NEW MH17 SENSATION: German experts point finger at Ukrainian air-force jets.

a reply to: Zaphod58

So if I were to accuse you of a crime, and threw all kinds of fits, and pointed all kinds of fingers at you, that means that you get access to all the police data for the investigation?

Well, my defense lawyer probably would.

a reply to: Flatcoat

No, your defense lawyer would get to see it after you were arrested and before you were brought to trial. You wouldn't get to be part of the investigation, and neither would he. Russia hasn't been charged with anything, and no one has been arrested, so they are following the rules as required.

originally posted by: R_Clark

This is what a German pilot-cum-air technology expert Peter Haisenko has just published on the subject of the MH17 disaster (my emphases):

SO... I am always skeptical when someone is conveniently described as an "Expert" in a field without any credentials detailed.

Is he an "Aviation Expert"? Why? ...So I started to google around for him and found very little at all...then found this from 4 years...of all places, back here on ATS...

posted on Apr, 7 2010 @ 02:27 AM

originally posted by: qwertz
According to the retired Airbus captain Peter Haisenko, AF 447 was probably bombed out of the sky.

-sudden loss of cabin pressure,
-crew and passengers immediately were unconcious,
-total loss of electric power and control within minutes,
-pitotprobe icing nonsense.

Compare Swissair 330 in 1970, or PanAm 103 in 1988, or TWA 800 in 1998.

www.gt-worldwide.com...
(In German only)

[edit on 7-4-2010 by qwertz]

I don't even know if he was an Airbus Captain? But even if so that does not make him an expert on Ballistics, nor an "Aviation Expert"..

As best I can tell he enjoys making unusual claims to gain media attention and those that like what they hear simply ignorantly or dishonestly ape "Aviation Expert" to lend him credence that this attention seeker has not earned.

a reply to: Indigo5

Personally, I felt it was a bit early for such analysis by experts to be released.

Nice post exposing yet another hoaxster. I sometimes think I should do such as that just to see if there is really any money in it LOL

originally posted by: bbracken677
a reply to: Indigo5

Personally, I felt it was a bit early for such analysis by experts to be released.

Nice post exposing yet another hoaxster. I sometimes think I should do such as that just to see if there is really any money in it LOL

Exactly how is he a hoaxster?

a reply to: Flatcoat

Well, after all the histrionics, finger-pointing and flat-out accusing Russia for the tragedy, I think they probably deserve a copy.

Why?

a reply to: Flatcoat

Exactly how is he a hoaxster?

When did he go to Ukraine and do his investigation?

originally posted by: tsurfer2000h
a reply to: Flatcoat

Exactly how is he a hoaxster?

When did he go to Ukraine and do his investigation?

Did anyone do an investigation before accusing Russia?

Ukrainian government fabricated false evidence a day before the "accident":

“The tape’s second fragment consists of three pieces but was presented as a single audio recording. However, a spectral and time analysis has showed that the dialog was cut into pieces and then assembled. Short pauses in the tape are very indicative: the audio file has preserved time marks which show that the dialog was assembled from various episodes.”

The encoding of the video file shows it was created on July 16, the day before the plane was shot down. This information remains to be confirmed, but if it is accurate, it would mean that the Ukrainian authorities shot the plane down and fabricated evidence to frame the opposition.

The Malaysian Airline MH17 Crash: Sixteen Central Issues Which Cannot be Ignored

The Ukrainian government has proven to be a liar. Why change their habit if their puppet-masters are doing the same?

a reply to: maghun

This has been debunked over and over again. It's a common timestamp issue that people have been seeing for years.

a reply to: Flatcoat

Did anyone do an investigation before accusing Russia?

And the finger pointing never said Russia was the ones who did it, but that they were guilty of supplying and training the ones responsible for it...the separatists.

originally posted by: tsurfer2000h
a reply to: Flatcoat

Did anyone do an investigation before accusing Russia?

And the finger pointing never said Russia was the ones who did it, but that they were guilty of supplying and training the ones responsible for it...the separatists.

Except that no-one knows who's responsible yet, as there has been no investigation so far.

a reply to: maghun

The Ukrainian government has proven to be a liar. Why change their habit if their puppet-masters are doing the same?

And the Russian never tell lies...Oh wait Crimea was a lie.

Good try, but Russia has lied so much they have to lie to cover a lie.

a reply to: Flatcoat

Except that no-one knows who's responsible yet, as there has been no investigation so far.

And that is because the separatists will not allow an investigation to actually happen, which goes to make one wonder what are they trying to keep investigators from finding?

originally posted by: tsurfer2000h
a reply to: Flatcoat

Except that no-one knows who's responsible yet, as there has been no investigation so far.

And that is because the separatists will not allow an investigation to actually happen, which goes to make one wonder what are they trying to keep investigators from finding?

What could they possibly be hiding? Evidence that a BUK missile brought the aircraft down? I thought that was a given at this point. The wreckage isn't going to tell them who fired the missile. The black boxes might give a clue and they've already been handed over.

a reply to: Flatcoat

Because the black boxes aren't going to tell anything but a missile hit. That doesn't help with WHO fired it.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Flatcoat

Because the black boxes aren't going to tell anything but a missile hit. That doesn't help with WHO fired it.

Yes, and neither will the wreckage, so what could the separatists be supposedly "hiding"?

a reply to: Flatcoat

What could they possibly be hiding? Evidence that a BUK missile brought the aircraft down? I thought that was a given at this point. The wreckage isn't going to tell them who fired the missile. The black boxes might give a clue and they've already been handed over.

Then why exactly are the separatists keeping the investigators from doing their job, and why have they been removing debris from the crash site?

Also know forensics can tell you alot about a crash, and they could reconstruct the plane enough to know what direction it was fired from and the separatists don't want that to happen.

a reply to: Flatcoat

The wreckage will show parts missing after being looted, and whether it was a SAM or an air to air missile. So if it was a SAM, from rebel held territory, when there was a known rebel SAM in the region, that looks pretty bad for them. If they can keep them from investigating and recovering the pieces of missile to determine what kind if was, then they can keep pointing the finger at Kiev.

a reply to: tsurfer2000h

the separatists don't want that to happen.

Would that be just speculation on your part?