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.

 

Angry families of MH17 crash victims seek U.N. investigation

page: 2
7
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 7 2014 @ 05:23 AM
link   
a reply to: learnatic

The agreement between the nations is available and specifically addresses the release of information from a media standpoint. You have countries who see this issue from a purely political point of view with no concept of criminal investigations and prosecutions. We need to remember the nations involved all have their own legal system and laws.

The release of sensitive information in one country could be acceptable while the same info in another country would be restricted.

The agreement allows the involved nations to meet and discuss the issue as well as decide if any new information should be made available to the public. The purpose for the ability to veto the release of information is to protect the integrity of the investigation and possible criminal charges.

As an example the Malaysian MH370 incident, may want to release information that would clear the airline of any wrongdoing since its one of their airlines. The release of information by Malaysia, while possibly clearing Malaysian airlines, could jeopardize criminal prosecution.

That was the sole intent of this agreement. To prevent one of the nations involved from releasing information that can jeopardize the Investigation and prosecution for MH17. It does NOT allow involved nations to veto what the report states nor does it allow a nation to veto criminal prosecution.

Remember we are dealing with a western standard of evidence and prosecution. Any action taken by a nation to get information out could prejudice any investigation and court case, resulting in tainted evidence and testimony which in turn sinks any chance of prosecution since the standard of a fair trial went out the window.

The dutch lost a lot of their nationals on that flight. Contrary to what some other posters put forward, the Dutch are not going to protect Ukraine if its determined they are the ones responsible for the shoot down.


edit on 7-12-2014 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)

edit on 7-12-2014 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 7 2014 @ 01:13 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

So now you not even claim to know what`s in the agreement, but you think you know the international acting of The Dutch government...

Why do you think Dutch politicians are getting lot of high international posts regularly ?

...because they are so independent of course...dream on buddy !
edit on 7 12 2014 by BornAgainAlien because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 8 2014 @ 02:03 AM
link   
a reply to: BornAgainAlien

Please learn to read. I said nothing of the sort.



posted on Dec, 8 2014 @ 08:49 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

I read perfectly you try to make it look like you know what is in the agreement while our press and parliament don`t even know it.



Contrary to what some other posters put forward, the Dutch are not going to protect Ukraine if its determined they are the ones responsible for the shoot down.


Sure...

- The Dutch government follow exactly what the US wants for the last few decades regrading international matters

- The Ukraine is now being run by a government which is also controlled by the US

- US government is attacking Russia economically and accusing it without a shred of evidence

Yep, all the ingredients to end up with just such an objective result as with the 9/11 investigation.
edit on 8 12 2014 by BornAgainAlien because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 8 2014 @ 11:35 AM
link   
a reply to: BornAgainAlien

Again please learn to read. I said nothing of the sort.



posted on Dec, 8 2014 @ 03:21 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

Are you suggesting that a proper and thorough and open investigation would be a threat to National Security?




posted on Dec, 8 2014 @ 05:11 PM
link   
a reply to: Salander

Uhm no. Where did that question come from?



posted on Dec, 9 2014 @ 09:02 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

Perhaps I misunderstood the gist of your several posts. It almost sounded like you were defending secrecy in the investigative process regarding MH17, that you thought it acceptable to keep the investigation out of the purview of the public.

Apologies if I misunderstood your message.



posted on Dec, 9 2014 @ 09:14 AM
link   
a reply to: Salander

No you didn`t, his only interest is not the truth, but still being to blame it on Putin...he doesn`t care about the victims getting to know what has happened but only his anti-Putin agenda...so you actual read it right.



posted on Dec, 10 2014 @ 03:59 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

When goverments are able to control what the publis hears with agreement like this agreement enables them to do, sooner or later they succumb to temptation to prevent the public from knowing about their own wrongdoing. This concern and historical incidence of it occuring, transcends any other purpose it may serve either at the time or later and so should never be allowed to occur.

There is so much abuse of agreements that have been abused, it has been a stong contribuing factor in the world being like it is today.



posted on Dec, 10 2014 @ 09:17 AM
link   
a reply to: learnatic

Again the agreement has nothing to do with preventing an investigation or prosecution.

It prevents countries involved from releasing info to the public so it does not jeopardize the investigation or prosecution.

It does not allow a nation to block an investigation.
It does not allow a nation to block specific portions of an investigation.
It does not allow a nation to block prosecution.



posted on Dec, 11 2014 @ 07:53 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

I am curious about how an investigation might be jeopardized by the public having knowledge of what happened?



posted on Dec, 11 2014 @ 08:06 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra



The release of sensitive information in one country could be acceptable while the same info in another country would be restricted.


So in effect we have national security, data protection and "sensitive information" that might upset living relatives of the dead being used as an excuse to cover up war crimes.

My how Hitler and his merry men would had loved all these rules to hide behind.

I think people in Holland would like to hear that terrorists shoot MH17 down instead of the Ukraine government on the orders of a public relations consultant woring for the CIA but the facts don't seem to tie in with the PR spin and lies so we have a problem.



Remember we are dealing with a western standard of evidence and prosecution.


Yes, don't remind us as we now see that half of our elected leaders were involved in child sex and police in the USA can get away with murder these days.



edit on 11-12-2014 by VirusGuard because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 11 2014 @ 08:12 AM
link   
a reply to: VirusGuard

You go for fail any chance you get.



posted on Dec, 11 2014 @ 08:17 AM
link   
a reply to: Salander

Because a release of information can contaminate the evidence. It can contaminate a jury pool. Under western standards 2 areas that can result in an argument of an unfair trial resulting in charges being thrown out.

Unlike Russian standards where the verdict is known before the trial even starts western standards use a court of law and not a court of public opinions.



posted on Dec, 11 2014 @ 08:23 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra




That was the sole intent of this agreement. To prevent one of the nations involved from releasing information that can jeopardize the Investigation and prosecution for MH17. It does NOT allow involved nations to veto what the report states nor does it allow a nation to veto criminal prosecution.


Do you have a copy of the agreement?

No?

So how can you be so sure about what it says exactly?



posted on Dec, 11 2014 @ 08:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: VirusGuard

You go for fail any chance you get.



Why the insult my freind or was it because you could not refute the contents ?



Because a release of information can contaminate the evidence. It can contaminate a jury pool. Under western standards


Why do you keep making an excuses for a bent and broken legal system that will watse $500m investigating CIA murders and water boarding to keep the judges and lawyers in a job when we both know that no head will roll and that the bill will be past on to tax payers ?

Do try to address my points without resorting to insults please



posted on Dec, 11 2014 @ 08:28 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra




Unlike Russian standards where the verdict is known before the trial even starts western standards use a court of law and not a court of public opinions.


You mean like how Putin was blamed almost before the aircraft hit the ground?



posted on Dec, 11 2014 @ 08:32 AM
link   
a reply to: Flatcoat

No I'm referring to the Russian government immediately blaming Ukraine and then being caught editing their version of Wikipedia to reflect Ukrainian involvement and guilt.



posted on Dec, 11 2014 @ 09:26 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

Still what`s in the agreement can be made public, it would not effect evidence coming out in public.

Now we don`t even know if the Ukraine is able to veto evidence which is incriminating to them, so they should at least make public what`s in the agreement.

And in other news, head of the investigation told US still hasn`t handed over the satellite pictures which they really would like to have.
edit on 11 12 2014 by BornAgainAlien because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join