Western propaganda

KoTeMoRe wrote:
Let us say that it should have been as easy for the Tanks and APC's captured by the initial insurgency, yet it happened. Ukraine is swiss cheese when it comes to these things. But that doesn't mean anything actually, capturing any equipment, doesn't explain the hit on MH17, so like you, I'm expecting to disprove that point.

I've never seen anybody convincingly justify why exactly the separatists should be put on trial if they did shoot down the aircraft. The plane was flying over a warzone where there had been significant aircraft losses in the preceding weeks. Somehow when the americans kill scores of children and women in "collateral damages" that's just a part of the holy war on terror, but when there's collateral damage in other conflicts it's a guaranteed war crime.
I mean jesus, just the civilian losses in Iraq haven't even been counted, and if we include the absolute fubar in Afghanistan and Syria and Libya and Egypt and Yemen and Pakistan the amounts of lives lost thanks to american intervention become absolutely staggering.

That's the true nature of western propaganda, not the blaming of one side over the other, but the complete ignorance of its own crimes.

^^^

Its a great point and one usually overlooked in the 'they did it' arguments. Personally i think the rebels did it accidentally, but my focus is more on the people who were sending the planes over a warzone that was responsible for so many aircraft losses in the time building up to that. If they wish to put the rebels on trial for an accident, then surely the people in kiev are arguably just as culpable for letting it overfly the zone?

Its a tricky one, and unless they can prove that the rebels did it completely on purpose, with the intention of shooting down an airliner full of civilians, then they should be looking at all people who had a part to play in this tragic accident.

I dont think they will get as far as fingering the rebels for it though, as they seem set on blaming russia and putin personally.

kvs wrote:

Rodinazombie wrote:^^^

Its a great point and one usually overlooked in the 'they did it' arguments. Personally i think the  rebels did it accidentally,  but my focus is more on the people who were sending the planes over a warzone that was responsible for so many aircraft losses in the time building up to that. If they wish to put the rebels on trial for an accident, then surely the people in kiev are arguably just as culpable for letting it overfly the zone?

Its a tricky one, and unless they can prove that the rebels did it completely on purpose, with the intention of shooting down an airliner full of civilians, then they should be looking at all people who had a part to play in this tragic accident.

I dont think they will get as far as fingering the rebels for it though, as they seem set on blaming russia and putin personally.

The fact that the Kiev regime seized the ATC tapes and made them secret (if not destroying them) says it all to me.   What have they
to hide?   The ATC tapes would be proving their case but they suppress this evidence.  

I do not find the theory that the rebels did it credible.   All of the previous shootdowns were due to MANPADs.   Somehow magically
they started using Buks.   BS.  If they had a Buk system that they could use they could have been shooting down regime SU-25s
much more easily.   But they chose to shoot down a civilian airliner just outside of the range of the 9M38 missile instead.   Epic
propaganda nonsense.

Actually there were OSA's and Strelas in thatre since at least end of June, early July. There were a couple of videos after the carnage at Donetsk Aiport in May showing "Separ" assets to prevent Crocodiles from roaming free that were initially treated as propaganda by Ukraine. Then Black July happened. Over 50% of the aircraft losses from the Ukropistanis were lost in July. That was the first Voentorg shot in the Arm.

kvs wrote:

Rodinazombie wrote:^^^

Its a great point and one usually overlooked in the 'they did it' arguments. Personally i think the  rebels did it accidentally,  but my focus is more on the people who were sending the planes over a warzone that was responsible for so many aircraft losses in the time building up to that. If they wish to put the rebels on trial for an accident, then surely the people in kiev are arguably just as culpable for letting it overfly the zone?

Its a tricky one, and unless they can prove that the rebels did it completely on purpose, with the intention of shooting down an airliner full of civilians, then they should be looking at all people who had a part to play in this tragic accident.

I dont think they will get as far as fingering the rebels for it though, as they seem set on blaming russia and putin personally.

The fact that the Kiev regime seized the ATC tapes and made them secret (if not destroying them) says it all to me.   What have they
to hide?   The ATC tapes would be proving their case but they suppress this evidence.  

I do not find the theory that the rebels did it credible.   All of the previous shootdowns were due to MANPADs.   Somehow magically
they started using Buks.   BS.  If they had a Buk system that they could use they could have been shooting down regime SU-25s
much more easily.   But they chose to shoot down a civilian airliner just outside of the range of the 9M38 missile instead.   Epic
propaganda nonsense.

The thing is, i have a lot of problems with the ukie story too, the secrecy surrounding it stinks yes, but i also have a problem with you guys that seem to this is beyond all realm of possibility that the rebels could have done it. Christ, who was shooting dozens of helicopters wnd planes down in the weeks preceding this?

And no, i very much doubt that they chose to shoot an airliner down, if they did do it, it was an accident.

I believe it was the rebels, but im more than willing to listen to any other theories on it. The problem with you guys on here is your minds are closed. Ukies did it in a false flag operation and any other idea is nonsense. Anything else is simply 'western propaganda'.with that attitude whats the point in even trying to find the truth?

Considering the number of civilians murdered by their own government in the Ukraine I find it a little hard to care about 300 odd "innocent" westerners in a plane shot down...

GarryB wrote:Considering the number of civilians murdered by their own government in the Ukraine I find it a little hard to care about 300 odd "innocent" westerners in a plane shot down...

well thats a strange view to be honest, those people in the plane had even less to do with whats going on than the civilians on the ground

Prince Darling wrote:

GarryB wrote:Considering the number of civilians murdered by their own government in the Ukraine I find it a little hard to care about 300 odd "innocent" westerners in a plane shot down...

well thats a strange view to be honest, those people in the plane had even less to do with whats going on than the civilians on the ground

No, its not a strange view, i kinda feel the same way. The people on mh17 were of course innocent victims, but there are thousands more who have been killed in the same war but get no sympathy or coverage from the west. 300 westerners are clearly worth more than 10,000 russians in the eyes of the west, so its easy to see why a russian wouldnt care about those 300 westerners. I do feel bad for the victims of mh17, but my feels for them are erased somewhat by the way the other victims of this war are ignored.

Prince Darling wrote:

GarryB wrote:Considering the number of civilians murdered by their own government in the Ukraine I find it a little hard to care about 300 odd "innocent" westerners in a plane shot down...

well thats a strange view to be honest, those people in the plane had even less to do with whats going on than the civilians on the ground

That does not mean that I or anyone else have to value their lives more than the lives of the people of Donbass.

ExBeobachter1987 wrote:

Prince Darling wrote:

GarryB wrote:Considering the number of civilians murdered by their own government in the Ukraine I find it a little hard to care about 300 odd "innocent" westerners in a plane shot down...

well thats a strange view to be honest, those people in the plane had even less to do with whats going on than the civilians on the ground

That does not mean that I or anyone else have to value their lives more than the lives of the people of Donbass.

Its brutal, but when guy doesnt care about your losses, why would you then go out of your way to care about his losses, especially when its him thats supporting the guys that are causing your losses?

well thats a strange view to be honest, those people in the plane had even less to do with whats going on than the civilians on the ground

Whereas the innocent civilians getting murdered by their own government are terrorists and had it coming?

The illegal government in Kiev has been attacking by aircraft and artillery its own citizens... why would it not attack aircraft flying over too?

If it is OK for the west to just care about of their "own" 300 people, why should I care about anyone but those on the ground that are still getting killed?

You are dropping way too many facts from your narrative to be taken seriously. Also, the claim that all of "us"
can't admit to the rebels being responsible is a smear. I have already posted that if they did it then it is no worse
than what the USA does on a routine basis and then fobs off as collateral damage.

Indeed the cost of the US shootdown of an Iranian Airbus in the 1980s should include the terrorist act that brought down the airliner over Lockerby in retaliation too, yet only one of those crimes got serious western attention. The double standard is not new.

kvs wrote:

Rodinazombie wrote:

kvs wrote:

Rodinazombie wrote:^^^

Its a great point and one usually overlooked in the 'they did it' arguments. Personally i think the  rebels did it accidentally,  but my focus is more on the people who were sending the planes over a warzone that was responsible for so many aircraft losses in the time building up to that. If they wish to put the rebels on trial for an accident, then surely the people in kiev are arguably just as culpable for letting it overfly the zone?

Its a tricky one, and unless they can prove that the rebels did it completely on purpose, with the intention of shooting down an airliner full of civilians, then they should be looking at all people who had a part to play in this tragic accident.

I dont think they will get as far as fingering the rebels for it though, as they seem set on blaming russia and putin personally.

The fact that the Kiev regime seized the ATC tapes and made them secret (if not destroying them) says it all to me.   What have they
to hide?   The ATC tapes would be proving their case but they suppress this evidence.  

I do not find the theory that the rebels did it credible.   All of the previous shootdowns were due to MANPADs.   Somehow magically
they started using Buks.   BS.  If they had a Buk system that they could use they could have been shooting down regime SU-25s
much more easily.   But they chose to shoot down a civilian airliner just outside of the range of the 9M38 missile instead.   Epic
propaganda nonsense.

The thing is, i have a lot of problems with the ukie story too, the secrecy surrounding it stinks yes, but i also have a problem with you guys that seem to this is beyond all realm of possibility that the rebels could have done it. Christ, who was shooting dozens of helicopters wnd planes down in the weeks preceding this?

And no, i very much doubt that they chose to shoot an airliner down, if they did do it, it was an accident.

I believe it was the rebels, but im more than willing to listen to any other theories on it. The problem with you guys on here is your minds are closed.  Ukies did it in a false flag operation and any other idea is nonsense. Anything else is simply 'western propaganda'.with that attitude whats the point in even trying to find the truth?

You are dropping way too many facts from your narrative to be taken seriously.   Also, the claim that all of "us"
can't admit to the rebels being responsible is a smear.   I have already posted that if they did it then it is no worse
than what the USA does on a routine basis and then fobs off as collateral damage.

Not a single aircraft was shot down from above 5 km before MH17.    If the rebels had functional Buk systems they could
track the altitude and path of their targets.   The claim that they shot wildly and screwed up makes the Buk into some
sort of MANPAD.  

I dont claim that they 'shot wildly', they may well have intended to shoot down the said plane, without knowing it was a civilian airliner. Who knows what false intelligence the ukies may have passed them? Lets say the ukies pass along the info that they are now using high altitude recon aircraft due to losses as lower level. This is just an example off the top of my head, but Wouldnt that then justify rebels aiming for such an aircraft?

I also find it disengenous to hear that rebels could not have had a buk, of course its unlikely, but they have managed to get their hands on a hell of a lot of 'unlikely' gear over the past year its unfair to count out this possibility.

My views are not a smear, its clear that almost everyone here thinks it impossible that the rebels did it, despite little evidence to contradict it.

But, lets say that the rebels didnt do it. What are the other options?

Are you willing to contend that russian forces did it? They were clearly identified using a pantsir in lugansk so is it beyond all realms of possibility that they could have operated a buk there too?

Im not saying that they did it, but if people are accusing the ukies of a false flag operation based on evidence available, surely using evidence available this theory should also be considered too?

This is why i dont get into discussions over this, too many people with minds already made up on both sides.

Rodinazombie wrote:
I dont claim that they 'shot wildly', they may well have intended to shoot down the said plane, without knowing it was a civilian airliner. Who knows what false intelligence the ukies may have passed them? Lets say the ukies pass along the info that they are now using high altitude recon aircraft due to losses as lower level. This is just an example off the top of my head, but  Wouldnt that then justify rebels aiming for such an aircraft?

I also find it disengenous to hear that rebels could not have had a buk, of course its unlikely, but they have managed to get their hands on a hell of a lot of 'unlikely' gear over the past year its unfair to count out this possibility.

My views are not a smear, its clear that  almost everyone here thinks it impossible that the rebels did it, despite little evidence to contradict it.

But, lets say that the rebels didnt do it. What are the other options?

Are you willing to contend that russian forces did it? They were clearly identified using a pantsir in lugansk so is it beyond all realms of possibility that they could have operated a buk there too?

Im not saying that they did it, but if people are accusing the ukies of a false flag operation based on evidence available, surely using evidence available this theory should also be considered too?

This is why i dont get into discussions over this, too many people with minds already made up on both sides.

What a nonsense comes here from several users.

There is no possibility for "confusion" for it to be a military aircraft.

Someone who is capable to operate a BUK Launcher without the necessary Commanding Post vehicle and the Observer radar that provides with high precision and broad angle the target and providing the data to the BUK Launcher, someone who can truelly manage to find a target with his weapon guidance radar and narrow search radar in a time window of less than 2 minutes, since the Aircraft MH-17 was flying 10km altitude with high speed and was only partially in the detection and weapons range for a brief period of time. Someone who is so highly capable and trained with such a complex, has no chances to confuse a civilian machine which use CIVILIAN TRANSPONDERS, that can send out their identification code several hundreds of kilometers, so countries, other planes and flight towers can direct them without fearing for responsive short term re-direction of those civilian jets to avoid air collision.

Civilian machines have civilian transponders and in all russian Aviation and Air Defense networks civilian machines are marked with two lines, unidendified aka military machines have no transponders and are always displayed with a single line, followed by lines representing their respective RCS the system recieves. Not only was the MH-17 on the BUK radar at least 4 long lines, but also clearly a two row lined target, which even to non operators of such systems like me is well known to be a Civilian Airliner.

There was never a even microscopic option for the BUK to confuse it for a military machine, it is something impossible. Not to mention that for a BUK system without the necessary and specific designed modularity of a ADS Complex where the lacking Commanding Post and Observer radar would be necessary to make the BUK Launcher an effective SAM, since it had no observer radar nor a commanding post, means it could only operate with almost non existing effectiveness, like a half blind cyclope to be used as a forward observer or a sniper spotter, with such a short time window that realistically without knowing the precense and the data of where the jet is coming from makes a Launching plattform with its painting radar to a non effective Weapon.

This is why i dont get into discussions over this, too many people with minds already made up on both sides.

You just lack common knowledge about that, the technology and circumstances of the BUK Launcher, completley ignore all Evidence against Ukraine and the sized control tower tapes, the pressence of entire BUK Complexes not just Launchers, but entire Observation radar, Commanding Post, Launcher and Distribution Network the Ukrops had in that region, the fact that Russia and Putin himself were immidiatley blamed for it, the Falsehoods and propaganda that Rebels have BUK, which never was the case like proven by Russian MoD with satellite evidence of this alledged BUK driving through east ukraine, it was never there but in western ukraine from start till this date controlled by Nazi junta city. All evidence and indications point only in one direction. People like you are either trolling or are simply have suffered under lobotomisation.

I did write a longer reply, but being accused of being a troll or having a lobotomy means this conversation is over. No need for insults.

Rodinazombie wrote:What if mh17s transponder was switched off?

Have you considered that possibility?

Im not trying to railroad anyone into thinking a certain way, rather id prefer people to keep their minds open and look at All possibilities. Something i dont really see many others doing, which is sad, considering the secrecy and lack of information we have about this. Theres a million and one ways this event could have transpired, not necessarily 'ukie inside job' nor 'putin did it' .

You can not switch off the transponders, they are integrated and trying to switch them off, means you need to rip it out of the aircraft and they are protected against such manipulation, meaning the Black box, documents all un-normal procedures, operations or failures of systems.

Why would the Pilot switch the transponder off? To be shot down?

Such possibility only exists if Malaysians have been all along in the boat of False Flag Operation Northwoods of the US, no other option there.

Your mind is not open, you just lack knowledge and right out ignore all indications and evidence. There is no possibility to "Switch off" a transponder, it is not a switch that can be turned on or off, like you want it, it is a crucial and vital integrated part for safety reasons that no pilot can control. Pilots have a display of systems and subsystems failures, errors or non functioning, if the transponder was switched off they would be alarmed by it, they would be alarmed by flight towers as being an unidentified target, would immidiatley send Airforce to intercept this target. Malaysian airliner was not started from Kiew but before that, meaning it flew through several airspaces of several countries at least one off them but actually more realistically all off them would have used Airforce jets to intercept the jet, especially after 9/11. The jet started from western and flew towards east, if the transponders were mechanically manipulated or turned off, than this is a direct indication of government involvement ans certainly not russian one, but a western government.

Let me guess, on 9/11 they didnt switch their transponders off either yeah? Cus that was all another cia false flag?

You say my mind is closed, yet im pretty much open to every possibility, i Have my view on what happened, due to evidence ive seen, but i dont KNOW.

You seem to have all the answers however.

Rodinazombie wrote:Let me guess, on 9/11 they didnt switch their transponders off either yeah? Cus that was all another cia false flag?

You say my mind is closed, yet im pretty much open to every possibility, i Have my view on what happened, due to evidence ive seen, but i dont KNOW.

You seem to have all the answers however.

Your mind is so open that aliens could have downed the airplane. You just simply are an ignorant that does not know facts and therefor thinks in terms that are physically impossible. Go ahead explain me your thought process of how exactly rebels could have downed MH-17 with a BUK system that A) never existed in eastern ukraine B) how someone could have turned off transponder without knowledge of half dozen of countries, but still have connection to flight towers of different countries and being Re-directed over a war zone?

Yes, i have a basic understanding to completley throw out theories that are impossible like "confusion or transponders being turned off".

You but ignore all EVIDENCE and indications to where the point the finger. Why are you ignoring facts like there was no BUK system in eastern ukraine, which was proven by russian MOD with satellite evidence after Ukrops have and US have started to make false propaganda with one BUK and a missing missile driving through alledged "eastern ukraine to russia" where Russian MoD has proven that those pictures which showed the BUK with the missing missile was driving through West ukraine?

Why you completley ignore the fact that Kiew has sealed the conversation between pilots of MH17 and flight control center? WHY? There is only one and single conclusion one can draw, they have something to hide.

Go ahead i am awating your open mind to physics and interpretation of impossibilities.

GarryB wrote:

well thats a strange view to be honest, those people in the plane had even less to do with whats going on than the civilians on the ground

Whereas the innocent civilians getting murdered by their own government are terrorists and had it coming?

The illegal government in Kiev has been attacking by aircraft and artillery its own citizens... why would it not attack aircraft flying over too?

If it is OK for the west to just care about of their "own" 300 people, why should I care about anyone but those on the ground that are still getting killed?

You are dropping way too many facts from your narrative to be taken seriously. Also, the claim that all of "us"
can't admit to the rebels being responsible is a smear. I have already posted that if they did it then it is no worse
than what the USA does on a routine basis and then fobs off as collateral damage.

Indeed the cost of the US shootdown of an Iranian Airbus in the 1980s should include the terrorist act that brought down the airliner over Lockerby in retaliation too, yet only one of those crimes got serious western attention. The double standard is not new.

no

well you could accuse anyone of that

no, because you are "better" then the west remember

kvs wrote:

KoTeMoRe wrote:

kvs wrote:

Rodinazombie wrote:^^^

Its a great point and one usually overlooked in the 'they did it' arguments. Personally i think the  rebels did it accidentally,  but my focus is more on the people who were sending the planes over a warzone that was responsible for so many aircraft losses in the time building up to that. If they wish to put the rebels on trial for an accident, then surely the people in kiev are arguably just as culpable for letting it overfly the zone?

Its a tricky one, and unless they can prove that the rebels did it completely on purpose, with the intention of shooting down an airliner full of civilians, then they should be looking at all people who had a part to play in this tragic accident.

I dont think they will get as far as fingering the rebels for it though, as they seem set on blaming russia and putin personally.

The fact that the Kiev regime seized the ATC tapes and made them secret (if not destroying them) says it all to me.   What have they
to hide?   The ATC tapes would be proving their case but they suppress this evidence.  

I do not find the theory that the rebels did it credible.   All of the previous shootdowns were due to MANPADs.   Somehow magically
they started using Buks.   BS.  If they had a Buk system that they could use they could have been shooting down regime SU-25s
much more easily.   But they chose to shoot down a civilian airliner just outside of the range of the 9M38 missile instead.   Epic
propaganda nonsense.

Actually there were OSA's and Strelas in thatre since at least end of June, early July. There were a couple of videos after the carnage at Donetsk Aiport in May showing "Separ" assets to prevent Crocodiles from roaming free that were initially treated as propaganda by Ukraine.  Then Black July happened. Over 50% of the aircraft losses from the Ukropistanis were lost in July. That was the first Voentorg shot in the Arm.

But the point is that all of the aircraft that were shot down including the An transports were below 5 km.   The rebels had no
means of shooting down aircraft at 10 km.  

I don't contest the point here, just making sure there's proper context. There were OSA's and Strela's. We didn't saw no BUK until the Paris Match photos.

kvs wrote:

KoTeMoRe wrote:

kvs wrote:

KoTeMoRe wrote:

kvs wrote:

Rodinazombie wrote:^^^

Its a great point and one usually overlooked in the 'they did it' arguments. Personally i think the  rebels did it accidentally,  but my focus is more on the people who were sending the planes over a warzone that was responsible for so many aircraft losses in the time building up to that. If they wish to put the rebels on trial for an accident, then surely the people in kiev are arguably just as culpable for letting it overfly the zone?

Its a tricky one, and unless they can prove that the rebels did it completely on purpose, with the intention of shooting down an airliner full of civilians, then they should be looking at all people who had a part to play in this tragic accident.

I dont think they will get as far as fingering the rebels for it though, as they seem set on blaming russia and putin personally.

The fact that the Kiev regime seized the ATC tapes and made them secret (if not destroying them) says it all to me.   What have they
to hide?   The ATC tapes would be proving their case but they suppress this evidence.  

I do not find the theory that the rebels did it credible.   All of the previous shootdowns were due to MANPADs.   Somehow magically
they started using Buks.   BS.  If they had a Buk system that they could use they could have been shooting down regime SU-25s
much more easily.   But they chose to shoot down a civilian airliner just outside of the range of the 9M38 missile instead.   Epic
propaganda nonsense.

Actually there were OSA's and Strelas in thatre since at least end of June, early July. There were a couple of videos after the carnage at Donetsk Aiport in May showing "Separ" assets to prevent Crocodiles from roaming free that were initially treated as propaganda by Ukraine.  Then Black July happened. Over 50% of the aircraft losses from the Ukropistanis were lost in July. That was the first Voentorg shot in the Arm.

But the point is that all of the aircraft that were shot down including the An transports were below 5 km.   The rebels had no
means of shooting down aircraft at 10 km.  

I don't contest the point here, just making sure there's proper context. There were OSA's and Strela's. We didn't saw no BUK until the Paris Match photos.

OSA's engagement ceiling is 5 km.  The Strela's ceiling is 3.5 km.    No way these systems could have hit MH17.

The rebels had a single non-functional Buk system which the Ukr army left behind at the air force base they abandoned.   There
are even pictures of the system.   Because it was not functional the Kiev regime accused Russia of supplying the rebels with
functional Buk systems and produced a phony video to prove it (they claimed it was going through a border town but in
fact it was filmed in the regime controlled part of Lugansk City).   Naturally NATO passes this BS claim off as the truth and
the blame is on Putin for shooting down MH17.  The question none of the NATO media drones and the consumers of their
excrement asks is why would Russia supply the rebels with Buks when the Ukrainian airforce was not using Tu-23 type high
altitude aircraft for attacks.   The regime forces used Su-25s to bomb and strafe the rebels and the rebels succeeded in
shooting them down without Buk systems.

It was the Kiev regime that was worried about Russian air force attacks and the deployment of Buk systems then make sense.
And it was only the Kiev regime that was operating Buks in the Donbas.

Once again, I don't factually dispute a point I didn't make. You said there were only Manpads used to down Ukrop aircraft. I corrected that, the rest isn't important to this point.