Malaysian airline MH-17 discussion thread

Egginacup · 25-07-2014 11:36AM

Corkfeen wrote: »

All news sites are saying it wasn't tampered with so it was more a matter of misreading your statement.

In relation to how British and Dutch investigators are looking at black box. There's two of them, the Dutch have one, English the other. They will both be sent back to the air disaster investigator today . No contradiction, just a deliberate inability to do some basic research.

Accusing me of conspiracy theories? You've twisted every part of the story to suit a western conspiracy to destroy mother Russia. But I, a conspiracy theorist? I don't like bull**** artists.

When did I accuse you of conspiracy theories? And what is the big taboo with conspiracies anyway? They do exist. Lincoln was killed as a result of a conspiracy as was Caesar. Are you suggesting that every crime in the history of the world was perpetrated by a single actor or agent?

Egginacup · 25-07-2014 11:51AM

deco nate wrote: »

Ever hear of chain of command?

What would your hypothetical chain of command be here? And what ought to be the consequences when the top of that chain is revealed?

smurfjed · 25-07-2014 11:52AM

http://www.icao.int/safety/airnavigation/Pages/aig.aspx

This is what the role of the ICAO Accident Investigation Section, you will see that they do not "CONDUCT" investigations.

smurfjed · 25-07-2014 11:58AM

At the end of the day the onus is upon those who are doing all the accusing to prove it. If Putin has any sense he will keep his mouth shut and just wait for the so called evidence to prove he is in some way responsible.

If Putin had any sense and could prove that the separatists were not responsible, then he would make the western world look like idiots by revealing such information. Unfortunately the fact that he doesn't release such information would indicate that as is the case with western intelligence, they really do not know who pulled the trigger.

As i have said previously, i don't believe that it is in the best interests of the investigation to antagonise the people who control the crash area, so i wouldn't expect ANY western intelligence until the investigation team has left, normally this could take months due to the logistics of collecting 140,000 kgs of aircraft parts, in a war zone, who knows!

Peist2007 · 25-07-2014 01:18PM

Saadyst wrote: »

Good thing no-one has to "prove" anything to anyone here... the level of evidence needed is ridiculous.. still not seen how anything can be realistically "verified". We'd be here for decades trying to figure out what happened taking the approaches people are are talking about. "How do we know a missile hit the plane?" Yeah, it could be flying ghosts or UFOs, can't rule anything out...

While we're at it, can we take a look at the laws of physics too? Has the evidence been verified by independent and impartial sources? Has Robert Parry taken a look? :rolleyes:

So, any evidence at all is ridiculous?

Saadyst · 25-07-2014 01:45PM

Peist2007 wrote: »

So, any evidence at all is ridiculous?

No, it's not, who said that?

Just the standard being sought is impossible. The world would not be able to function if everything had to be held to these standards. There is no acceptance of anything at all and everything has to be questioned.

Conversely, the benefit of the doubt is being given in spades to the Russians for some reason? Where is the evidence of the Russian claims..? Are we holding it to the same standard?

However in the end, it doesn't matter - nobody here needs to be shown anything. The people that are making the decisions will see it and decide what to do.

Peist2007 · 25-07-2014 01:52PM

Saadyst wrote: »

No, it's not, who said that?

Just the standard being sought is impossible. The world would not be able to function if everything had to be held to these standards. There is no acceptance of anything at all and everything has to be questioned.

Conversely, the benefit of the doubt is being given in spades to the Russians for some reason? Where is the evidence of the Russian claims..? Are we holding it to the same standard?

However in the end, it doesn't matter - nobody here needs to be shown anything. The people that are making the decisions will see it and decide what to do.

The standard being sought is any evidence, any evidence at all. They have shown us nothing yet that could be called evidence.

Ps you clearly do not see the irony in what you're saying.

Send me a link to the evidence you think should be deemed acceptable.

Autonomous Cowherd · 25-07-2014 01:59PM

[QUOTE=Saadyst;91432759

Just the standard being sought is impossible. The world would not be able to function if everything had to be held to these standards. .[/QUOTE]
The standard available for every Tom Dick and Mary in a criminal court is ''Beyond all reasonable Doubt.'' In a civil court it is the less demanding ''on the Balance of probabilities''. I think given the case before us is mass murder, and possibly state terrorism, then at least Beyond All Reasonable Doubt should apply. And not just someone says...

Peist2007 · 25-07-2014 02:00PM

Autonomous Cowherd wrote: »

The standard available for every Tom Dick and Mary in a criminal court is ''Beyond all reasonable Doubt.'' In a civil court it is the less demanding ''on the Balance of probabilities''. I think given the case before us is mass murder, and possibly state terrorism, then at least Beyond All Reasonable Doubt should apply. And not just someone says...

Even evidence showing that this was definitely a ground to air missile hit. It's now a week since this happened. I see a lot of accusations and, with each day going by, the accusers are looking more and more suspicious.

Saadyst · 25-07-2014 02:06PM

So the question is why do YOU as individuals need this evidence? Do you think every incident should require an investigation, completely open to the public?

Do you consider that there may be issues that would affect intelligence gathering capabilities if this evidence was presented to the public or the Russians?

I mean seriously you guys would want evidence of whodunnit if there was 2 of you in a lift and you let out a fart....

Peist2007 · 25-07-2014 02:12PM

Saadyst wrote: »

So the question is why do YOU as individuals need this evidence? Do you think every incident should require an investigation, completely open to the public?

Do you consider that there may be issues that would affect intelligence gathering capabilities if this evidence was presented to the public or the Russians?

I mean seriously you guys would want evidence of whodunnit if there was 2 of you in a lift and you let out a fart....

Are you actually following this story? Before you can accuse any side of killing 300 civilians in a missile strike on a passenger plane you need to have evidence. This is all a very simple concept. The fact that no evidence has yet been produced would lead one to assume that they dont have the evidence to show. If that is the case then why did they say they had it?

You seem to not be getting the whole evidence thing so no problem. I really cannot put it in any more simple terms. I am a lawyer and deal with evidence every day. No evidence has been produced in this instance. Nothing.

You didnt send me a link the last time. Show me what evidence you think is satisfactory but that isnt being deemed acceptable. Send me a link. I am not too proud to back down. You dont have any evidence and you havent seen any though, have you?

comongethappy · 25-07-2014 02:14PM

Peist2007 wrote: »

the accusers are looking more and more suspicious.

The 'accusers' are the Dutch & malaysian & Australian governments as well as the families of 298 dead people.

... What is suspicious about them?

smurfjed · 25-07-2014 02:18PM

I am a lawyer and deal with evidence every day. No evidence has been produced in this instance. Nothing.

What exactly would you call 298 dead bodies and an aircraft scattered all around the countryside?

Peist2007 · 25-07-2014 02:18PM

comongethappy wrote: »

The 'accusers' are the Dutch & malaysian & Australian governments as well as the families of 298 dead people.

... What is suspicious about them?

No the accusers are the US and the Ukrainian government. Or were the Dutch and Malaysians blaming the Russians saying they first had evidence and then subsequently had mounting evidence when the fact is they have nothing?

Why not quote my whole message and deal with all of the points raised. Let's have it out

comongethappy · 25-07-2014 02:21PM

Peist2007 wrote: »

No the accusers are the US

So.... What is suspicious about them?

I'd hold them in no more suspicion for this crime than the Irish government.

Peist2007 · 25-07-2014 02:22PM

smurfjed wrote: »

What exactly would you call 298 dead bodies and an aircraft scattered all around the countryside?

I would call that evidence of a plane crash.

I'm sorry. I'll slow right down for you. "Evidence" in this instance refers to evidence that the US and Ukrainians said they had that proved Russian involvement in this accident.

Quite noticeable the responses are now becoming more and more childish. Guess that's a good sign.

Peist2007 · 25-07-2014 02:23PM

comongethappy wrote: »

So.... What is suspicious about them?

I'd hold them in no more suspicion for this crime than the Irish government.

So you don't have a clue what you're talking about. I suspected it but thanks for illustrating it.

comongethappy · 25-07-2014 02:26PM

Peist2007 wrote: »

So you don't have a clue what you're talking about. I suspected it but thanks for illustrating it.

You said the "accusers are looking suspicious "

The accusers, being the global community, I'd be keen to hear you flesh that out.

& less of the personal abuse komrade, you've been chasing your own tail for days now.

listermint · 25-07-2014 02:28PM

Some of the lads in here must have a tough time going to work in the morning. Especially if there is a mirror in the hall they must catch a glimpse and argue with themselves.

Probably argue with their own shadow there's so much sun at the moment. Must be tough times.

Peist2007 · 25-07-2014 02:29PM

comongethappy wrote: »

You said the "accusers are looking suspicious "

The accusers, being the global community, I'd be keen to hear you flesh that out.

& less of the personal abuse komrade, you've been chasing your own tail for days now.

I have already said who the accusers are. The US and Ukrainians immediately pointed the finger at the Russians last Friday. They said they had evidence to prove it. I am merely asking to see that evidence. Any other basic facts you want fleshed out?

Funny thing is, it could have been the Russians that did this. I am not on one side or the other. But, before we demonise a nation, evidence please.

Son Of A Vidic · 25-07-2014 02:30PM

Saadyst wrote: »

So the question is why do YOU as individuals need this evidence? Do you think every incident should require an investigation, completely open to the public?

Yes and do you know why? Well it's because the consequences of getting this wrong could have grave consequences for the world. Most rationale individuals don't want to see a conflagration. But we do want to see hard evidence and hard undisputed data.

The World once witnessed a nut job b@stard called George Bush and his lap dog Tony Blair. Invent a reason to start a war in Iraq and look at the bloodbath they created. Powell sat before the UN and presented intelligence that had no more value than horseshít.

So no wonder people want aboveboard, transparent investigations. One can only hope that logic, facts and reason eventually prevails over the type of war mongering, jingoistic bullshít we witnessed last weekend.

Peist2007 · 25-07-2014 02:30PM

listermint wrote: »

Some of the lads in here must have a tough time going to work in the morning. Especially if there is a mirror in the hall they must catch a glimpse and argue with themselves.

Probably argue with their own shadow there's so much sun at the moment. Must be tough times.

I always enjoy your posts. You're absolutely hilarious.

jimeryan22 · 25-07-2014 02:30PM

comongethappy wrote: »

The 'accusers' are the Dutch & malaysian & Australian governments as well as the families of 298 dead people.

... What is suspicious about them?

The lack of evidence..?

jimeryan22 · 25-07-2014 02:34PM

Corvus Maximus wrote: »

Yes and do you know why? Well it's because the consequences of getting this wrong could have grave consequences for the world. Most rationale individuals don't want to see a conflagration. But we do want to see hard evidence and hard undisputed data.

The World once witnessed a nut job b@stard called George Bush and his lap dog Tony Blair. Invent a reason to start a war in Iraq and look at the bloodbath they created. Powell sat before the UN and presented intelligence that had no more value than horseshít.

So no wonder people want aboveboard, transparent investigations. One can only hope that logic, facts and reason eventually prevails over the type of war mongering, jingoistic bullshít we witnessed last weekend.

Where have you all been.??? I have been arguing the same points for a week...
They all want to believe known liars tell them they've evidence they haven't shown.. I mean sure look at the "evidence" used by Powell and co at UN assembly for Iraq. Fabricated
They showed it to everybody and it was still lies

who_me · 25-07-2014 02:38PM

Peist2007 wrote: »

Are you actually following this story? Before you can accuse any side of killing 300 civilians in a missile strike on a passenger plane you need to have evidence. This is all a very simple concept. The fact that no evidence has yet been produced would lead one to assume that they dont have the evidence to show. If that is the case then why did they say they had it?

You seem to not be getting the whole evidence thing so no problem. I really cannot put it in any more simple terms. I am a lawyer and deal with evidence every day. No evidence has been produced in this instance. Nothing.

You didnt send me a link the last time. Show me what evidence you think is satisfactory but that isnt being deemed acceptable. Send me a link. I am not too proud to back down. You dont have any evidence and you havent seen any though, have you?

There were the voice recordings allegedly of pro-Russian separatists discussing a civilian airliner was shot down? That's certainly evidence. I've read claims these are fake, but I haven't seen any evidence of that claim.

Also, the investigation into this event is only just beginning, so it's a bit early to be assuming there's no evidence to be shown.

Peist2007 · 25-07-2014 02:38PM

jimeryan22 wrote: »

Where have you all been.??? I have been arguing the same points for a week...
They all want to believe known liars tell them they've evidence they haven't shown.. I mean sure look at the "evidence" used by Powell and co at UN assembly for Iraq. Fabricated
They showed it to everybody and it was still lies

It is quite concerning that, given all of the lies told even only in the past 15 years, people still blindly follow.

Piliger · 25-07-2014 02:41PM

smurfjed wrote: »

What exactly would you call 298 dead bodies and an aircraft scattered all around the countryside?

Scattered all around the Russian held countryside with Russian thugs abusing the bodies of the survivors and stealing their credit cards and phones, planting pieces of other aircraft, rifling through their clothes, and refusing to allow international inspectors access to the site. I call that overwhelming and indisputable evidence of Putin's mass murder.

Peist2007 · 25-07-2014 02:43PM

who_me wrote: »

There were the voice recordings allegedly of pro-Russian separatists discussing a civilian airliner was shot down? That's certainly evidence. I've read claims these are fake, but I haven't seen any evidence of that claim.

Also, the investigation into this event is only just beginning, so it's a bit early to be assuming there's no evidence to be shown.

The voice recordings have been debunked since. They arent even definitely from that particular time and could have referred to any event.

I agree that it is only just beginning. My question is why is one side being immediately accused when there is no evidence. And also when there are other parties with better motives for such an act.

listermint · 25-07-2014 02:43PM

Peist2007 wrote: »

I always enjoy your posts. You're absolutely hilarious.

They can't be as jovial as the content of your. There's always a few who go against the popular opinion just to be that guy. And dress it up with such terms as critical thinking and using your brain when in fact it's the complete opposite.

Sure everything is a westerm conspiracy and **** can not just happen. No?

Completely laughable the level a very small number of posters are getting to bleating the same complete baseless nonsense.

But hey. Whatever makes you happy because some folks want to be "that guy" who's smarter than everyone else because the question everything and believe absolutely nothing. Literally nothing.

Peist2007 · 25-07-2014 02:50PM

listermint wrote: »

They can't be as jovial as the content of your. There's always a few who go against the popular opinion just to be that guy. And dress it up with such terms as critical thinking and using your brain when in fact it's the complete opposite.

Sure everything is a westerm conspiracy and **** can not just happen. No?

Completely laughable the level a very small number of posters are getting to bleating the same complete baseless nonsense.

But hey. Whatever makes you happy because some folks want to be "that guy" who's smarter than everyone else because the question everything and believe absolutely nothing. Literally nothing.

Sorry, you're right. I am that guy. So, now you've had a good talk to yourself about what i may or may not be like, evidence the Russians took down the plane?

You see, a conspiracy theory in the form you are alluding to, would be if we saw the Russians take the plane down but then said that it was really a plot against them. However that is not the case here. We just want evidence that what the Americans and Ukrainians are saying is true.

If the above is too much for you, please respond with something witty instead. You are better at that.

Malaysian airline MH-17 discussion thread

Comments