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.
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.
I really can't see how anyone can deny Russian involvement.
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?
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?
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.
What is the proof for Russia's involvement?
Russia cannot expect a fair investigation, especially if they have no acces to it themselves.
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...
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.
Seems pretty simple...if your innocent then you should be looking forward to proving your innocence...not trying to keep that from happening.
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?
originally posted by: DProgram
a reply to: tsurfer2000h
Is that wrong?
It is not proof of anything, I can tell you that much.
the sheriff prevented any investigation to see who did it,