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.
originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
Can we get an actual reliable source?
a reliable source...seriously what is that in this day and age ?...what in your mind qualifies a reliable source ?
Not a blog post for sure. And certainly not Global Research. Any other sources?
Here is your source by the way ...
North Korea, a Land of Human Achievement, Love and Joy
Yeah, definitely a trusted source ...
No, the question is do YOU believe it?
So, can you show me a reliable source or not?
originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
a reply to: OccamsRazor04
So, can you show me a reliable source or not?
no because when i asked you earlier what is "a reliable source in your mind" you chose to deflect the question...so how can this be done?....i simply mentioned your IQ because you like to throw it out there....you also accused me of having a source...
all i have done in this thread is ask you a legitimate question...what in your mind is a reliable source ?...there you go i just asked again
In the framework of the 4-country agreement signed on 8 August between Ukraine, the Netherlands, Belgium and Australia, information on the progress and results of the investigation of the disaster will remain classified.
This was confirmed at a briefing in Kiev under the auspices of the office of the Prosecutor General Yuri Boychenko.
What sources I find reliable are not relevant.
If you can not do so then that says all that needs to be said.
originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
a reply to: OccamsRazor04
What sources I find reliable are not relevant.
so what you are saying is that the source is relevant if it backs up what you perceive to be truth
If you can not do so then that says all that needs to be said.
well then what you are saying i could find sources all day long and you will still come back with the same rhetoric garbage....ok lets play this game....s i win tails you lose...so what will it be..s or tails ?
originally posted by: BornAgainAlien
a reply to: OccamsRazor04
In the framework of the 4-country agreement signed on 8 August between Ukraine, the Netherlands, Belgium and Australia, information on the progress and results of the investigation of the disaster will remain classified.
This was confirmed at a briefing in Kiev under the auspices of the office of the Prosecutor General Yuri Boychenko.
And because it hasn`t been published on big news networks it didn`t happen...?
Of course it doesn`t get published in MSM...DUH !
And have you got any proof for us the briefing didn`t take place ?
Lovely logical fallacies to cover for the fact there are no credible sources. Russia just nuked Ukraine and Putin eats babies.
originally posted by: Flatcoat
a reply to: OccamsRazor04
Actually, I read about it in Yahoo Aus about a month ago.
originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
a reply to: OccamsRazor04
Lovely logical fallacies to cover for the fact there are no credible sources. Russia just nuked Ukraine and Putin eats babies.
looks like we now know what it is you look for in a "credible source"
This agreement tells me that it proves that either the evidence proves Russia did not shoot down MA17 or it proves that an article that Kerry Cassidy has on her website; project camelot, that Russia did shoot down MA 17 because it was filled with bio weapons and was headed for a Russian City, is true.
Either way, this agreement is protecting either our friends from the mid east or the US, or both.
originally posted by: tsurfer2000h
And the fact that it was shown on globalresearch.ca doesn't even come close to actually being true as they have a pro Russian view on event's that happened in Ukraine.
righto; The reason for the disclosure agreement seems to be because the plane was carrying a dirty bio bomb. I have just finished watching the Kerry Cassidy interview with Simon Parks. In this interview Parks states that the Russians did shoot down MA17 because it had the bomb on board.
Simon Parks did not elaborate on how they knew this but he did say that some of the bodies were decayed. Again he did not elaborate further on this. The site was cleaned up in terms of the bio hazard which explains why others were kept away from the site for a time.
He does not provide information on whether or not the MA17 was in fact MA370 (least as I recall)