It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

US: No evidence of direct Russian link to plane

page: 2
21
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 22 2014 @ 06:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: JIDFBrzezinski
It's funny how common sense is completely devoid among this forum.

Why would Putin should down a civilian airliner and kill 300 people?

Why?

Two questions need to be asked more.

Where's the motive.

And who benefits from this the most.

Does Russia or Ukraine benefit from this? Of course not. Who benefits? Go ahead and take a wild guess.




those who invest expect some gains in return


edit on 22-7-2014 by cosmonova because: (no reason given)




posted on Jul, 22 2014 @ 06:10 PM
link   
a reply to: ressiv

298? Thousands...



posted on Jul, 22 2014 @ 06:15 PM
link   
a reply to: DeadSeraph


The video referenced by the New York Times was, in fact, posted on the Facebook account of the Ukrainian Interior Minister. The allegation was that the launcher was crossing the border with Russia.

However, going by the billboard and other features of the scenery, Russian bloggers and news sources claim to have identified the road in the video as having been taken in or near the town of Krasnoarmeisk ("Krasnoarmiysk" in Ukrainian), which has been under Kiev's control since May.

In fact, the billboard is supposedly advertising a Krasnoarmeisk car dealership. Also, one of the structures in the background is said to be a construction materials store on Gorkii Street, Krasnoarmeisk.

Please note that this town is (very roughly) 120 kilometers from the Russian border and 80 kilometers from where the Malaysian 777 went down. And again, it has been under Kiev's control since May.


Video of Rebel Buk Launchers Headed Back to Russia? No - Images From Ukraine-Held Territory Since May


+1 more 
posted on Jul, 22 2014 @ 06:15 PM
link   
a reply to: DeadSeraph

How is this Russian propaganda when it was America who said they weren't involved?



posted on Jul, 22 2014 @ 06:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: sosobad
a reply to: DeadSeraph

How is this Russian propaganda when it was America who said they weren't involved?


Show me where the U.S said Russia had no involvement.



posted on Jul, 22 2014 @ 06:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: maghun
a reply to: DeadSeraph


The video referenced by the New York Times was, in fact, posted on the Facebook account of the Ukrainian Interior Minister. The allegation was that the launcher was crossing the border with Russia.

However, going by the billboard and other features of the scenery, Russian bloggers and news sources claim to have identified the road in the video as having been taken in or near the town of Krasnoarmeisk ("Krasnoarmiysk" in Ukrainian), which has been under Kiev's control since May.

In fact, the billboard is supposedly advertising a Krasnoarmeisk car dealership. Also, one of the structures in the background is said to be a construction materials store on Gorkii Street, Krasnoarmeisk.

Please note that this town is (very roughly) 120 kilometers from the Russian border and 80 kilometers from where the Malaysian 777 went down. And again, it has been under Kiev's control since May.


Video of Rebel Buk Launchers Headed Back to Russia? No - Images From Ukraine-Held Territory Since May


So the argument is that because the launcher is shown traveling on a road 120km from the Russian border, it must not be Russian? Well I guess that settles it then.



posted on Jul, 22 2014 @ 06:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: DeadSeraph

originally posted by: sosobad
a reply to: DeadSeraph

How is this Russian propaganda when it was America who said they weren't involved?


Show me where the U.S said Russia had no involvement.




the U.S. had no direct evidence that the missile used to shoot down the passenger jet came from Russia.


Seems pretty legit to me.

What say you?



posted on Jul, 22 2014 @ 06:36 PM
link   
a reply to: DeadSeraph

Hey,

"Excuse me... mind if I just play through? I'd stop, but this week's fundraising has been exhausting."



posted on Jul, 22 2014 @ 06:37 PM
link   
a reply to: SurrenderingAmerica

You don't think you are taking things somewhat out of context? One might even say intentionally doing so? How is it you go from the U.S saying it has no direct evidence that the missile came from Russia, to the U.S claiming there was no Russian involvement? Because the article in the OP does not make the latter claim, anywhere, even once.

from the OP's source:



But the officials said they did not know who fired the missile or whether any Russian operatives were present at the missile launch. They were not certain that the missile crew was trained in Russia, although they described a stepped-up campaign in recent weeks by Russia to arm and train the rebels, which they say has continued even after the downing of the commercial jetliner.

In terms of who fired the missile, "we don't know a name, we don't know a rank and we're not even 100 percent sure of a nationality," one official said, adding at another point, "There is not going to be a Perry Mason moment here."

White House deputy national security adviser Ben Rhodes said the U.S. was still working to determine whether the missile launch had a "direct link" to Russia, including whether there were Russians on the ground during the attack and the degree to which Russians may have trained the separatists to launch such a strike.

"We do think President Putin and the Russian government bears responsibility for the support they provided to these separatists, the arms they provided to these separatists, the training they provided as well and the general unstable environment in eastern Ukraine," Rhodes said in an interview with CNN.

He added that heavy weaponry continues to flow into Ukraine from Russia following the downing of the plane.


Read more: www.dailymail.co.uk...
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook


So the Whitehouse says they can't prove it was a Russian that fired the missile and you turn around and claim they have admitted the Russians had nothing to do with it? Come on.



posted on Jul, 22 2014 @ 06:49 PM
link   
Hold on, have people actually read the Daily Mail article?

It says there is no direct satellite evidence of Russian government involvement in the physical firing of the missile, but that Russian Separatists most likely fired the missile.


Which is what the news media has been saying since this started. Russian Seperatists got ah old of a BUK missile launcher, and accidentally brought down the airliner.

There wouldn't be evidence from satellite surveillance of Russian government involvement in the firing of the actual missile, this is because the Russians are working through proxies, and the Spetznaz operating in Ukraine are wearing militia uniforms and balaclavas.



posted on Jul, 22 2014 @ 06:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: Painterz
There wouldn't be evidence from satellite surveillance of Russian government involvement in the firing of the actual missile, this is because the Russians are working through proxies, and the Spetznaz operating in Ukraine are wearing militia uniforms and balaclavas.

The Russians wouldn't even have to work with the rebels.

There are many ex USSR, Russian, and Ukrainian soldiers in the Donetsk Republic forces. There is likely quite a few that are formally trained with the BUK systems, which have been around since 1979.



posted on Jul, 22 2014 @ 06:54 PM
link   
a reply to: Painterz

It's called confirmation bias. They read the title of the article and immediately assume it confirms their own preconceived notions of what happened without considering the information it contains within context.



posted on Jul, 22 2014 @ 06:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: ressiv
a reply to: JIDFBrzezinski
one correction.... not the eastern part of the Ukraine...
but kiev would benefit from it to open the doors for nato / vn troops to win the eastern part and the krim back
but the reality is that Ukraine is split in 2 parts and the western world is still thinking its not..
so i'm grieving for the 298 casulty's that was needed to clear things out..
what an waist of live



That is the issue here. Ukraine is already split. Russia should recognize the S-E regions as a country and start to provide OPEN aid and assistance of all kinds. Russian military has a very long list of outdated tanks, artilerry, APCs, planes etc. to be dismantled. These will come real handy for the S-E Region guys.

Kiev Junta is bankrupt. EU/West do not want to throw even a dime in aid. Only give loans. Once the S-E regions have even 1000 tanks of T-64 or even older grades, 500 APCs, even 500 Mig-21/23/27 etc. Ukraine will not be able to fight a whole dogged and diligent war. Better bet of Kiev Junta would be to "suck up" and focus on their own affairs. End of the story.




posted on Jul, 22 2014 @ 07:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: DeadSeraph
Are we even on the same planet here? The same dimension?

Obviously not, and you could try and obtain a better video, there are plenty out there. You could try a better paper too!
Pity about The Mirror though, it used to be a good piece of paper, a long long time ago.



posted on Jul, 22 2014 @ 07:05 PM
link   
a reply to: DeadSeraph

You're funny.


- - You Russophobes ALL say the same thing when you can't refute facts.

Always claim: "Out of context"

DeadSeraph:


U.S saying it has no direct evidence that the missile came from Russia, to the U.S claiming there was no Russian involvement?



Hold your horses there sparky.

First:

Cite ME where I said: " How is it you go from the U.S saying it has no direct evidence that the missile came from Russia, to the U.S claiming there was no Russian involvement? "

Have fun with that!


Secondly:


Ukrainian officials openly stated that the 'separatists' didn't have FUNCTIONAL BUKs -- after the MH17 crash.

So which is it?

- - Russia didn't supply or Seperatists didn't have FUNCTIONAL BUKs?

- - or Ukraine who has up to TWENTY-SEVEN BUKs in the area?


Next, you gonna blame me for Obama's BAD GOLF SCORE? lol



posted on Jul, 22 2014 @ 07:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: theMediator
This is actually good news compared to what we usually get considering Russia.

I also don't see the motive to why Russians would of done it anyway.


The claim was never that the Russians shot down the airliner. The U.S position is that the Russians provided the separatists with the weapons system that was used to shoot down the plane, and the separatists are the ones who actually fired it. It's likely it was an accident, and if the tweets are to be believed, they thought they were firing on a Ukrainian military transport plane, and not a civilian airliner. Now there is a cover up because it's an international crime and they don't want to admit they did it. Sort of bad for PR when you are blowing 298 innocent people out of the sky (accidentally or not).

The real question is if it was Russians themselves fighting for the separatist movement that fired the missile, which the U.S cannot prove.



posted on Jul, 22 2014 @ 07:11 PM
link   
a reply to: DeadSeraph

LMAO!

You trust a govt that relies on this:



The officials made clear they were relying only in part on social media postings and videos made public in recent days by the Ukrainian government.


. . . If that is what the great U.S. govt relies on as evidence - I might be concerned if I was you.



posted on Jul, 22 2014 @ 07:18 PM
link   
a reply to: SurrenderingAmerica




You're funny.


- - You Russophobes ALL say the same thing when you can't refute facts.

Always claim: "Out of context"


Nice ad hominem. So now I'm a "Russophobe"? I am Russian on my mothers side of the family. Sort of hard to be a Russophobe when I am half russian don't you think?

I have supported Russia's stance on a number of issues in the past, including Syria, Iraq, and Libya, and for the most part supported the Russian stance on western involvement in the Ukrainian uprising. What I don't support is their proxy war in the Ukraine, or their bold faced lies and propaganda when it comes to the tragedy that is MH17. Not agreeing with everything Moscow says does not make me a "Russophobe". Funny how your type always claims we are "sheeple" blinded by western propaganda yet you are completely incapable of questioning the Russian party line. Why is that?



First:

Cite ME where I said: " How is it you go from the U.S saying it has no direct evidence that the missile came from Russia, to the U.S claiming there was no Russian involvement? "

Have fun with that!


I asked you to show me where the U.S said Russia had no involvement in the incident and you posted a quote from the article. If you want to be taken seriously and have a 2 way conversation here, at least try to be honest.



Secondly:


Ukrainian officials openly stated that the 'separatists' didn't have FUNCTIONAL BUKs -- after the MH17 crash.


Whats your point? The argument is that the BUK was supplied to the separatists by the Russians, and was later driven back across the Russian border after they realized they'd shot down a civilian airliner instead of the Ukrainian military transport plane they originally thought they'd bagged.



posted on Jul, 22 2014 @ 07:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: SurrenderingAmerica
a reply to: DeadSeraph

LMAO!

You trust a govt that relies on this:



The officials made clear they were relying only in part on social media postings and videos made public in recent days by the Ukrainian government.


. . . If that is what the great U.S. govt relies on as evidence - I might be concerned if I was you.


If only we could all be so enlightened as to believe everything the Russian government says. Naturally, it's impossible that they might have agendas of their own, and could be capable of deception. Afterall, it's not like the Russian people have ever been subject to government sanctioned propaganda or anything.



posted on Jul, 22 2014 @ 07:43 PM
link   
There you go. No proof or reason to believe that the missile shot by a Russian or that it was fired from Russia. Since the US or UK cannot possibly take issue with the collateral consequences of supporting foreign forces against foreign governments, we should not have to hear the word "Russia" from now on when speaking about the downed air plane.

Oh BTW. Canada has already promised new sanctions against Russia as a result of this "horrific action" by Russia...I presume he meant. We have the dumbest government in the world.



new topics

top topics



 
21
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join