in the rebel territory (do you recall the photos of the BUK entering and leaving the area at the time of the downing).

2.  Why Russia would not have its own military actually operating the BUK or supervising the operation?

Frankly, you sound like a Hillary Clinton supporter - no matter how much dirt is revealed about her, the supporter, in knee-jerk fashion, claims such is not proven and ignores the dirt.   Most don't even hold their nose when voting for her.  Do you hold your nose when writing your defense of Russia?

The accident report obviously states it was shot down by a BUK and did note that only a limited number of pictures of the BUK 'remains' were in the report.  Other, more identifying and incriminating evidence will obviously will show up in the criminal report.  The accident report at some 400 odd pages IIRC was quite complete IMHO.  I expect no less from the criminal investigation.  Is still premature to throw politics into the game   We will know more in time and doubt Shadow's neighbors will reveal anything less than the truth.

[BillyB]

There is currently one area that the free world can use to punish Putin for MH17.   In fact it is currently in use.....sanctions!

We love it when politicians apply sanctions on bad boys but they never work. Sanctions is a way politicians tell us they're doing something about a problem but in reality they aren't willing to do enough.

I once asked if sanctions ever worked and nobody responded. Did the Soviet Union stopped aggressively spreading Communism? Soviets weren't doing business with us either yet how many Americans were pressuring our government to change the way the Soviets wanted us to be so we may buy Soviet goods?

Did sanctions make Cuba give back what they stole from American investors? Did sanctions stop North Korea from obtaining nukes? We're sanctions stopping Iran from pursuing nukes?

Are sanctions stopping Russia from destabilizing Ukraine in order to regain control? Because sanctions was all the west was willing to do for his actions in Ukraine, Putin decided to enter into Syria and bomb the fukc out of our friends there. Putin is showing all groups in this world who desire to be free that if they accept help from the west, they will be slaughtered. It's best they wait for the next American president before making any moves. If the west won't sanction Russia for causing problems in Syris, they certainly won't sanction Russia over MH 17.

Now Obama, through his foreign policy mouthpiece, Kerry, is begging for a ceasefire and mercy for the rebels since Russia is winning Syria. Russia will ask Syria remain in one piece and under their influence and all Obama can request is that Assad won't allow terrorists to breed there. Assad will comply by being the ruthless dictator he is and slaughter all who is against him. Putin will allow the west to take the rebel fighters as refugees or they will be slaughtered too.

People think Putin will get himself in trouble in Syria. Libya is becoming another breeding ground for extremists. Obama didn't leave Iraq and Afghanistan in stable condition. Putin will not use the same methods the west uses for nation building in the Middle East. He will allow Assad to rule with an iron fist and we in the west will keep our mouths shut if we know what's best for us. Only if the West had more balls to spank Putin, we'd see a different outcome in Syria and Ukraine. The score now is Russia got all of Syria and part of Ukraine and Putin hasn't decided the game is over yet.

[BC]

We love it when politicians apply sanctions on bad boys but they never work. Sanctions is a way politicians tell us they're doing something about a problem but in reality they aren't willing to do enough.

To be effective in the long run, the carrot must always be a bit more enticing than the stick.

[fathertime]

To be effective in the long run, the carrot must always be a bit more enticing than the stick.

Offering a carrot involves a give and take between 2 or more countries, which many here refuse to entertain....I think it is because they believe we are better (exceptional), and shouldn't have to negotiate.  What we say/impose is how it should be! That sorta stance might work for a while, but  when it doesn't, and sanctions aren't effective enough, then it is either fight, or negotiate solutions that provide enough benefit for all sides...a win-win!


Fathertime! 

[BC]

Offering a carrot involves a give and take between 2 or more countries, which many here refuse to entertain....

The enticing carrot vs stick is all a part of the negotiation process. Yes more difficult when more than two parties are involved, but ultimately only a win-win for all works out in the end.  'winning' is not an all for one deal, concessions are a part of negotiation and required from all.

[mendeleyev]

If sanctions were not working, the Russians would not be so desperate to end them. A key theme of PM Medvedev's recent European tour was to end the Western sanctions.

President Putin's imposition of "reverse sanctions" was logical and I understand why he ordered them, but over the longer term they have come to hamstring the economy even more. Ironically, the Western sanctions hurt wealthy individuals and businesses the most while the reverse sanctions have hurt their own "little people" the most.

Grocery stores still are overflowing with food, mainly because Eurasian Union partners Belarus and Kazakhstan are cheating by mislabeling products. The Kremlin knows it, and are frustrated by it, but they also understand that it is a safety value that at least in part holds down discontent with the inflation and poorer quality of products available. The higher prices for truly less than ordinary goods hurts the folks on the lower level of the economy the most.

In past years you'd rarely see shoppers read food labels. That is a common reaction in an emerging economy as shoppers are just plain excited at the expansion of choices. These days aisles are more clogged as shoppers in supermarkets whip out their reading glasses and spend time pouring over every ingredient, trying to decipher whether a product is really as good as labeled, or just another misrepresented pretender.