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.

 

Russia vetoes UN resolution on MH17 tribunal

page: 2
7
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 31 2015 @ 09:29 AM
link   
Ukraine has stated they are going to reintroduce the tribunal resolution once the Dutch release the final report, so sometime in September or October.

I am curious what excuse Russia will use then veto the tribunal.




posted on Aug, 9 2015 @ 04:00 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

Figured you might be interested it talks about all the crazy conspiracy theories coming out if Russia. Apparently there was some I missed but it will give us lots to discuss though I really can't see how anyone can deny Russian involvement.

www.bellingcat.com...



posted on Aug, 9 2015 @ 05:08 AM
link   
a reply to: dragonridr

Some comedic gold right there.



posted on Aug, 9 2015 @ 05:11 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra




One of the excuses Russia gave was their investigators don't have the same access as other countries investigations. What Russia ignored is the fact those countries who lost citizens are involved where as no Russian citizens were lost.


Yet Russia is obviously the one that is getting blamed for it, so why would they vote in favor of a tribunal that would be set up to find them quilty,from the get go, without them having acces to the ongoing investigation in order to defend themselves properly?



posted on Aug, 9 2015 @ 05:14 AM
link   
a reply to: dragonridr




I really can't see how anyone can deny Russian involvement.


What is the proof for Russia's involvement?



posted on Aug, 9 2015 @ 05:30 AM
link   
a reply to: DProgram




Yet Russia is obviously the one that is getting blamed for it, so why would they vote in favor of a tribunal that would be set up to find them quilty,from the get go, without them having acces to the ongoing investigation in order to defend themselves properly?



If they are innocent why keep the investigation from showing it...and the tribunal would do that if they are.



posted on Aug, 9 2015 @ 05:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: DProgram
a reply to: Xcathdra




One of the excuses Russia gave was their investigators don't have the same access as other countries investigations. What Russia ignored is the fact those countries who lost citizens are involved where as no Russian citizens were lost.


Yet Russia is obviously the one that is getting blamed for it, so why would they vote in favor of a tribunal that would be set up to find them quilty,from the get go, without them having acces to the ongoing investigation in order to defend themselves properly?

Because they would be a part of the investigation and have equal access. Right now they have no access because they are not a part of the crash. If a tribunal was set up, they would.



posted on Aug, 9 2015 @ 05:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: DProgram
a reply to: dragonridr




I really can't see how anyone can deny Russian involvement.


What is the proof for Russia's involvement?


Usually the guy who is blocking an investigation is a guilty party.



posted on Aug, 9 2015 @ 05:40 AM
link   
a reply to: tsurfer2000h

Because, ike I said, the other parties are hell bent on blaming Russia, and have been since it happened. Russia cannot expect a fair investigation, especially if they have no acces to it themselves.
edit on 9-8-2015 by DProgram because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 9 2015 @ 05:43 AM
link   
a reply to: OccamsRazor04




Usually the guy who is blocking an investigation is a guilty party.


And that is your proof?



posted on Aug, 9 2015 @ 05:43 AM
link   
a reply to: DProgram




What is the proof for Russia's involvement?


Well let's see here shall we...

The Russian government is supplying arms and troops to the separatists.

The separatists have said they had a BUK system in their possession at the time it happened.

The separatists don't have the knowledge to operate the BUK system without training from someone, and Ukraine didn't train them but Russia has been. And they admit to getting training in Russia.

Ukraine had no need for their missile systems to be active as the separatists do not have any planes that would give Ukraine the reason to use them...but Ukraine does have planes that were being shot down just days prior to this.

And let's not forget all the shenanigans Russia played with first saying it was an SU 25 that physically coudn't shoot this plane down was the one that did...also changing the wiki page for the SU 25 really isn't helping to prove their innocence.

But feel free to refute anything I said that shows they are an innocent party here, and aren't trying to place blame elsewhere.



posted on Aug, 9 2015 @ 05:51 AM
link   
a reply to: DProgram




Russia cannot expect a fair investigation, especially if they have no acces to it themselves.



What access should they have, as I said in a prior post...

They have no citizens on the plane, they have connection to this plane, so why should they get any access to the investigation?

Here I will make it a bit simpler for you...

When someone breaks the law do they access to the investigation being done as it happens...NO.

Do they have the right to the evidence being found before it goes to a court of law...NO.

If Russia is innocent then they should be pushing hard for their day in court where they can prove their innocence...but they don't want that, why?

Seems pretty simple...if your innocent then you should be looking forward to proving your innocence...not trying to keep that from happening.



posted on Aug, 9 2015 @ 05:52 AM
link   
a reply to: tsurfer2000h




Ukraine had no need for their missile systems to be active as the separatists do not have any planes that would give Ukraine the reason to use them...


This is a ridiculous argument. Since Ukraine does have BUK's it might just as well have been them. saying that they didn't have them setup because the rebels have no planes means absolutely nothing.

Does it mean that they couldn't have used on of theirs to shoot down MH17?

No it doesn't.




And let's not forget all the shenanigans Russia played with first saying it was an SU 25 that physically coudn't shoot this plane down was the one that did...also changing the wiki page for the SU 25 really isn't helping to prove their innocence.


And this is your proof they shot it down? And you really think they would edit that page without realising it would trace back to the Kremlin? Cool story bro. Seems like a setup to me. Anyways, doesn't prove a thing.




But feel free to refute anything I said that shows they are an innocent party here, and aren't trying to place blame elsewhere.


Nothing you said even remotely proves that Russia was involved in shooting it down.

Again, if this is your case against Russia, then that is pathetically laughable.



posted on Aug, 9 2015 @ 05:54 AM
link   
a reply to: DProgram




And that is your proof?



Is that wrong?

Innocent people don't try and hinder their chance to prove it...guilty parties do.



posted on Aug, 9 2015 @ 05:57 AM
link   
a reply to: tsurfer2000h




Seems pretty simple...if your innocent then you should be looking forward to proving your innocence...not trying to keep that from happening.


It is kinda hard to defend yourself against contrived evidence, created with the intent to make you look guilty. Russia can fully expect this to happen. Furthermore, they know what is up, and the veto is just a big '"#&^% you" to those of which they know are setting them up.



posted on Aug, 9 2015 @ 05:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: DProgram
a reply to: OccamsRazor04




Usually the guy who is blocking an investigation is a guilty party.


And that is your proof?

If a family was murdered and the sheriff was rumored to be responsible, and then the sheriff prevented any investigation to see who did it, and claimed they were killed by hail, in the middle of the summer, while indoors, it would lead me to believe they took part, don't you agree?



posted on Aug, 9 2015 @ 05:58 AM
link   
a reply to: tsurfer2000h




Is that wrong?


It is not proof of anything, I can tell you that much.



posted on Aug, 9 2015 @ 06:00 AM
link   
a reply to: DProgram

So you don't care about evidence or truth. You "know" what happened without the need for any of that. Big surprise.



posted on Aug, 9 2015 @ 06:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: DProgram
a reply to: tsurfer2000h




Is that wrong?


It is not proof of anything, I can tell you that much.

It's shady, and highly suspicious, and evidence of wrongdoing.



posted on Aug, 9 2015 @ 06:01 AM
link   
a reply to: OccamsRazor04




the sheriff prevented any investigation to see who did it,


What investigation are they preventing?



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join