SBU arrests DPR militant that transported BUK used on MH17.

http://www.uawire.org/sbu-arrests-dpr-militant-who-transported-buk-used-to-shoot-down-mh17

This was a great special op hit by the Ukraine ....they nailed this scumbag deep into DPR territory....approx. 80km +....kudos to Ukraine govt. Crappy security in the DPR if they couldn't see this coming...LOL.

 

OMG, the Bellingcat bullshit is told again and again and again.

No BUK brought down MH17, airborne cannon fire did.

Michael Bociurkiw of OSCE talked about it in 2014, and any person paying attention to details knows the official story is untrue.

 

I didn't quote Belling at....and OSCE Bociurkiw has said several things....basically how he sees fit. Yes sure....maybe NATO jets brought it down, flown outta Romania)).

 

Air cannon from what? From an aircraft that was designed for ground assault? Even Russian engineers laughed at the idea.

 

Facts are facts, and those facts that are quickly withdrawn from public view, like the cannon fire markings on that aircraft, wing and cockpit, are facts that contradict the official narrative.

MH17 was a staged event meant to demonize Russia.

 

Of course, bringing down a civilian airliner, if you're a civilized human being and not an Islamist or nationalist fanatic, is going to be a huge setback for your own side.

So if civilized people do it, it's almost certainly an error on their part -- they thought it was a military plane. They may be guilty of negligence, but that's a different thing.

As Lenin counseled, you always have to ask, 'who benefits?'.

The Russians and the pro-Russians in Donetsk did not benefit from this.
When the Americans shot down an Iranian civilian airliner, the Americans did not benefit.
When the Russians shot down a Korean civilian airliner, the Russians did not benefit.

 

And who benefited from MH17 was western powers who were attempting to consolidate political power in Ukraine, which government it had just overthrown.

Those who benefited were the ones who imposed sanctions on Russia because of the incident.

 

Yes. No doubt they will take advantage of something like this, conveniently forgetting that Americans have done the same thing.

 

By enabling and covering up, it appears likely that Americans have done it again....

 

If you've got really good evidence of that, you ought to start a thread on it.

The problem with material generated by the conspiracy-mindset crowd is that it discredits attempts to get to the truth of obscure and possibly evil operations. For instance, I would like to know a lot more than I do about American involvement in Syria, in particular our relationship to jihadis there, but there is so much nonsense written about this area that it's hard to pick out the truth.

 

What aircraft opened fire on Boeing?

 

A beneficiary can be intended or unintended. Ukraine was an unintended beneficiary from all of this.
The crime was committed by someone in Russia who handed over anti aircraft missile to people who would shoot into an airplane without looking at its altitude, direction and checking with Russian air traffic control to verify what it is they are about to shoot at. Hell, even checking FlightAware website would quickly tell them what’s above their heads.

It doesn’t matter who benefitted. What matters is who allowed this to happen.

 

I have to say that my initial response was that they (whichever side did it) were drunk.

Since it's not evidently your view that a pro-Ukrainian on the Russian side is the guilty party, are you saying that we have here a case of criminal negligence?

 

The deaths of everyone on board of that flight were the result of criminal negligence on the part of Russian officials who allowed that system to get into Ukraine. That includes Putin himself.

 

Never mind the fact that several military planes had been shot down in the recent days leading up to MH17 yet Ukraine air traffic control sent MH17 directly into the path of the war. Now who is negligent?

 

Ukraine bears partial fault, but Russia is the one guilty of criminal negligence.

 

It sounds like your mind is already made up.

However if you really are interested in learning about US involvement in Syria, or MH17, or any number of OTHER controversial topics, you might go Canadian.

https://www.globalresearch.ca/

Definitely NOT mainstream media.

 

The ones seen on Russian radar. The ones described by the quickly silenced Spanish ATC controller working in Kiev. The ones described by the Ukrainian peasant women for the BBC special that was taken down shortly thereafter.

 

When some event of importance happens in the world, it's almost impossible for anyone not to have some immediate hypothesis about its cause. You, me, same-same. I know nothing about you, but as for me, I'm not a reflexive Yay-the-West, Yay-America hyper-patriot. Nor am I a reflexive the-West-is-Evil, America-is-controlled-by-the-Lizard-People anti-patriot. (I'm a conservative, so I don't have a sunny-side view of human nature, especially not of humans in charge of governments ... any government.) I always try to apply Karl Popper's criterion for rational belief: what evidence would make one change one's mind?

I've looked at Global Research in the past, and will again, on your recommendation. One criterion I use to judge a source is to take something where I am very sure of the truth -- say, was 9/11 organized by Israel [No] -- and see what they say about that, if anything. You don't have to drink a whole litre of milk to know that it's sour.

 

As you effectively brought up conspiracy, you should also consider buying the book by Lance de Haven-Smith, entitled "Conspiracy Theory in America". It's most informative, considering how prevalent that term has become these days.

Yes, a great topic--what evidence WOULD make one change one's mind?

 

LOL....global research.ca....yeah, sure grab your tinfoil hat and start spinning.

Face it....there's really no hiding the fact that the Russkis shot this plane down....any amount of "spinning" isnt going to change anything.
The so called rebels couldn't hit a barn door with a handful of wheat let alone fire a BUK....

 

Of course, the "what evidence" criterion can be a difficult one at times. For instance, I can't actually think of any plausible evidence that would make me change my mind about the fact -- leave aside the mechanisms -- of biological evolution. Nonetheless, it's a good rule of thumb.

I grew up with the Kennedy Assassination, and read various books that came out about it over the years. I'm willing to believe that there is more to the whole thing than the Oswald-the-lone-shooter hypothesis states -- for instance, that Oswald might have had ongoing connections to one or more American intelligence agencies, who hoped to use him as an informant -- but I don't think there is credible evidence for a CIA conspiracy to assassinate Kennedy.

There can be evil things done, or tolerated, which fall way short of organized conspiracy. There's no question at all that the US was responsible for deaths in civilian installations in Cuba in the early 60s, such as occured in the El Encanto fire.

But there is a difference between being directly involved in some criminal action, and being associated with people who undertake criminal actions. For example, there was a fellow, Luis Posada Carriles -- a big hero in the Cuban exile community in Miami -- who put a bomb on a civilian airliner which blew it out of the sky. He certainly deserved to be put in front of a Castroite firing squad, but, sadly, after some prison time in Venezuela, lived out his life happily in the US. Now it's just possible that he was put up to it by the CIA -- but it's far more likely that he did this on his own initiative, although he was certainly involved with the CIA. The CIA has also been blamed for a particularly horrible car-bombing in Beirut, and it seems quite possible that a former head of the CIA, William Casey, was involved, along with Saudi Arabia -- our lovely allies --but on his own time, so to speak. Big organized conspiracies have to worry about the Edward Snowdens in their midst.

One thing I don't like about conspiracy theories is that they give the intelligence community too much credit. They're actually not that good, because, in this world, nobody can be that good. They didn't predict China's response to our approaching their border in the Korean War, they didn't predict the Iranian Revolution, and they got it wrong with respect to Saddam Hussein's nuclear weapons program (although in that case they may have just lied).

 

Here ya' go, tinfoilers! Go for it.


The Joint Investigation Team, which seeks to try the suspects under Dutch law, has said the missile system came from the Russian 53rd Anti-Aircraft Brigade, based in the western Russian city of Kursk.

Investigators had said their next step would be to identify individual culprits and to attempt to put them on trial.

Dutch officials have said Russia has refused to cooperate.


Russia is not expected to surrender any potential suspects who may be on its territory and authorities have said individuals could be tried in absentia.

The Joint Investigation Team was formed in 2014 by Australia, Belgium, Malaysia, the Netherlands and Ukraine to investigate collaboratively.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...h17-suspects-dutch-broadcasters-idUSKCN1TF1A1

 

You mean SU-25? The ground attack plans? The one with top ceiling of 7km?

https://www.popsci.com/article/technology/could-old-warplane-really-shoot-down-mh17/

Here is another:

https://www.bellingcat.com/news/uk-...d-the-problems-with-keeping-a-story-straight/

Belingcat article also covers the “Spaniard ATC” and other crap you mentioned.

I remember even someone from the manufacturer of the plane said its absurd to think SU-25 could shoot down an airliner at 11km.

 

if its true what they say then it seems to me that criminal negligence is definatly on the ukranian part not the pro russian side who where defending themself from fighters those weeks before the accident,
the pro russian side was shooting fighters down the entire time yet they let that plane fly over a warzone knowing that both sides where involved in air/ground fighting.

if there was a buk it was obviously intended to shoot down russian airplanes to protect pro-russian citizens and rebels from ukranian bomb