Flight MH17 - What happened?

[RLP]

It's not a false flag operation by the Ukranian or US governments as there's simply nothing to be gained by bringing down a commercial plane in the region. Ukraine are already in a de-facto civil war so gain nothing by greater PR in their favour. The US can't get involved military wise given Putin's support of the separatist militia and they're already, with the EU, applying economic sanctions against Russia. The EU don't want to cause major trade relation issues with Russia as that's where the majority of their oil imports come from. The only play from a false flag operation is for trade sanctions which could have been done anyway. It simply doesn't make sense and, given the high likelihood of a leak due to the rolling coverage and interest of what is a global incident, any so called false flag operation would backfire massively.

There's no purpose to this and the only logical conclusion to draw is that MH17 was mistaken for a Ukranian carrier, many of which have been shot down in recent days, which correlates with an untrained militia in the region. It also correlates with the reaction after the crash, namely the deleting of tweets by Igor Girkin, the removal of black boxes to Moscow and denying international observers access to the crash site. Everything points to a mistake by the rebels who are now scarpering to try and cover their mistake.

There's only one question that remains in my mind and that's whether the separatists obtained the SAMs from Ukranian bases they took control of or whether they were given by Russia. Given the recent shootings of Ukranian planes and the boasting of rebel leaders of recently procured sophisticated weaponry, especially SAM weapons, then the logical conclusion is that the missile battery was supplied by Russia.

I'm also afraid to say there's every chance that no justice will occur from the tragedy. It's highly likely that whoever pressed the fire button will never see the inside of a cell, and as time goes on the focus of the crash will turn away from the victims to be replaced by how trade is effected at the national level. Heart goes out to the family and friends who have lost loved ones in the most horrific of circumstances in the eyes of the world who will get no closure on their sorrow.

 

[Sammy G]

But why did the rebels initially grant free access to the Ukrainian inspection team? You would have thought that if there truly was a cover-up operation, then they'd be the very last people they'd want to let in. Why were there conflicting statements about the black boxes shortly after the Ukrainian team left the site and OSCE were turned away?

And it's not just about the recently-imposed sanctions - this incident will (depending on how it pans out) result in international support for what is already a brutal, indiscriminate and disproportionate military campaign by the Ukrainian forces - bombing their own citizens as well as the militia members, and practically destroying the infrastructure of a large part of the eastern region. There's a human cost to this conflict apart from the passengers on the plane. Yet Ukraine is using it as grounds to continue the airstrikes etc., while Moscow calls for a ceasefire.

I'm not discounting the possibility of an itchy trigger finger on behalf of the rebels, but it ain't quite as simple as you're making out.

Plus, I really am interested in the response to a few of the questions detailed above; surely the Ukrainian administration has perfectly good answers, assuming they're innocent of any involvement?

Carlos the air traffic controller, where are you?

 

[BecomingJulie]

Isn't it ever so slightly beside the point whether they got the missiles from Russia or Ukraine, and whether they bought them and paid for them or stole them?

If nobody had made those missiles in the first place, there would be about 300 people still alive and a few days' more reserves of fossil fuels to invest in renewable energy sources .....

 

[RLP]

But why did the rebels initially grant free access to the Ukrainian inspection team? You would have thought that if there truly was a cover-up operation, then they'd be the very last people they'd want to let in. Why were there conflicting statements about the black boxes shortly after the Ukrainian team left the site and OSCE were turned away?

And it's not just about the recently-imposed sanctions - this incident will (depending on how it pans out) result in international support for what is already a brutal, indiscriminate and disproportionate military campaign by the Ukrainian forces - bombing their own citizens as well as the militia members, and practically destroying the infrastructure of a large part of the eastern region.

I'm not discounting the possibility of an itchy trigger finger on behalf of the rebels, but it ain't quite as simple as you're making out.

Plus, I really am interested in the response to a few of the questions detailed above; surely the Ukrainian administration has perfectly good answers, assuming they're innocent of any involvement?

There was limited access granted. The crime scene is 20KM in diameter and the world has seen two scenes - the main crash site and a separate wing which obviously broke off in midair. If the rebels were confident that it wasn't them then you'd think they'd let Malaysian officials, or anyone else that isn't supporting the Ukranians in their civil war, full access?

I also don't buy your comments around indiscriminate bombing. If it's already occurring, why would the Ukranians need to blow up a passenger plane to get support to continue what they were already being allowed to do? Especially in the knowledge that should the "truth" ever come out, their legitimacy to Government in the eyes of the world is immediately annihilated.

I'll await for confirmation - if we ever get it - that it was definitely rebels, but in the meantime I'd be willing to bet my entire life savings on it being so. There's just no point in anyone else doing it, nor the rebels doing it on purpose, it just has to be a mistake.

I also think I could answer 8 of the 10 questions put to Kiev by the way. It's a really poor attempt at deflection. Kiev could answer the questions and it changes nothing.

Isn't it ever so slightly beside the point whether they got the missiles from Russia or Ukraine, and whether they bought them and paid for them or stole them?

If nobody had made those missiles in the first place, there would be about 300 people still alive and a few days' more reserves of fossil fuels to invest in renewable energy sources .....

It makes the difference in that if Putin is knowingly supplying highly sophisticated weaponry to militia that aren't trained in using them, then he and Russia are partly responsible for the death of 300 innocent civilians.

 

[Sammy G]

True, Julie, but 300 people?

What about the people being killed each day in eastern Ukraine by their 'own' government? I'm not talking about militia members either.

RLP - if there were any limits imposed, it wasn't the militants imposing them, but simply the scale of the area. Or at least that was the case when reports came in yesterday. The Ukrainian team left the site perfectly satisfied with the access they'd been granted.

 

[RLP]

It's beside the point. I'm not in support of Ukraine or Russia, I'm not wanting to point blame or try to manipulate the situation to my thoughts on the conflict.

From a completely unbiased POV, you have to think the rebels mistakenly thought they were firing on a Ukranian carrier. That's the logical conclusion.

 

[BecomingJulie]

True, Julie, but 300 people?

What about the people being killed each day in eastern Ukraine by their 'own' government? I'm not talking about militia members either.

Again, they'd have a harder time killing anyone if nobody was making weapons and ammunition.

 

[Sammy G]

It's beside the point. I'm not in support of Ukraine or Russia, I'm not wanting to point blame or try to manipulate the situation to my thoughts on the conflict.

Nor am I, if that's what you're suggesting.

From a completely unbiased POV, you have to think the rebels mistakenly thought they were firing on a Ukranian carrier. That's the logical conclusion.

It's the simplest conclusion, although again it raises questions. If there were a clueless band of rebels who were supplied by Russia with the missiles, why were they not also supplied with the correct targeting equipment? Radar alone just doesn't cut it. That's akin to examining a distant galaxy with the aid of nothing but a magnifying glass.

If the missiles were stolen from Ukrainian forces (as the rebels having possession of the missiles but not the accompanying technology would seem to indicate), why the outright denials from Kiev that any of their Buks have been taken?

Those are two of the simplest, least conspiratorially-minded questions, yet nobody appears to have answered them yet. Of course, they may well do so in time, but the silence on that front merely arouses suspicion.

 

[RLP]

It's the simplest conclusion, although again it raises questions. If there were a clueless band of rebels who were supplied by Russia with the missiles, why were they not also supplied with the correct targeting equipment? Radar alone just doesn't cut it. That's akin to examining a distant galaxy with the aid of nothing but a magnifying glass.

If the missiles were stolen from Ukrainian forces (as the rebels having possession of the missiles but not the accompanying technology would seem to indicate), why the outright denials from Kiev that any of their Buks have been taken?

Those are two of the simplest, least conspiratorially-minded questions, yet nobody appears to have answered them yet. Of course, they may well do so in time, but the silence on that front merely arouses suspicion.

The missiles and targeting system worked flawlessly. My question is with the untrained rebels, simple user error, especially after getting excited about taking out two Ukranian carriers in 48 hours. With professional military there will be standards and checks to follow when locking a target, usually done by people of sufficient senior rank and years of experience. The separatists are made up of anyone and everyone sympathetic to the Russian cause. We've seen a lot of reports on British men going out to Syria to fight - students, shop assistants, IT technicians etc. None of these have any armed training but have simply turned up, been given a gun and told to fire at the opposition. I'm sure that's what happened in eastern Ukraine on Thursday, with an eager, untrained rebel without the necessary training to identify the plane as civilian and who didn't go through the checks that a trained officer would.

Second point: Is Kiev denying that their buks were taken? They're saying the plane was shot down with a Russian made Buk. Unless it's stated elsewhere then it doesn't prove either way that it was stolen when eastern Ukraine was lost to the rebels or that Russia provided the weaponry because all Buks are Russian made. Of course, they will immediately place blame towards the Russians and saying 'russian made' is clearly done with a reason, but practically all media and export reports are waiting for confirmation on where the missile was fired from which would given an indication as to how it was procured.

 

[Sammy G]

The missiles and targeting system worked flawlessly.

The missiles obviously worked - I never contested that. As for targeting systems, we know that the radar was operational, but as already stated, a radar return isn't enough to establish whether it's a civilian plane or not - hence this statement from Bob Latiff of Notre Dame University (and formerly the CIA):

If radar was all they were using, that's a shame.

And yes, Ukraine has denied that any Buks of theirs were taken, or even deployed in the immediate vicinity to begin with.

The latest 'evidence' apparently shows Buks crossing the border from Russia. So why were rebels not given the proper technology to assist in targeting? Did Russia want this to happen? I doubt it.

 

[RLP]

Bob Latiff has no idea what technology alongside the missile was used. Given that the route was used by multiple airliners for weeks on end you'd like to think as a collective they had the ability to determine what was civilian or not. My argument is that this is the result of one inexperienced rebel who made the wrong call. Again, it's my assumption, but it suits better than the rebels firing at everything that flies above them with no second thought to it.

I also find it hard to believe that no Ukranian Buks were stationed in Crimea or eastern Ukraine, especially given that is what borders Russia. Ukraine might be denying it to put pressure on Russia as the only other logical conclusion is that it was supplied by them. Anyway, that point is probably moot. Either way, it assumes the rebels fired. It doesn't make a huge difference about whether they got them from a Ukrainian base or direct from Russia if Putin can distance his government from it, which he will no doubt do.

I also doubt Russia wanted this to happen, hence coming back to untrained rebels. I'm not talking about all of the rebels here as clearly there have been fighters deployed from Russia, some of whom will have a long military career. However, a lot of the fighters will be novices. My conclusion is that one of said novices has been left in charge of the SAM battery, maybe only briefly whilst their chief goes to take a piss, but that lack of experience in being able to interpret the technology to its full extent, potentially combined with a quick pressured decision, has ultimately downed this plane. No one meant for this to happen (which, I think, was the first thing I said when getting involved with this thread about the false flags!).

Anyway, we will find out soon enough.

 

[Sammy G]

Bob Latiff has no idea what technology alongside the missile was used.

Never suggested he did, but he knows exactly what technology should be used. A Russian operative (or a Russian-trained operative) would be fully aware of the need to verify targets before pulling the trigger. No novice could even operate the system. So all of this points to the missiles having been stolen from Ukrainian forces, if we're to believe that it was an accident

The Ukrainian foreign minister had this to say (yesterday):

We are absolutely sure and we checked yesterday that no missiles have been taken from the Ukrainian army

He also stated that no such missiles had been deployed in the area by the Ukrainian army. You've said that you doubt this yourself. So why has he categorically denied it?

Our military forces don't use any sort of anti-air missile in the region of anti-terror operation

I'm not jumping to any conclusions about false flags, but don't you think there are a few questions which it would be in Ukraine's interest to answer promptly, if only to silence Moscow?

 

[wcote2]

I doubt it was the Ukrainian's.

The simple fact is the 'rebels' have no air power. Even if they did they would be worried that it could be a Russian aircraft and that would be an excuse for the Russians to officially get troops into Eastern Ukraine. That would be game over for Kiev.

From what I have read it seems like a tragic accident by the 'rebels'. They even made comments online about shooting down a Ukrainian Air Force transport jet, but when it turned out it was MH17 these comments were deleted.

 

[Sammy G]

Regarding the 'tragic accident' theory, Arseniy Yatsenuk (Ukraine's PM) seems to believe otherwise.

In a German newspaper he's quoted as saying that the missile required "very professional staff", and that it "could not be operated by drunken gorillas" (it appears he did say 'gorillas' rather than 'guerillas'). That's tantamount to saying "the Russians did it".

When asked about the very real possibility of it having been an accident, his response was:

"It's a lie and I hope it will be proved as a lie by experts, including international experts who have already arrived in our country".

Meanwhile, the rebels are asking for a ceasefire in exchange for acess to the crash site, and Kiev (so far) appears to be hesistant on that front. Why?

 

[rickolasnice]

Rebels could tamper with evidence?

 

[Sammy G]

Why would that have any bearing on Ukraine's refusal to agree to a ceasefire?

Of course rebels may have tampered with evidence to some extent, but does that mean investigating the crash site is now of no interest? Hardly. Does it justify further indiscriminate bombing?

It's remarkable how trusting people are of the Ukrainian junta, given that Odessa happened barely two months ago. I'm not a Putin apologist by any stretch, but why trust the thugs in Kyiv any more than their counterparts in Moscow?

 

[Si Dread]

Gotta love the conspiracy theories this one's throwing up, huh?

How closely do these two Malaysian airliners resemble each other? Would it be possible to smash a 767 into the ground & then pretend the plane was actually a 777, or vice versa, & have no experts notice?

Is this shit coindidence? I'm not too sure how I feel about coincidences. This seriously pongs this does.

Anyone remember that SEAL team that killed Bin Laden & were then almost completely elliminated through a helicopter crash? That smelled fucking bad to me too.

I do not trust a word the media is saying & the online media & internet itself are now so thoroughly policed & (con)trolled that I have trouble believing a single official account of damned near anything anymore.

... & do not start me on the fucking Gaza situation! Coincidence? My gaping orrifice!

 

[mydrugbuddy]

Anyone remember that SEAL team that killed Bin Laden & were then almost completely elliminated through a helicopter crash? That smelled fucking bad to me too.

In the documetary i saw about that operation it stated that the helicopter crash landed from a low height (20 feet iirc) at the very start of the mission, (the helicopter was fucked and unusable and they had to leave it behind, but no one was injured), thus immediatley throwing Plan A into dissaray, and Plan B had to be implemented immediatley (calling in the backup team) as the first team would have had to means of getting out of there after the mission otherwise.

 

[RLP]

It's remarkable how trusting people are of the Ukrainian junta, given that Odessa happened barely two months ago. I'm not a Putin apologist by any stretch, but why trust the thugs in Kyiv any more than their counterparts in Moscow?

Kiev is a (semi) functioning government which has to play to the international community. Any coordinated investigation undertaken by independent experts from a variety of countries will likely be working from Kiev or a Ukranian held town also.

You don't have to trust Kiev to also believe that the best opportunity for the real truth to come out lies with the rebels allowing the international community and Ukraine in. A temporary ceasefire and safe passage MUST be given.

 

[Sammy G]

Kiev may be a semi-functioning government, but as for answering to the international community, are you joking? It's an unelected administration installed by a CIA-led, IMF-backed coup. It also happens to be dominated by far-right antisemite lunatics.

The airstrike on Staraya Kondrashovka (which occurred on July 2nd) was the latest in a series of acts which would constitute war crimes, were they not perpetrated by a US-supported regime. Funnily enough, that was initially pinned on pro-Russian rebels again, until incontrovertible evidence to the contrary forced the Azov Battalion to publicly state that it was all because of 'pilot error'.

Speaking about the Azov Batallion (part of the Ukrainian National Guard), they're known neo-fascists who actually incorporate Nazi insignia into their emblems. Yet they're on Kiev's payroll.

As for the statement of the obvious about any investigation having to take place on Ukrainian soil (I could've sworn it was being done from Stevenage), I'm really not sure how that relates to my post at all.

Of course a ceasefire must be brokered - the point is that both Putin and the rebels have made every effort to do so, only to be met with resistance from the Ukrainian administration. That's what's mystifying about the whole business.