A3801000 wrote:

Totally reliable and believable russian log books are kept up to date by always the same person with always the same pen:

It was probably the only task he had to do.

marcelh wrote:

A3801000 wrote:

Totally reliable and believable russian log books are kept up to date by always the same person with always the same pen:

It was probably the only task he had to do.

Written on the left edges:
"Recovered from the original. Correct: [sign] 14.01.96 /Dmitrieva/"
"Восстановлен с подлинника. Верно: [sign] 14.01.96 /Дмитриева/"

Such documents must necessarily be stitched, pages are numbered and signed, yet must be sealed. The figure shows an unverified 'copy'.

A3801000 wrote:

marcelh wrote:

A3801000 wrote:

Totally reliable and believable russian log books are kept up to date by always the same person with always the same pen:

It was probably the only task he had to do.

Written on the left edges:
"Recovered from the original. Correct: [sign] 14.01.96 /Dmitrieva/"
"Восстановлен с подлинника. Верно: [sign] 14.01.96 /Дмитриева/"

Such documents must necessarily be stitched, pages are numbered and signed, yet must be sealed. The figure shows an unverified 'copy'.

I know, I was just being sarcastic.

anrec80 wrote:

casinterest wrote:

Ukraine is responsible? You mean mother russia didn't claim it's weapons after the USSR disolved ? Did they leave nukes with Ukraine as well?

Exactly, my friend. Russia took out of Ukraine only nukes, nothing else (the only other thing they split was the Black Sea Fleet). Everything that remained became the property Ukrainian armed forces - that includes this particular missile, plus many more things - air defenses, tanks, airplanes. And hence - their responsibility, including the consequences of trade and use. So the ball goes to Ukrainian side - what was the missile, a property of Ukraine, doing right next to MH-17?

So The Ukranians are responsible for the Russian Soldiers still in Eastern Ukraine that cross the borders on the satellites all the time? With weapons?

anrec80 wrote:

casinterest wrote:

I think the satellite pictured are more than convincing. It's too bad you ignore them, much like the russian generals who have to please Putin.

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/a ... d=11639794

Again - where is the picture from? From what satellite? How did this Stratfor gain possession of it? All the article shows is 2 pictures next to each other, supposedly they want the reader to believe that the area of the image is Donetsk vicinity. But - what's there in the article or image to establish this? The resolution of the picture is rather low, and it does contain some pixels said to be BUK. How do we associate the satellite image to a particular area of the world's map? Even JIT didn't make much determination based on this one.

Overall, once you have detailed and documented trace of that very missile that was found on the crash site, you can't cover that up with low quality pics and videos of doubtful and unknown origin. Gotta find some stronger Russian proof.

[/quote]
[quote="anrec80"]

The west has better satellites than the Russians could ever dream of.

https://uawire.org/us-provides-importan ... mh17-crash

So instead of a proxy mouthpiece from Russia, maybe you should go talk to the investigation boards about the evidence.

Oh wait, you already made up your mind, and just want to look for the lies that fit your agenda and the invasion of Ukraine.

WIederling wrote:

casinterest wrote:

Ukraine is responsible? You mean mother russia didn't claim it's weapons after the USSR disolved ? Did they leave nukes with Ukraine as well?

All weapons initially stayed with the (re)new(ed) nations being created after the dissolution of the soviet union
where they had been deployed to.

Afaik the Russian Federation later started some deals to at least have control over the now foreign nuke arsenals.
see: http://factsanddetails.com/russia/Gover ... -5216.html

Yes, and Ukraine must have missed those nukes when Russia took part of their territory.

Dutchy wrote:

Oh, you are saying that the Russian military is incompetent of fabricating such documentation?

Well - this is a different and serious allegation. Have to catch them and have a proof the the documents are fraudulent, forged, fabricated, etc. Ideally - by showing what actually happened to that very missile.

Russian military is pretty good at record keeping, we must say. Yes, they were hand-written and maybe re-written by hand at some point, since in 1980s in USSR there was no such a thing as photocopier. And even if they were popular - in military they won’t trust foreign equipment.

Dutchy wrote:

So now it is the accidental shoot-down of the MH17, not on purpose. I am too lazy to look it up, but I know Scorpius did say that the MH17 was shot down by Ukraine to provoke an international incident, perhaps you did too.

I can’t really answer for Scorpius, but I’ve kept maintaining that this is a deed by some incompetent Ukrainian monkey. Intentional act by Ukrainians - it’s a serious allegation that requires strong proof, that orders were knowingly given to bring something down. But I am not ruling that out and won’t be surprised if such evidence or testaments will appear.

Dutchy wrote:

But then you have to answer the following, the MH17 was moving from west to east, so from Ukraine territory to Russia, not an obvious Russian plane, the rebels don't have planes. Second, they haven't shot down any planes, only the rebels did. So this fails the logic test.

When applied to Ukraine - there is no logic. Any logic in shooting down a civil airliner in 2001? Where’s the logic in sending tanks against own people? Why they had air defenses in the region - who knows. Presumably they decided they want all kinds of military in the area, to gain experience perhaps. Hence yes - air defenses gained tons of experience for sure. Maybe they were afraid of Russian planes and decided to deploy air defenses. This question is to them - what the missile owned by Ukrainians was doing next to MH-17?

anrec80 wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

Oh, you are saying that the Russian military is incompetent of fabricating such documentation?

Well - this is a different and serious allegation. Have to catch them and have a proof the the documents are fraudulent, forged, fabricated, etc. Ideally - by showing what actually happened to that very missile.

Russian military is pretty good at record keeping, we must say. Yes, they were hand-written and maybe re-written by hand at some point, since in 1980s in USSR there was no such a thing as photocopier. And even if they were popular - in military they won’t trust foreign equipment.

Well, it isn't an allegation as of yet. I have said many times let's see what the findings of the official investigation team will be: if they find it credible, so will I, if not, then I will dismiss it as another hoax from the Russians. Could we make this deal Anrec80? Just leave it with the JIT and subscribe to their findings, whatever they may be?

Jouhou wrote:

Lol, Russians take note. Look what Putin's disinformation campaign has done. We don't even look at what you put out before we decide it's a lie. The disinformation campaign is a long term failure. No one believes Russians anymore. Meanwhile China reaps the benefits of a weakening West with their influence and using an increasingly isolated Russia for cheap fuel.

Congrats.

Well - when in Russian Foreign affairs dept. they have hard time literally to make foreign delegations pass by each other on the same floor - this doesn’t look like isolation at all. Periodic pilgrimages of foreign leaders to Moscow doesn’t help create such impression either.

If you don’t want to look what’s being put out - don’t. But once you arrive to the point you can’t trust your media either - what are you gonna do?

casinterest wrote:

The west has better satellites than the Russians could ever dream of.

https://uawire.org/us-provides-importan ... mh17-crash

So instead of a proxy mouthpiece from Russia, maybe you should go talk to the investigation boards about the evidence.

Oh wait, you already made up your mind, and just want to look for the lies that fit your agenda and the invasion of Ukraine.

So wait a min - we are bringing Ukrainian media here now? Now - the ball is in Ukrainian side to explain what went on with that missile. If it’s indeed Ukrainian deed (and documents so far point that it is) - well, Ukraine should be under investigation and not on JIT. In Ukrainian military and radar divisions there is knowledge of what went on (“we’ll f-k another Malaysian Boeing”).

Speaking of this “satellite evidence” - a lot has been said to exist, but not much has been shown. You say something exists - then gotta show it.

anrec80 wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

So now it is the accidental shoot-down of the MH17, not on purpose. I am too lazy to look it up, but I know Scorpius did say that the MH17 was shot down by Ukraine to provoke an international incident, perhaps you did too.

I can’t really answer for Scorpius, but I’ve kept maintaining that this is a deed by some incompetent Ukrainian monkey. Intentional act by Ukrainians - it’s a serious allegation that requires strong proof, that orders were knowingly given to bring something down. But I am not ruling that out and won’t be surprised if such evidence or testaments will appear.

Dutchy wrote:

But then you have to answer the following, the MH17 was moving from west to east, so from Ukraine territory to Russia, not an obvious Russian plane, the rebels don't have planes. Second, they haven't shot down any planes, only the rebels did. So this fails the logic test.

When applied to Ukraine - there is no logic. Any logic in shooting down a civil airliner in 2001? Where’s the logic in sending tanks against own people? Why they had air defenses in the region - who knows. Presumably they decided they want all kinds of military in the area, to gain experience perhaps. Hence yes - air defenses gained tons of experience for sure. Maybe they were afraid of Russian planes and decided to deploy air defenses. This question is to them - what the missile owned by Ukrainians was doing next to MH-17?

Yet again, you take the Russian military on face value. Nothing has been proven yet and the accused comes with yet another theory, which you subscribe to immediately without questions asked. So at the moment, we have two conflicting theories: missile deployed from a Russian military base --> tracked by various means and supported by telephone calls and a missile in possession of the Ukrainian military, shown by various documents supposedly going back till the build of the SAM. First theory is tested by the independent investigation team: JIT, the second will be tested by the independent investigation team.

But what is it? Ukraine military is incompetent and thus shoots at everything that moves, despite no Russian a/c flying over Ukraine. Or the Ukrainian military deliberately shoots down the MH17 to create an international incident. The former means total incompetence, the latter is criminal intent and is competent in the way it carried out this despicable dead.

The 2001 incident was an accident, or do you think it was intentional?
Tanks --> civil war, with the support of Russia for the rebels. (confirmed by the OCSE)
Air defenses --> civil war, with the support of Russia for the rebels. (confirmed by the OCSE)

Dutchy wrote:

Yes, and Ukraine must have missed those nukes when Russia took part of their territory.

Russia hasn’t taken anything from anyone. After armed coup, residents of those parts of territory did not want to remain in that country. As it commonly happens after armed coups.

anrec80 wrote:

If you don’t want to look what’s being put out - don’t. But once you arrive to the point you can’t trust your media either - what are you gonna do?

And that, my Ukrainian friend yet Russian defender, is the whole point of this campaign and a well-known tactic from Soviet times. You can't trust anyone anymore!

Luckily in the west, we have an independent media whom will attack our own governments if needed.

Novaya Gazeta on documents shown yesterday by Russian Ministry of Defense on Buk missile: copy of document on missile for some reasons was signed a year before missile have been even manufactured



"recovered document" was signed on 14 Jan 1986, when missile manufactured on 24 December 1986



https://www.novayagazeta.ru/articles/20 ... nomu-verit (russian only, sorry)

A3801000 wrote:

Novaya Gazeta on documents shown yesterday by Russian Ministry of Defense on Buk missile: copy of document on missile for some reasons was signed a year before missile have been even manufactured



"recovered document" was signed on 14 Jan 1986, when missile manufactured on 24 December 1986



https://www.novayagazeta.ru/articles/20 ... nomu-verit (russian only, sorry)

Whoops

Anyhow, let the JIT figure this one out and I am eagerly waiting for their response.

A3801000 wrote:

"recovered document" was signed on 14 Jan 1986, when missile manufactured on 24 December 1986

Well oopsie!

Will we see a pic of a DeLorean with the BUK on it next from the russian military or RT?

anrec80 wrote:

casinterest wrote:

The west has better satellites than the Russians could ever dream of.

https://uawire.org/us-provides-importan ... mh17-crash

So instead of a proxy mouthpiece from Russia, maybe you should go talk to the investigation boards about the evidence.

Oh wait, you already made up your mind, and just want to look for the lies that fit your agenda and the invasion of Ukraine.

So wait a min - we are bringing Ukrainian media here now? Now - the ball is in Ukrainian side to explain what went on with that missile. If it’s indeed Ukrainian deed (and documents so far point that it is) - well, Ukraine should be under investigation and not on JIT. In Ukrainian military and radar divisions there is knowledge of what went on (“we’ll f-k another Malaysian Boeing”).

Speaking of this “satellite evidence” - a lot has been said to exist, but not much has been shown. You say something exists - then gotta show it.

It's all over the reports. You got to read them some day. You are supporting a country that is currently blaming Israel for the fact that the Syrians shot down a Russian plane. So I don't think a lot of credibility and responsibility exists within the Russian Military.

Dutchy wrote:

Yes, and Ukraine must have missed those nukes when Russia took part of their territory.

is this sentence supposed to make any sense at all?

Scorpius wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

Present your evidence to the investigators. We have seen a lot of BS from Russian military and government sources, so why would this be any different? They have zero credibility in this. But I am sure the Dutch prosecutors will do their research if the Russians would hand over everything, because they are required to do so by law.
Makes you wonder, though, why now? Does the Puting regime need a distraction for domestic use because of all the protest for raising the pension age? Ah well, I guess it is better than starting another war.

In 7 minutes, you managed to watch the briefing, which is 37 minutes? Or you simply hurry to declare the data provided by the Ministry of defence of Russia lie? And what right do you have after that to say something about impartiality?

Nobody has to watch anything to know it is a lie; the description you provided lets us know that this is another laughable propaganda stunt from the Russian regime.

Thanks for letting us know about the latest Russian lies!

tommy1808 wrote:

So what is happening today is basically:
"Forget the forged evidence we showed four years ago, we have much improved forgeries now!"

casinterest wrote:

It took Russia 4 years to come up with this story? Sounds like a lot of time to forge documents to me.

anrec80 wrote:

Nobody in Ukraine doubts that it will take Russians a few days to get to Polish border. Just look at quality of their operation in Syria. Also - Crimea was gone without a shingle shot fired.

Thank you for admiting what Russia's goal really is: to forcibly invade and take control of other countries' territory. You succeeded in Crimea, and you are suffering the sanctions you deserve for your violations. And just look at the "quality" of their operations in Syria; they move in to support an oppressive dictator, and that dictator's own military is so incompetent it shoots down a Russian plane.

Sort of sounds like the well-trained "rebels" in Ukraine... deja vu...

A3801000 wrote:

Novaya Gazeta on documents shown yesterday by Russian Ministry of Defense on Buk missile: copy of document on missile for some reasons was signed a year before missile have been even manufactured

So next week.... the Russians will be providing new "evidence"... with some new theory... or excuse...misinformation is the biggest business in Mother Russia today!

anrec80 wrote:

There is no contradiction. Operating an air defense system and pressing the button is not the same thing, obviously. Operating SAM site includes ability to identify and distinguish the target - its type, size, speed, altitude. Though one can start the engine and press the red button without doing any of that - in this case the missile will locate and find the target itself, and hit it. This unlucky target that time happened to be MH-17. But it’s my opinion. Ukraine is obviously responsible for missile - they need to answer what went on with it.

Obviously the Russians operating the system did not bother to identify their target. Either through laziness and/or incompetence. You can parrot the Russian MOD all you want. It does not change the fact that MH17 was flying over "separatist" controlled territory in an easterly direction and was hit head on..

anrec80 wrote:

Speaking of Ukrainian and Russian military competence - it’s a topic for a separate thread. Nobody in Ukraine doubts that it will take Russians a few days to get to Polish border.

Really? How many lives of draftees, because that's who makes up the majority of the the enlisted ranks in the Russian Army, are you willing to gamble with? Is there an acceptable number for Russian mothers?

anrec80 wrote:

Just look at quality of their operation in Syria

You do realize that Russia is stuck there now. Assad's military is decimated. If the Russians leave how long do you think he would last?

And before you start bragging anymore about Russia's performance in Syria let me remind you of two things. One, you carpet bomb enough rebel controlled area's you will eventually prevail. For a time that is. Second those people are not going to forget.

Before I sign off let me remind you that the US Special Forces toppled the Taliban with lightening speed.

LMP737 wrote:

Before I sign off let me remind you that the US Special Forces toppled the Taliban with lightening speed.

Is that the same Taliban that are now back in control of large swathes of Afghanistan? The same Taliban that can let off bombs in Kabul with impunity? Just wondering.

casinterest wrote:

It's all over the reports. You got to read them some day.

“All over” is where? “All over the reports” and publicly available imagery aren’t the same things, are they?

casinterest wrote:

You are supporting a country that is currently blaming Israel for the fact that the Syrians shot down a Russian plane. So I don't think a lot of credibility and responsibility exists within the Russian Military.

Yes, and not only that. First problem - Israel feels way too free to fly around the whole region and bomb whenever and whoever they feel like. Syria is another country with its own leadership, and Israel has no business there. They weren’t asked to bomb anything or anybody. Second, they did this thing yet another time in totally reckless manner.

I personally think that Russian policy is way too soft on Israel and these things there. Russia should not deny sales of modern air defenses to Syria, Lebanon, Iran and other nations. They have rights to defend themselves against this Israeli BS.

scbriml wrote:

LMP737 wrote:

Before I sign off let me remind you that the US Special Forces toppled the Taliban with lightening speed.

Is that the same Taliban that are now back in control of large swathes of Afghanistan? The same Taliban that can let off bombs in Kabul with impunity? Just wondering.

Yup, the very same. And of course Russia "succeeded" there as well years before the US.

I believe it was a word of warning not any kind of boast. Hell, remember our "Mission Accomplished" in Iraq? All done, defeated the guy, yay, lets go home... wait.. what? We need a plan for AFTER we "win" (What'd we win by the way?) Won't the people just love us and take right up and live happily ever after? )



Tugg

Tugger wrote:

I believe it was a word of warning not any kind of boast.

Ah, yes I can see that's possible now you mention it.

If that was LMP737's intent, then I apologise.

Dutchy wrote:

Luckily in the west, we have an independent media whom will attack our own governments if needed.

You still believe in that “independent media” tale? Isn’t it time yet to leave this notion as part of glorious past?

LMP737 wrote:

Obviously the Russians operating the system did not bother to identify their target. Either through laziness and/or incompetence. You can parrot the Russian MOD all you want. It does not change the fact that MH17 was flying over "separatist" controlled territory in an easterly direction and was hit head on..

It crashed onto the DNR’s territory. But where was the missile launched from? This question goes to Ukraine now, clearly. They are responsible for the very missile.

LMP737 wrote:

Really? How many lives of draftees, because that's who makes up the majority of the the enlisted ranks in the Russian Army, are you willing to gamble with? Is there an acceptable number for Russian mothers?

Not many at all, if any. In 2014, Ukrainian generals were calling their Russian colleagues and saying “if you are to get orders to get in, just call me ahead of time. We’ll either go home or sit put where we are, as you wish”. They’ll do the same now. Georgian operation didn’t bring many casualties at all. Most of Ukrainians will be rather happy with that as well, if not nearly all.

LMP737 wrote:

You do realize that Russia is stuck there now. Assad's military is decimated. If the Russians leave how long do you think he would last?

Quite the contrary. Assad military received many new arms and arms upgrades. They have recent combat experience. They are also strengthening their state institutions to make sure this doesn’t reoccur.

LMP737 wrote:

And before you start bragging anymore about Russia's performance in Syria let me remind you of two things. One, you carpet bomb enough rebel controlled area's you will eventually prevail. For a time that is. Second those people are not going to forget.

There is also Russian military police on the ground, himanitarian aid, military medical personnel offering aid to locals, sappers, and many others. They get along with local Syrians just fine. Also there are Russian journalists on the frontline.

jordanh wrote:

Thank you for admiting what Russia's goal really is: to forcibly invade and take control of other countries' territory. You succeeded in Crimea, and you are suffering the sanctions you deserve for your violations.

You are mixing up goals and abilities. Russians have ability to take over Ukraine, yes. They don’t have such a goal though. Unfortunately for Ukraine and Ukrainians. Had they had such goals - they would have done it long ago.

jordanh wrote:

And just look at the "quality" of their operations in Syria; they move in to support an oppressive dictator, and that dictator's own military is so incompetent it shoots down a Russian plane.

This is a different question and obviously consequences of recklessness of Israelis. The latter allow themselves too much - they should stop bombing whoever and whenever they feel like. And its neighbors (Syrian, Lebanon) should be sold more modern air defenses.

jordanh wrote:

Sort of sounds like the well-trained "rebels" in Ukraine... deja vu...

Well - some time into a civil war rebels do receive training, combat experiences, and institutionalize their military. Hence at some point of time they need to be called “army”, and not “rebels”.

The investigation has already concluded that the shrapnels are of a type that have never been delivered to Ukrainian forces. The Russian manufacturer has helped to make that point. Duh.

David

flyingturtle wrote:

The investigation has already concluded that the shrapnels are of a type that have never been delivered to Ukrainian forces. The Russian manufacturer has helped to make that point. Duh.

David

Nonetheless the same investigation provided the serial number of the missile and asked to provide more detail about it. Missile was made in 1986, before BUKs started using the shrapnels said to be found.

anrec80 wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

Luckily in the west, we have an independent media whom will attack our own governments if needed.

You still believe in that “independent media” tale? Isn’t it time yet to leave this notion as part of glorious past?

Nope, we still have a free press and is very important for a free democracy. Confirmed by all kind of NGO's. Facts are a bitch man. Your beloved Russia doesn't have free press indeed, so I can see that this gives an uncomfortable feeling.

anrec80 wrote:

Jouhou wrote:

Lol, Russians take note. Look what Putin's disinformation campaign has done. We don't even look at what you put out before we decide it's a lie. The disinformation campaign is a long term failure. No one believes Russians anymore. Meanwhile China reaps the benefits of a weakening West with their influence and using an increasingly isolated Russia for cheap fuel.

Congrats.

Well - when in Russian Foreign affairs dept. they have hard time literally to make foreign delegations pass by each other on the same floor - this doesn’t look like isolation at all. Periodic pilgrimages of foreign leaders to Moscow doesn’t help create such impression either.

If you don’t want to look what’s being put out - don’t. But once you arrive to the point you can’t trust your media either - what are you gonna do?

I do trust the media. Especially international media from countries with no stakes in our controversies. I also trust my eyes and ears. If you muddy the waters, I'll do what is needed to clarify them for myself.

Also for Christ's sake, just admit to wrong doing and apologize already. I just don't get this. You already think the West is too weak to act. How could an admission of guilt actually harm you?

Jouhou wrote:

anrec80 wrote:

Jouhou wrote:

Lol, Russians take note. Look what Putin's disinformation campaign has done. We don't even look at what you put out before we decide it's a lie. The disinformation campaign is a long term failure. No one believes Russians anymore. Meanwhile China reaps the benefits of a weakening West with their influence and using an increasingly isolated Russia for cheap fuel.

Congrats.

Well - when in Russian Foreign affairs dept. they have hard time literally to make foreign delegations pass by each other on the same floor - this doesn’t look like isolation at all. Periodic pilgrimages of foreign leaders to Moscow doesn’t help create such impression either.

If you don’t want to look what’s being put out - don’t. But once you arrive to the point you can’t trust your media either - what are you gonna do?

I do trust the media. Especially international media from countries with no stakes in our controversies. I also trust my eyes and ears. If you muddy the waters, I'll do what is needed to clarify them for myself.

Journalists not regulary ending up conviniently dead is also a fairly good indicator how much a nations media can be trusted in total.

best regards
Thomas

Zeppi wrote:

A3801000 wrote:

"recovered document" was signed on 14 Jan 1986, when missile manufactured on 24 December 1986

Well oopsie!

Will we see a pic of a DeLorean with the BUK on it next from the russian military or RT?

If you were a little more careful, you would see that just below there is an inscription "signed 17.01.84". These inscriptions are in those places where usually put signatures on coordination of the form of the document. In addition, you might notice that the lines of the document, the printed letters, and the label data have the same color - brownish. Even a complete Amateur should understand that we see only a blueprint of the standard form, and these inscriptions do not belong to what is written in the document. These inscriptions report that the standard form of the passport was agreed 17.01.1984, and that 14.01.1986 year was confirmedcopy from the original standard form of the document. Further, this form was sent to the factory, where it was already filled with information on a specific product.

Do not forget that this is 1986 and the secret production in the USSR-such documents are either copied manually or multiplied by photocopiers. There were almost no printers. Therefore, each copy of the original standard form had to be certified by a signature that would say that a copy of the original is made accurately, there are no violations or deviations.

I would not advise you to draw deep conclusions based on articles in Newspapers - it looks extremely stupid.

And this:

Scorpius wrote:

If you were a little more careful, you would see that just below there is an inscription "signed 17.01.84". These inscriptions are in those places where usually put signatures on coordination of the form of the document. In addition, you might notice that the lines of the document, the printed letters, and the label data have the same color - brownish. Even a complete Amateur should understand that we see only a blueprint of the standard form, and these inscriptions do not belong to what is written in the document. These inscriptions report that the standard form of the passport was agreed 17.01.1984, and that 14.01.1986 year was confirmedcopy from the original standard form of the document. Further, this form was sent to the factory, where it was already filled with information on a specific product.

Great eye detail and thorough in depth knowledge of documents (and any other topic, as needed) for a casual poster! I tell you, I always enjoy it!

Tugg

Russia's credibility is close to zero, if not in the negative. Unless anything that comes from their mouths can be verified by independent means I'm treating it as suspect, and everyone else should too.

Stop desecrating the memories of the 298 lives lost in this heinous disaster by claiming something to be true when it is not.

TheFlyingDisk wrote:

Russia's credibility is close to zero, if not in the negative.

"levels of credibility"

These are invariably Ex Cathedra stipulations.
Would you judge the other parties to the fray as strongly credible?

Will people ever understand that Schopenhauer's "How to win an argument"
was advice on what not use when discussing something for a productive outcome.

It is not the equivalent of "Rhetoric 101"

WIederling wrote:

Will people ever understand that Schopenhauer's "How to win an argument"
was advice on what not use when discussing something for a productive outcome.

he also assumed that a productive outcome is what the participants want, which Russia doesn´t.

best regards
Thomas

Tugger wrote:

And this:

Scorpius wrote:

If you were a little more careful, you would see that just below there is an inscription "signed 17.01.84". These inscriptions are in those places where usually put signatures on coordination of the form of the document. In addition, you might notice that the lines of the document, the printed letters, and the label data have the same color - brownish. Even a complete Amateur should understand that we see only a blueprint of the standard form, and these inscriptions do not belong to what is written in the document. These inscriptions report that the standard form of the passport was agreed 17.01.1984, and that 14.01.1986 year was confirmedcopy from the original standard form of the document. Further, this form was sent to the factory, where it was already filled with information on a specific product.

Great eye detail and thorough in depth knowledge of documents (and any other topic, as needed) for a casual poster! I tell you, I always enjoy it!

Tugg

Well, firstly, I am well educated and have a fairly high IQ (~130-140 according to the tests), in addition, I am interested in a wide range of questions. As for such documents - I worked at one of the largest industrial enterprises in the aircraft industry in Russia - I am familiar with how such documents can look like and how the document flow is conducted. Yes, this particular form looks different from what my forms looked like, but I can guess where it came from and what labels appeared, because the algorithms are still similar.

Scorpius wrote:

I can guess where it came from and what labels appeared, because the algorithms are still similar.

I am also familiar with such forms. In all my time working with (and designing) such forms I have yet to encounter a standardized form where the "copyright date" (for lack of better terms) is not printed but written.

edited for spelling

Scorpius wrote:

Well, firstly, I am well educated and have a fairly high IQ (~130-140 according to the tests), in addition, I am interested in a wide range of questions.

Authoritarian argument. Besides we have no way of checking if you are actually telling the truth on this, two points:
- it is quite irrelevant what your IQ is
- I am quite sure there are quite a few people on this forum with a similar IQ and many more with a masters degree from a good university or even a Doctorate

Don't know why you are saying this, but I think it is quite comical for people to brack about their IQ or education like that.

WIederling wrote:

TheFlyingDisk wrote:

Russia's credibility is close to zero, if not in the negative.

"levels of credibility"

These are invariably Ex Cathedra stipulations.
Would you judge the other parties to the fray as strongly credible?

Will people ever understand that Schopenhauer's "How to win an argument"
was advice on what not use when discussing something for a productive outcome.

It is not the equivalent of "Rhetoric 101"

You can talk big, but fact of the matter is Russia had lied during the MH17 investigation and was proven to have lied - remember the SU-25 argument?

That alone establishes their level of credibility.

TheFlyingDisk wrote:

WIederling wrote:

TheFlyingDisk wrote:

Russia's credibility is close to zero, if not in the negative.

"levels of credibility"

These are invariably Ex Cathedra stipulations.
Would you judge the other parties to the fray as strongly credible?

Will people ever understand that Schopenhauer's "How to win an argument"
was advice on what not use when discussing something for a productive outcome.

It is not the equivalent of "Rhetoric 101"

You can talk big, but fact of the matter is Russia had lied during the MH17 investigation and was proven to have lied - remember the SU-25 argument?

That alone establishes their level of credibility.

Fact 1: the version about the su-25 was just a version.
Fact 2: Ukraine said that Ukraine has no complexes BUK:
https://korrespondent.net/ukraine/35234 ... poroshenko

Fact 3: at the parade in Kiev in 2018, we see Ukrainian BUK-M1, which "is not in Ukraine":
https://nv.ua/ukraine/events/v-seti-poj ... 89537.html

Fact 4: Ukrainian beeches were relocated to the Donetsk region in March 2014. Thus, the video from 05.07.2014, posted on the YouTube channel, called "the Ministry of defense of Ukraine Colonel-General Valery geletey in the ATO zone (05.07.14)", at the time mark 0:55-1:10 clearly visible installation "Buk-M1" and reload machine. While the fire installation 1:08 is clearly visible tail number 332. That is 05.07.2014 years Ukrainian armed forces kept in the area of fighting complex "Buk-M1" with the tail number 332 (this number appears in the investigation Bellingkat, but for some reason it is trying to attribute to the Russian complex).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xOo-VWKezmo

Fact 5: Ukraine did not provide data on the location of BUK complexes at the time of the mh17 disaster, although according to known data, there were at least three positions of Ukrainian Buks in the area of the crash site. Also, Ukraine did not provide records of air traffic controllers ' negotiations and radar data.

And I don't see JIT even trying to work in that direction. Which tells me that the JIT activity is a hoax.
Their goal is not to find those responsible for the disaster, but only to present Russia as the culprit.
This is also evidenced by the fact that Russian representatives are not allowed to conduct an investigation as part of JIT. But for some reason allowed Ukrainians.

Scorpius wrote:

And I don't see JIT even trying to work in that direction. Which tells me that the JIT activity is a hoax.
Their goal is not to find those responsible for the disaster, but only to present Russia as the culprit.
This is also evidenced by the fact that Russian representatives are not allowed to conduct an investigation as part of JIT. But for some reason allowed Ukrainians.

We have gone over this numerous times, but I will repeat it just for you. Russia was part of the initial investigation. The murders took place in Ukraine, so jurisdiction lies with Ukraine. They gave this authority to The Netherlands and they formed the Joint Investigation Team consisting of countries which has lost citizens and Ukraine because it is there country. So for some reason = it is their country!

Would you rather have it that the Ukraine justice had investigated it then the JIT lead by The Netherlands? Because that is the alternative since your Russia has blocked an international tribunal which was the preferred route. Russia, by its own admission, has nothing to do with it, so why should they join this investigation? They are welcome to give their input, no problem, it will be investigated and put into the file, just like everything else the Russians have provided. And yet, the JIT is still convinced that the BUK was launched from a certain field (rebel territory at the time), by a missile system which came from Russia. They are narrowing their search for the culprits, their are known, so they are also welcome to talk to Dutch investigators and to have their day in court, our beautiful independent court system which nobody doubts except.....

I personally don't care if you call the JIT a hoax and think that their only cause is to find Russia guilty. As a Dutchman I take offense, as a person whom lost someone in these murders, I would be outraged, but then again I see whom posted it and I just shake my head and move on.

Scorpius wrote:

Fact 1: the version about the su-25 was just a version.

It wasn't just a version, it was the official story from Russia until it was thoroughly debunked. Hence Russia's zero credibility. The JIT's credibility may not be 100%, at least it's higher than Russia's.

We'll only know the truth once Putin's dead and the Russian disinformation apparatus is dismantled. I sure hope it will come soon enough. At least it will provide closure to the families of the 298 victims. Until then, stop saying that what Russia's saying is the absolute truth.

TheFlyingDisk wrote:

Scorpius wrote:

Fact 1: the version about the su-25 was just a version.

It wasn't just a version, it was the official story from Russia until it was thoroughly debunked. Hence Russia's zero credibility. The JIT's credibility may not be 100%, at least it's higher than Russia's.

We'll only know the truth once Putin's dead and the Russian disinformation apparatus is dismantled. I sure hope it will come soon enough. At least it will provide closure to the families of the 298 victims. Until then, stop saying that what Russia's saying is the absolute truth.

The Su-25 was also meant to be debunked. Russia has no interest showing any consistent alternative version of events, decisiveness is much more useful to them. That is why they are pouring money into fringe political movements all over the place. Russia has invented a form a state terrorism that works much better than the traditional one. MH17 was likely shut down deliberately to create this situation. One in 4 chance that they "accidentally" happen to shot down an aircraft from Russia´s smallest export customer ......

best regards
Thomas

Dutchy wrote:

Scorpius wrote:

And I don't see JIT even trying to work in that direction. Which tells me that the JIT activity is a hoax.
Their goal is not to find those responsible for the disaster, but only to present Russia as the culprit.
This is also evidenced by the fact that Russian representatives are not allowed to conduct an investigation as part of JIT. But for some reason allowed Ukrainians.

We have gone over this numerous times, but I will repeat it just for you. Russia was part of the initial investigation. The murders took place in Ukraine, so jurisdiction lies with Ukraine. They gave this authority to The Netherlands and they formed the Joint Investigation Team consisting of countries which has lost citizens and Ukraine because it is there country. So for some reason = it is their country!

Would you rather have it that the Ukraine justice had investigated it then the JIT lead by The Netherlands? Because that is the alternative since your Russia has blocked an international tribunal which was the preferred route. Russia, by its own admission, has nothing to do with it, so why should they join this investigation? They are welcome to give their input, no problem, it will be investigated and put into the file, just like everything else the Russians have provided. And yet, the JIT is still convinced that the BUK was launched from a certain field (rebel territory at the time), by a missile system which came from Russia. They are narrowing their search for the culprits, their are known, so they are also welcome to talk to Dutch investigators and to have their day in court, our beautiful independent court system which nobody doubts except.....

I personally don't care if you call the JIT a hoax and think that their only cause is to find Russia guilty. As a Dutchman I take offense, as a person whom lost someone in these murders, I would be outraged, but then again I see whom posted it and I just shake my head and move on.

1. If Russia has nothing to do with the crash of MH17 - why then everywhere in the press Russia is accused of this?
2. If I accuse Russia of something, why is it not given the right to defend its position?
3. Why is Ukraine involved in the investigation, if it is obvious that Ukraine is directly interested in accusing Russia of what happened?
4. What was the "international Tribunal", what powers it should have, under what international treaties? Why are the existing international institutions not enough? Russia offered to buy a pig in a bag-of course, that Russia refused to participate in the unknown on unclear terms. Furthermore Russia has refused approval "the Tribunal for Boeing" including the fact that the Russian investigators were not allowed to investigate. That is, you, Dutchy, again misinform people-Russia first was not allowed to investigate, and only then she refused to participate in some "Tribunal".
5. And Yes - I, like many other people, highly doubt the Dutch judicial system. You're misinforming people again.

Scorpius wrote:

1. If Russia has nothing to do with the crash of MH17 - why then everywhere in the press Russia is accused of this?

Russia claims it has nothing to do with the shot down of MH17, hence it has no place in the investigation. If they admitted they shot it down, they would still have no place in the investigation, aside of cooperating with procecution.

2. If I accuse Russia of something, why is it not given the right to defend its position?

I am sure sooner or later there will be a list of names that Russia can hand over to the Netherlands, including all the defense support they want to send along.

3. Why is Ukraine involved in the investigation, if it is obvious that Ukraine is directly interested in accusing Russia of what happened?

It happened in Ukrainian territory, they are automatically involved. The nation where are crime is committed always is, and who is to stop them, the country of the perpetrator, in this case Russia, has no right to be part of any investigation. Russia is guilty regardless of who fired the missile. They started the war after all.

4. What was the "international Tribunal", what powers it should have, under what international treaties? Why are the existing international institutions not enough? Russia offered to buy a pig in a bag-of course, that Russia refused to participate in the unknown on unclear terms. Furthermore Russia has refused approval "the Tribunal for Boeing" including the fact that the Russian investigators were not allowed to investigate. That is, you, Dutchy, again misinform people-Russia first was not allowed to investigate, and only then she refused to participate in some "Tribunal".

The European Court of Human Rights and the ICC have jurisdiction over Russia. The former would be a stretch, war crimes are handled by the ICC.

best regards
Thomas

tommy1808 wrote:

TheFlyingDisk wrote:

Scorpius wrote:

Fact 1: the version about the su-25 was just a version.

It wasn't just a version, it was the official story from Russia until it was thoroughly debunked. Hence Russia's zero credibility. The JIT's credibility may not be 100%, at least it's higher than Russia's.

We'll only know the truth once Putin's dead and the Russian disinformation apparatus is dismantled. I sure hope it will come soon enough. At least it will provide closure to the families of the 298 victims. Until then, stop saying that what Russia's saying is the absolute truth.

The Su-25 was also meant to be debunked. Russia has no interest showing any consistent alternative version of events, decisiveness is much more useful to them. That is why they are pouring money into fringe political movements all over the place. Russia has invented a form a state terrorism that works much better than the traditional one. MH17 was likely shut down deliberately to create this situation. One in 4 chance that they "accidentally" happen to shot down an aircraft from Russia´s smallest export customer ......

best regards
Thomas

You lied again. Immediately after the mh17 disaster, several versions of the incident were expressed: including that MH17 could be shot down by an air-to-air missile, as according to radar data, an unidentified aircraft was observed in the area. In addition, it considered the version of a bomb on Board, or a technical malfunction. Version of the bomb damage or were swept aside pretty quickly. Version of the plane as one of the workers took the Investigative Committee of Russia in its own investigation. A year later, a man appeared who reported that on the day of the mh17 disaster, he observed the departure of su-25 attack aircraft from the Ukrainian airfield, and one of the attack aircraft carried air-to-air missiles. This man reported that the pilot of that attack aircraft was involved in the mh17 crash. The pilot's name was Vladislav Voloshin (quite by accident, Vladislav Voloshin "committed suicide" in Ukraine in the spring of 2018).

So, the Investigative Committee of Russia has a witness who claims that the su-25 was, and that he was involved in the mh17 disaster. However, JIT ignores this information without even trying to verify it. And Voloshin's death somehow, no one is alarming. Note-the witness does not report that the su-25 shot down MH17. He says the plane may have been involved in the incident. However, no one even tried to request from Ukraine this about combat flights that day, for example. And still strangeness-why the Ukrainian politicians declared that complexes"BUK" in Ukraine aren't present if these complexes in Ukraine are? No one has any questions about this either.

And the very fact that the mh17 investigation is conducted behind closed doors is a serious reason to ask the question - what is JIT hiding from us?

tommy1808 wrote:

Scorpius wrote:

1. If Russia has nothing to do with the crash of MH17 - why then everywhere in the press Russia is accused of this?

Russia claims it has nothing to do with the shot down of MH17, hence it has no place in the investigation. If they admitted they shot it down, they would still have no place in the investigation, aside of cooperating with procecution.

2. If I accuse Russia of something, why is it not given the right to defend its position?

I am sure sooner or later there will be a list of names that Russia can hand over to the Netherlands, including all the defense support they want to send along.

3. Why is Ukraine involved in the investigation, if it is obvious that Ukraine is directly interested in accusing Russia of what happened?

It happened in Ukrainian territory, they are automatically involved. The nation where are crime is committed always is, and who is to stop them, the country of the perpetrator, in this case Russia, has no right to be part of any investigation. Russia is guilty regardless of who fired the missile. They started the war after all.

4. What was the "international Tribunal", what powers it should have, under what international treaties? Why are the existing international institutions not enough? Russia offered to buy a pig in a bag-of course, that Russia refused to participate in the unknown on unclear terms. Furthermore Russia has refused approval "the Tribunal for Boeing" including the fact that the Russian investigators were not allowed to investigate. That is, you, Dutchy, again misinform people-Russia first was not allowed to investigate, and only then she refused to participate in some "Tribunal".

The European Court of Human Rights and the ICC have jurisdiction over Russia. The former would be a stretch, war crimes are handled by the ICC.

best regards
Thomas

Please provide me with your contact details so that I can file a lawsuit against you for slandering my country and insulting its fair name. You continue to accuse Russia, despite the fact that even the investigation is not finished, and that Ukraine is guilty of shooting down MH17. I think you should be responsible for your slander.

Scorpius wrote:

Please provide me with your contact details so that I can file a lawsuit against you for slandering my country and insulting its fair name..

Libel laws don´t cover countries.... and what good name? Using weapons of mass destruction against civilians. Have a hard time thinking about a country with less honor in the last decade or so.
Shall is send my contact details to 55 Ulitsa Savushkina, Saint Petersburg?

best regards
Thomas