Malaysian Airline shot down

HensVassal

weisses wrote: »

How does almaz aty explain the bow-tie and cubes fragments that were found in the wreckage and bodies of the crew ? These shape of fragments are only used on 9N314M-type warheads

And the commision did not Ignore the Almazaty findings evident on page 144 of the report

But hey if its in the Belfast telegraph you must be right

Maybe you should familiarize yourself with both the bellincat and the dutch report ... They are full of actual evidence and facts.

Calm down, weisses, I'm. As skeptical as you are. Was the almaz antey study taken into account when conducting the Dutch investigation? Was the fact [their words] that a missile launched from where they [investigation] stated capable of destroying the aircraft on the side where the damage and failure occurred?

Almaz Antay are stating that cube shrapnel was the spray. Others are insistiing it was bow tie shrapnel. Still others are insisting that fuselage damage was circular.

I don't know but I'd love a bit of conclusively determined engineering verdict on holes.

weisses

HensVassal wrote: »

Calm down, weisses, I'm. As skeptical as you are. Was the almaz antey study taken into account when conducting the Dutch investigation? Was the fact [their words] that a missile launched from where they [investigation] stated capable of destroying the aircraft on the side where the damage and failure occurred?

Almaz Antay are stating that cube shrapnel was the spray. Others are insistiing it was bow tie shrapnel. Still others are insisting that fuselage damage was circular.

I don't know but I'd love a bit of conclusively determined engineering verdict on holes.

Read the relevant sections of the report and tell me if the Dutch investigation board ignored the Almaz antey findings ...

You seem very dismissive of both the dutch investigation and the thoroughly research Bellincat findings.. Which is fine, but at least bring something substantial to the table to counter their findings

HensVassal

weisses wrote: »

Read the relevant sections of the report and tell me if the Dutch investigation board ignored the Almaz antey findings ...

You seem very dismissive of both the dutch investigation and the thoroughly research Bellincat findings.. Which is fine, but at least bring something substantial to the table to counter their findings

The Bellingcat findings are a farce. That guy has deliberately fabricated evidence that the Australia Broadcasting Corporation put on its 60 minutes program and tried to get away with it and were caught redhanded.

Higgins "research" is limited to photographs and any old crud pulled from the internet. He has made journalistic errors that would have ended the careers of any true professional. The only reason this charlatan is cited is because he backs up the view of Washington propagandists.

Higgins, an unemployed British bureaucrat operating from his bedroom in Leicester came out stating that he had ironclad proof that the Syrian government was responsible for firing sarin nerve gas rockets at civilian centres despite a galactic lack of evidence on his part. He even had the temerity to mock the legendary investigative journalist, Seymour Hersh, you know, the guy who exposed the My Lai Massacre, the "Family Jewels" CIA secrets and the Abu Ghraib torture program scandal.
Hersh cited intelligence sources that indicated the attack appeared to be a provocation by Sunni extremists to draw the US into the war.
Hersh's work was vindicated by the findings of top aeronautical scientists who examined the one rocket that carried sarin gas into the Damascus neighbourhood of Ghouta and concluded that it could only have flown 2km and not the 10km that Washington groupthink claimed.

“It’s clear and unambiguous this munition could not have come from Syrian government-controlled areas as the White House claimed,” - Theodore Postol, professor in the Science, Technology, and Global Security Working Group at Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Higgins is a bullshit artist but if you want to put your faith into this excuse of a man and his abortion of an "investigative" website, Bellingcat, then knock yourself out.

weisses

HensVassal wrote: »

The Bellingcat findings are a farce. That guy has deliberately fabricated evidence that the Australia Broadcasting Corporation put on its 60 minutes program and tried to get away with it and were caught redhanded.

Can you link to articles exposing him ? or show what he supposedly fabricated ?

I asked for it earlier but you only seem to be interested in having a rant

Meaanwhile the Bellincat response could help you

https://www.bellingcat.com/news/uk-and-europe/2015/05/19/robert-parry-falsely-accuses-60-minutes-australia-of-using-mh17-fake-evidence/

HensVassal

weisses wrote: »

Can you link to articles exposing him ? or show what he supposedly fabricated ?

I asked for it earlier but you only seem to be interested in having a rant

Meaanwhile the Bellincat response could help you

https://www.bellingcat.com/news/uk-and-europe/2015/05/19/robert-parry-falsely-accuses-60-minutes-australia-of-using-mh17-fake-evidence/

Here you have what amounts to the New York Times' grudging retraction of its bandwagon claim that Syrian government forces fired sarin rockets at civilians:

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/29/world/middleeast/new-study-refines-view-of-sarin-attack-in-syria.html?_r=1

You have Professor Postol and others who are experts at the most prestigious Science and Engineering college in the world examining these munitions and stating emphatically that they couldn't have come from government held areas.
Then you have Higgins, with no scientific or analytic experience or qualifications whatsoever claiming he knows better than essentially a group of technical geniuses.

Higgins is a grade A bullshitting muckraker who is no doubt getting paid to spread his rubbish.

The trickery used by ABC what with photo overlays etc was as amateurish as it was blatant and again Higgins and Bellingcat were at the heart of this pathetic subterfuge.

Again to quote Professor Postol: "Higgins has done a very nice job collecting information on a website. As far as his analysis, it’s so lacking any analytical foundation it’s clear he has no idea what he’s talking about.”

Weisses, we've clashed in the past, but you don't sound like an idiot. I would be very wary of putting any faith in Higgins' low-rent "research" and the train-wreck of a "journalist" website that is Bellingcat. I would even guess that Higgins is making half this crap up and knows it's shoddy and falacious but is getting paid to disseminate lies and propaganda.

weisses

HensVassal wrote: »

Here you have what amounts to the New York Times' grudging retraction of its bandwagon claim that Syrian government forces fired sarin rockets at civilians:

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/29/world/middleeast/new-study-refines-view-of-sarin-attack-in-syria.html?_r=1

You have Professor Postol and others who are experts at the most prestigious Science and Engineering college in the world examining these munitions and stating emphatically that they couldn't have come from government held areas.
Then you have Higgins, with no scientific or analytic experience or qualifications whatsoever claiming he knows better than essentially a group of technical geniuses.

Higgins is a grade A bullshitting muckraker who is no doubt getting paid to spread his rubbish.

The trickery used by ABC what with photo overlays etc was as amateurish as it was blatant and again Higgins and Bellingcat were at the heart of this pathetic subterfuge.

Again to quote Professor Postol: "Higgins has done a very nice job collecting information on a website. As far as his analysis, it’s so lacking any analytical foundation it’s clear he has no idea what he’s talking about.”

Weisses, we've clashed in the past, but you don't sound like an idiot. I would be very wary of putting any faith in Higgins' low-rent "research" and the train-wreck of a "journalist" website that is Bellingcat. I would even guess that Higgins is making half this crap up and knows it's shoddy and falacious but is getting paid to disseminate lies and propaganda.

That has feck all to do with MH17

If you have some material that tackles the bellincat findings I'm all ears

Until then I leave the lies and propaganda in the trusted hands of Russia

Over and over you come with stories and claims and you never back them up when asked ... So yes I have an open mind but at least come up with something worth discussing

HensVassal

weisses wrote: »

That has feck all to do with MH17

If you have some material that tackles the bellincat findings I'm all ears

Until then I leave the lies and propaganda in the trusted hands of Russia

Over and over you come with stories and claims and you never back them up when asked ... So yes I have an open mind but at least come up with something worth discussing

I showed that Higgins and Bellingcat is a dubious source. He's been shown to be a liar and to not provide any level of anaylsis for his findings and still you view Bellingcat as gospel. Higgins fabricated "proof" about sarin in Syria. He does the same with regards to MH-17.

I just showed you examples of his lies and fakery and all you can do is take a dig at Russia.

weisses

HensVassal wrote: »

I showed that Higgins and Bellingcat is a dubious source. He's been shown to be a liar and to not provide any level of anaylsis for his findings and still you view Bellingcat as gospel. Higgins fabricated "proof" about sarin in Syria. He does the same with regards to MH-17.

I just showed you examples of his lies and fakery and all you can do is take a dig at Russia.

No ...you are having a dig at Higgins in regards to that 60 minutes piece ..Which are explained/refuted on their website ..And then you post some article which has nothing to do with MH17 ... I even googled bellincat sarin fake and that search didn't bring up anything significant

So please copy paste some sources that clearly stipulate how and why bellincat is faking their findings ...... Shouldn't be that bloody difficult

Dohnjoe

HensVassal wrote: »

I showed that Higgins and Bellingcat is a dubious source. He's been shown to be a liar and to not provide any level of anaylsis for his findings and still you view Bellingcat as gospel. Higgins fabricated "proof" about sarin in Syria. He does the same with regards to MH-17.

I just showed you examples of his lies and fakery and all you can do is take a dig at Russia.

Which part of the Bellingcat investigation is fundamentally flawed?

Likewise, why are it's findings in line with a separate joint-investigation carried out on a national level by Netherlands, Australia, Belgium, Ukraine and Malaysia involving over 200 investigators?

What part of these findings are incorrect and, if so, what really happened (with evidence)?

Think of it like a court case. On one side there is this vast amount of evidence, hundreds of witness statements, intercepted calls, half a million photos and videos, etc... and on the other side is an empty briefcase and an indignant partisan view

Elmer Blooker

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Which part of the Bellingcat investigation is fundamentally flawed?

All of it!
Would a guy with a laptop sitting at home in Moscow or St Petersburg, a self appointed expert, a citizen journalist be taken seriously by you Dohnjoe?

Dohnjoe

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

All of it!

What do you believe is the correct theory behind the downing of MH17? Also show how you have come to that conclusion

weisses

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

All of it!
Would a guy with a laptop sitting at home in Moscow or St Petersburg, a self appointed expert, a citizen journalist be taken seriously by you Dohnjoe?

It's ironic really ... What are the people on this forum using to discredit bellingcat ? . . . . . . Exactly

Elmer Blooker

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

Would a guy with a laptop sitting at home in Moscow or St Petersburg, a self appointed expert, a citizen journalist be taken seriously?

No one willing to answer my question?

I can only imagine the derision! Putinbot, Kremlin troll! ... in the pay of the Kremlin ...

weisses

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

No one willing to answer my question?
The Russian government claims to have evidence and that evidence is from an individual as described above.
I can only imagine the derision! Putinbot, Kremlin troll! ... in the pay of the Kremlin ...

Evidence is evidence ....

Problem with Russia is they diidnt provide any ... Bar the badly photoshopped Google Earth pictures and some other evidence that was taken into account by the investigators and then dismissed

All they do is trying to discredit bellingcat with a smear campaign ... And Evidently a few people fall for it

Now can anybody come up with some REAL evidence bellingcat is faking its findings ?

Dohnjoe

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

No one willing to answer my question?
The Russian government claims to have evidence and that evidence is from an individual as described above.

Has it been presented and what is the evidence?

HensVassal

Dohnjoe wrote: »

What do you believe is the correct theory behind the downing of MH17? Also show how you have come to that conclusion

That's beside the point

Elliot Higgins is an amateur. And his findings have been refuted by experts, EXPERTS.

The guy has no qualification to state what he does.

Dohnjoe

HensVassal wrote: »

That's beside the point

If there's a significant challenge to the Bellingcat or JIT findings, lay it out. Likewise if there's a substantiated alternative theory.

To be fair at least the moon landing hoaxers give it a shot.

Elmer Blooker

If anyone thinks this is "evidence" then I have nothing more to add to this thread.
cheerio.

weisses

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

If anyone thinks this is "evidence" then I have nothing more to add to this thread.
cheerio.

Ahh we have another runner