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.

 

MH17 - The Open Source Evidence

page: 1
9
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 8 2015 @ 08:11 AM
link   

This report summarizes the open source investigations into the downing of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 (MH17) on July 17, 2014 in Ukraine. It draws on the work of Bellingcat and others who used open source information to uncover facts about the events that took place on July 17 and the origin of the Buk missile launcher that downed MH17.

Source

This morning Bellingcat released their report regarding MH17. This comes just days before the official investigation is set to release their findings. This report collects evidence found freely on the internet and social media and uses it to present a timeline of events leading up to and following the downing of MH17. Further, it addresses alternate theories and provides evidence as to why they are false.

Now as this report is just based on photographs and eyewitness reports it needs to be taken with a grain of salt. That said the evidence they do provide is quite convincing. It looks like they have found the exact BUK launcher that was used and they may have even discovered who the driver was that was transporting it.

Now I know some on here take issue with Bellingcat. However all of their evidence is sourced within this report. So I ask that instead of just disregarding this report because it's from Bellingcat I ask that you discuss the evidence that is actually presented.




posted on Oct, 8 2015 @ 10:07 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcalibur254

Bellingcat , Bellingcat you say ...who is this Bellingcat ...Well without digging too deeply into Bellingcat past searches you might compare him to the State Dept's use of social media for their intelligence on other Ukraine issues . He did work on that file as well and I am sure the State Dept. is thankful ....lol



posted on Oct, 8 2015 @ 10:16 AM
link   
a reply to: the2ofusr1

Funny how the first response attacks the source instead of addressing the evidence. I also like how Russia is so worried about the report that they had RT run a hit piece on Bellingcat.



posted on Oct, 8 2015 @ 10:24 AM
link   
a reply to: the2ofusr1

Another one from Bellingcat :

Bellingcat accuses Russia of faking videos showing jets dropping bombs on ISIS

Personally, I'd rather wait for the Dutch Safety Board report to be issued in a couple of weeks before trying myself at any MH17 theories.



posted on Oct, 8 2015 @ 11:09 AM
link   
a reply to: theultimatebelgianjoke

Yea well that is the one that most are waiting for . This Bellingcat chap has about as much credibility as Sorcha Fall or if not then he should . This vid is from someone who was actually there moments after it happened and is making a documentary about it from what he seen and experienced . Mind you it is RT that is talking about it but that shouldn't take away from what he put out and what the western MSM edited and put their own spin on it .
ETA thanks for that link ...it does bring into question in a detailed way the credibility of Bellincat in a more profound way then the little piece I posted ..thanks
edit on 8-10-2015 by the2ofusr1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 8 2015 @ 11:09 AM
link   
a reply to: theultimatebelgianjoke

Once again sometime that can only attack Bellingcat. Why not discuss the photos and video that show a BUK moving through separatist held territory the day of the event and then heading into Russia the next day? Or what about the eyewitnesses and video that show a launch trail? That's something certain members on here say doesn't exist. Or why don't you try debunking the analysis comparing the BUK that was seen in Ukraine with one employed by the Russian military?

There are many photos and videos presented and sources supplied. If Bellingcat is so full of it then these things should be easy to disprove.



posted on Oct, 8 2015 @ 11:13 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcalibur254

Those considerations should be confirmed or dismissed by the Dutch safety board report. We'll see then what's left to debunk.



posted on Oct, 8 2015 @ 02:31 PM
link   
a reply to: theultimatebelgianjoke

So if the official report mirrors the Bellingcat report will you accept him as a credible source?



posted on Oct, 8 2015 @ 02:48 PM
link   
a reply to: the2ofusr1




ETA thanks for that link ...it does bring into question in a detailed way the credibility of Bellincat in a more profound way then the little piece I posted ..thanks


Wow, for someone who blasts Russian media as the great truth...do you really think your in a position to talk about a sources credibility?

And it's RT what do you expect them to say...that's right whatever the Kremlin tells them to.



posted on Oct, 8 2015 @ 03:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: theultimatebelgianjoke
a reply to: Xcalibur254

Those considerations should be confirmed or dismissed by the Dutch safety board report. We'll see then what's left to debunk.


And now it seems several media in Holland are critical of the secrecy and "black marker policy" surrounding the release of documents to them.

Secrecy is usually a sign of somebody trying to hide something.

If they have nothing to hide at NATO, why are the Dutch hiding so much?



posted on Oct, 8 2015 @ 03:04 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcalibur254

I would be surprised if the report from the Dutchs doesn't take into consideration plane debris analysis like the report of Bellingcat.



posted on Oct, 8 2015 @ 03:08 PM
link   
a reply to: the2ofusr1




This vid is from someone who was actually there moments after it happened and is making a documentary about it from what he seen and experienced .


This man didn't get there till hours after it happened...not moments.

I would also like to touch on the comment he made saying a couple hours after the crash when he got there nobody was there...

I beg to differ as this shows there were people there into the night.

www.huffingtonpost.com...



Mind you it is RT that is talking about it but that shouldn't take away from what he put out and what the western MSM edited and put their own spin on it .


Just like he did by saying nobody was there hours after the crash...can't imagine this documentary being anything but more of the same.



posted on Oct, 8 2015 @ 03:12 PM
link   
a reply to: Salander




And now it seems several media in Holland are critical of the secrecy and "black marker policy" surrounding the release of documents to them.


Sources.



Secrecy is usually a sign of somebody trying to hide something.


Who, and what are they trying to hide?



If they have nothing to hide at NATO, why are the Dutch hiding so much?


WHat does NATO have to do with the Dutch investigation?

WHat does NATO even have to do with MH17?



posted on Oct, 8 2015 @ 03:15 PM
link   
a reply to: tsurfer2000h

I don't know what they are trying to hide, do you? But clearly "black marker policy" shows they have something to hide.

My guess would be that they are trying to hide the truth, because the US version of the story does not comport with most of the forensic evidence.

If they had nothing to hide, if the facts supported the story, there would be no need for black marker redaction.



posted on Oct, 8 2015 @ 03:27 PM
link   
a reply to: Salander

Nice job deflecting from the topic. So tell me, what do you think about the video showing a launch trail in the middle of separatist held territory? Or what about the pictures and videos showing a Russian BUK moving into separatist held territory on the day MH17 was downed and then heading into Russia the next day?



posted on Oct, 8 2015 @ 03:34 PM
link   
a reply to: Salander




But clearly "black marker policy" shows they have something to hide.


So you say they are, but have no clue as to what...imagine that.



My guess would be that they are trying to hide the truth, because the US version of the story does not comport with most of the forensic evidence.


No that would be Russia. There version have planes performing engineering feats not even known to the designer.

And exactly who's forensic evidence would that be?



posted on Oct, 8 2015 @ 03:37 PM
link   
a reply to: Salander




If they had nothing to hide, if the facts supported the story, there would be no need for black marker redaction.


Wanted to address this one on it's own.

SO you have seen the final report, and have seen these black marker redactions?

SO exactly what forensic evidence doesn't go along with the story, since you say it doesn't you can provide sources to back your claim?



posted on Oct, 8 2015 @ 03:38 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcalibur254




So tell me, what do you think about the video showing a launch trail in the middle of separatist held territory? Or what about the pictures and videos showing a Russian BUK moving into separatist held territory on the day MH17 was downed and then heading into Russia the next day?


All photo shopped I tell you...all photo shopped.



posted on Oct, 8 2015 @ 03:58 PM
link   
a reply to: tsurfer2000h

If you are refering to that BUK pic I think you are refering to then it was shopped if I recall correctly.

Yes, looks fake to me. BUK launcher is all blurry and angles don't match.


edit on 8-10-2015 by RogueWave because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 8 2015 @ 04:32 PM
link   

Dutch news outlet RTL Nieuws conducted an interview[18] with the photographer of the white smoke trail in December 2014,


More BS from Bellingcat.

If you check the source he linked, there is no interview with the photographer at all, in fact they say the identity is protected.


Bellingcat's conclusions that Russia faked satelite pics were alos proven bogus, by noone less than the inventor of the image analysis tool he used.

I would say these three examples show what this Bellendcat is about.
edit on 8-10-2015 by RogueWave because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
9
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join