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.

 

Flight MH17 - Searching for the Truth

page: 14
6
<< 11  12  13    15  16 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 24 2015 @ 06:56 AM
link   
a reply to: DJW001




Because the Budapest Memorandum could be used to justify NATO aggression.


So let me get this straight. The rebels decided that just fighting against the Ukraine army wasn't enough of a challenge for them, so they wanted to bring NATO in on the action as well?




Why would Ukraine shoot down a passenger jet with air to air missiles, knowing that the rebels did not have that capacity, when they could have easily shot it down with one of their own BUKs in disputed territory?


Who's to say they didn't? They did have BUK systems in the area even though the rebels have no aircraft...




posted on Feb, 24 2015 @ 07:11 AM
link   
a reply to: BornAgainAlien

A website whose every article has an anti-West slant quoting an anonymous source? Seems legit.



posted on Feb, 24 2015 @ 07:13 AM
link   
a reply to: Flatcoat


So let me get this straight. The rebels decided that just fighting against the Ukraine army wasn't enough of a challenge for them, so they wanted to bring NATO in on the action as well?


Wrong, they may have thought that NATO was mounting a sneak attack.



Who's to say they didn't? They did have BUK systems in the area even though the rebels have no aircraft...


Excellent point: so why not use a BUK missile? Why use aircraft that the rebels don't have? And why is Russia so insistent that it was aircraft rather than a missile, given that a Ukrainian BUK is far more plausible?

Of course, another possibility is that the missile was fired accidentally during a training exercise. If so, why create the fiction of two, no one, no, two, Ukrainian aircraft?



posted on Feb, 24 2015 @ 07:21 AM
link   
a reply to: DJW001




Excellent point: so why not use a BUK missile? Why use aircraft that the rebels don't have? And why is Russia so insistent that it was aircraft rather than a missile, given that a Ukrainian BUK is far more plausible?



Well, that's the thing. Russia only claimed that there was another aircraft in the area, not that it shot down MH17..those theories came from elsewhere. So what logical reason could the Russians have for inventing a story of another aircraft in the vicinity unless, of course, there was another aircraft in the area.



posted on Feb, 24 2015 @ 07:34 AM
link   
a reply to: Flatcoat

Russian state media reported it was shot down by a Ukrainian aircraft. They even had the false photographs to go with it. Russia has pushed the air to air shootdown since very early on, blaming Ukraine.



posted on Feb, 24 2015 @ 09:16 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcalibur254

Yup, an English newspapers do sound legit.



posted on Feb, 24 2015 @ 10:08 AM
link   
a reply to: Flatcoat


Well, that's the thing. Russia only claimed that there was another aircraft in the area, not that it shot down MH17..those theories came from elsewhere. So what logical reason could the Russians have for inventing a story of another aircraft in the vicinity unless, of course, there was another aircraft in the area.


Seriously? You can't see why Russia would lie about there being other aircraft in the area? This conversation is pointless if you refuse to look at the situation objectively.



posted on Feb, 24 2015 @ 11:16 AM
link   
a reply to: DJW001

I am looking at it objectively. There are a number of videos of witnesses reporting another aircraft in the vicinity. I tend to put more credence in videoed testimonies than in hearsay and "unnamed sources in the pentagon". That's why I tend to believe that there was another aircraft. That's not saying that it was involved in the shootdown, though I am inclined to believe it was there at least.



posted on Feb, 24 2015 @ 11:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: Flatcoat
a reply to: DJW001

I am looking at it objectively. There are a number of videos of witnesses reporting another aircraft in the vicinity. I tend to put more credence in videoed testimonies than in hearsay and "unnamed sources in the pentagon". That's why I tend to believe that there was another aircraft. That's not saying that it was involved in the shootdown, though I am inclined to believe it was there at least.


How did these "witnesses" see anything? MH17 reported nasty weather at the time. Secondly its a bit difficult to identify type of aircraft at 30k + feet, even on a clear day.



posted on Feb, 24 2015 @ 11:57 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

They just reported a "military" style aircraft in the vicinity when MH17 went down. They didn't identify it. These were just local people who probably wouldn't know the difference between an SU25 and a Spad.

And btw, if it was such terrible weather, how did the rebels identify this "NATO bomber" disguised as a domestic flight?
edit on 24-2-2015 by Flatcoat because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 24 2015 @ 01:46 PM
link   
a reply to: Flatcoat

They did in fact identify it. Remember the press briefing the Russian general had?

RT - Ukrainian Su-25 fighter detected in close approach to MH17 before crash - Moscow


The Russian military detected a Ukrainian SU-25 fighter jet gaining height towards the MH17 Boeing on the day of the catastrophe. Kiev must explain why the military jet was tracking the passenger airplane, the Russian Defense Ministry said.

Follow Malaysia Airlines MH17 plane crash in Ukraine LIVE UPDATES

“A Ukraine Air Force military jet was detected gaining height, it’s distance from the Malaysian Boeing was 3 to 5km,” said the head of the Main Operations Directorate of the HQ of Russia’s military forces, Lieutenant-General Andrey Kartopolov speaking at a media conference in Moscow on Monday.

“[We] would like to get an explanation as to why the military jet was flying along a civil aviation corridor at almost the same time and at the same level as a passenger plane,” he stated.

“The SU-25 fighter jet can gain an altitude of 10km, according to its specification,” he added. “It’s equipped with air-to-air R-60 missiles that can hit a target at a distance up to 12km, up to 5km for sure.”

The presence of the Ukrainian military jet can be confirmed by video shots made by the Rostov monitoring center, Kartopolov stated.

At the moment of the MH17 crash an American satellite was flying over the area of eastern Ukraine, according to Russia’s Defense Ministry. It urged the US to publish the space photos and data captured by it.


Click link for remainder of propaganda.



posted on Feb, 24 2015 @ 01:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: Flatcoat


And btw, if it was such terrible weather, how did the rebels identify this "NATO bomber" disguised as a domestic flight?


They didnt know, which is why they ended up shooting down a civilian jetliner. Of course once they found out it was not military they removed their twitter posts about their involvement.
edit on 24-2-2015 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 24 2015 @ 01:51 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

And that has yet to be proven. I remember you were quite sure that the rebels shot it down, and that was back in July-August, and after all this time, we still don't have not ONE proof to prove it. And i see you still as a proof use a tweet that could have been made by ANYONE. Now, that's what i call legit.

But hey, you guys and a proof? Doesn't really go together.
edit on 24-2-2015 by Nikola014 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 24 2015 @ 02:02 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

And the message on his VK which was also removed after it became apparent that it was not a AN-26 but a civilian airliner.




posted on Feb, 24 2015 @ 02:06 PM
link   
a reply to: earthling42

There are words on the internet also that he didn`t have an actual account but there were others acting like it was him, so I wouldn`t hold too much merit to such things.
edit on 24 2 2015 by BornAgainAlien because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 24 2015 @ 02:11 PM
link   
Just like it would be impossible for RT to find a bunch of actors who could look into the camera and swear that they clearly saw an SU-25 ground support plane with clearly visible Ukrainian Air Force markings at seven kilometers. a reply to: BornAgainAlien



posted on Feb, 24 2015 @ 02:38 PM
link   
a reply to: DJW001

It is not even possible for a SU-25 to shoot down an civilian aircraft.
MH17 was hit at the front with many so called 'high energy objects' some of which also penetrated the floor of the cockpit.
Now think of an SU-25 flying towards MH17 with high speed and MH17 approaching it with high speed, say 915 kilometer + 800 for the SU-25? and than take into account that the board canon has a fire range of 2 kilometer.
The altitude is already questionable, certainly if it was not in clean configuration, but if even must have been flying higher than MH17 and diving to shoot through the cockpit floor.
Than there is also the CVR which would have recorded the impacts if it was hit by a board canon, but no, it was immediate destruction.

But there was another aircraft nearby, this was SIA351 which was about to cross the path of MH17, they were a minute away from MH17.
So it is quite possible that people had seen another aircraft.



posted on Feb, 24 2015 @ 02:40 PM
link   
a reply to: BornAgainAlien

He did have a VK, i've been reading his page to see what was going on.



posted on Feb, 24 2015 @ 02:59 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra




They didnt know, which is why they ended up shooting down a civilian jetliner. Of course once they found out it was not military they removed their twitter posts about their involvement.


So then why would they think it was a military flight in the first place? If it was on a regular domestic route and they couldn't see it, why on earth would they shoot it down?



posted on Feb, 24 2015 @ 03:04 PM
link   
a reply to: Flatcoat

Because an AN-26 was supposed to be heading to the area about the same time.



new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 11  12  13    15  16 >>

log in

join