MH17 Crash In Ukraine. Known info in OP.

  • Thread starter Dennisch
  • 1,285 comments
  • 59,863 views
The Netherlands and Australia now officially lay the blame at Russia, to force them to cooperate in the investigation.

And Bellingcat goes a step further and names a suspect Oleg Ivannikov, also known as Orion and Andrey Ivanovich, a high ranking officer in the Russian army.
 
Last edited:
Mmm, some interesting details coming up.



In this May, the Dutch revealed the missile fragments with serial numbers visible on them. Since their job was to blame Russia, not to investigate the tradegy, it was their failure. Because they didn't know the evil Russians store documents about their missiles.

According to them, the missile number 8868720 (with revealed engine number 9Д1318869032) was made in December 1986 in Dolgoprudny NPP and transported to the 223rd anti-aircraft missile brigade that was located in Ternopol region of Ukrainian SSR, in the same month of that year. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, this unit wasn't redeployed back to Russia, and joined the Ukrainian Armed Forces, where it was reformed into a regiment. In 2014, the 223rd AA missile regiment was deployed in the war zone of Donetsk region, and was there on 17th of July.

Second. The Bellingcat's videos of Buk launcher moving provided to JIT are fake (see the the briefing video). You don't need to be an expert to see the reference lines violating the linear perspective rule.
mh17_mo1.png
mh17_mo2.png

That's all you have to know about Bellingcat's "investigations".

Third. Not as interesting as the first two, but the MoD also published an audio of 'conversation' of Ukrainan servicemen recorded in 2016 in Odessa, where one of them says "...if it goes like this, we'll 🤬 down another Malaysian Boeing." Not so much of evidence TBH, but the guy who said this is allegedly Col. Ruslan Grinchak, who commanded the radio-technical brigade deployed on the east of Ukraine in July 2014, and probably knew what really happened.

No idea where they got it, but I can note that the guys speak with clear Ukrainian accent, with some Ukrainian words in their Russian.

So. Any questions? :rolleyes:
 
View attachment 766874 View attachment 766875
That's all you have to know about Bellingcat's "investigations".

To be honest I think anybody who's ever used a camera is going to tell you that what you're seeing on the dashcam is lens (aka radial) distortion. If the truck is provably fake due to the bendy 'vanishing point' then so are the road signs, the vehicle to the left of frame and the building beyond.
 
And even at that, it still doesn't explain why Russia has been mum on the investigation done by multiple countries.

Is the weapon used probably destroyed? Yes, but that still really doesn't excuse the fact that Russia is sponsoring the group that is allegedly to blame for the attack.
 
To be honest I think anybody who's ever used a camera is going to tell you that what you're seeing on the dashcam is lens (aka radial) distortion. If the truck is provably fake due to the bendy 'vanishing point' then so are the road signs, the vehicle to the left of frame and the building beyond.
Aren't all lines supposed to be bendy in that case? On the previous frame without the truck (see the video), the lines of the road and the bulding to the right converge in one point.
The road signs aren't parallel to the road (they're perpendicular), the building to the left may be angled to the road, and the body lines of the Lada Priora you're probably talking about aren't parallel to the ground (as well as those of the Toyota RAV4 in the front of the truck).

And even at that, it still doesn't explain why Russia has been mum on the investigation done by multiple countries.
Probably because Russia wasn't allowed to participate in the investigation properly? Go away and shut up style.
It was only May of this year when JIT published the serial numbers on the missile that let Russia track them in logbooks.

Is the weapon used probably destroyed?
Since the missile belonged to Ukraine, we should ask them.
But we may expect an 'accidental' fire on an ammunition storage of the 223rd regiment that will destroy the other missiles and logistcal documents.

but that still really doesn't excuse the fact that Russia is sponsoring the group that is allegedly to blame for the attack.
The USA is sponsoring Poroshenko's regime, whose troops are the other suspect, and sponsored the coup d'etat that lead it to power, killing over 100 people in Kiev, but that doesn't seem to bother you.
 
Probably because Russia wasn't allowed to participate in the investigation properly? Go away and shut up style.
Source required. Regardless though, they could have spoken up and not through their proproganda machine Russia Today.

It was only May of this year when JIT published the serial numbers on the missile that let Russia track them in logbooks.
Why would Russia need to track the missile used. Oh, wait, it is Russia... [I'll allow you to fill in the blank]

Since the missile belonged to Ukraine, we should ask them.
But we may expect an 'accidental' fire on an ammunition storage of the 223rd regiment that will destroy the other missiles and logistcal documents.
It is a hypothetical question that I answered in the very next sentence. No need to add on.

The USA is sponsoring Poroshenko's regime, whose troops are the other suspect, and sponsored the coup d'etat that lead it to power, killing over 100 people in Kiev, but that doesn't seem to bother you.
Who the USA supports or not support is irrelevant at this point. The point is that they are the recognized leaders of Ukraine, and how they got to power is a bit irrelevant now. What is relevant, and that is a matter for a Russia thread if and when it is created, is how Putin himself managed to get around term limits and hold power like any other South American or African dictator.
 
Poroshenko is an American puppet while the last one was a Russian puppet. So Russia saved Ukraine hahah what a joke. A lot of people were not happy with Yanukvchy(cant even spell his name forgive me)

Russia ripped Crimea off Ukraine and supported Russian Separatists in Eastern Ukraine.

Both the USA and Russia signed an agreement to leave Ukraine neutral so it can give up its nukes. What a big mistake that was for Ukraine.
 
Source required. Regardless though, they could have spoken up and not through their proproganda machine Russia Today.
Just check the list of countries that are members of the JIT. Hint: there is Ukraine but no Russia.
And just because you don't know about it doesn't mean Russia didn't speak up multiple times.

https://sputniknews.com/russia/2014...ht-MH17-Downing-by-Militia-Remain-Unfounded-/
https://www.theage.com.au/world/mh1...eapons-manufacturer-says-20150603-ghfdco.html
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/20...rosecutors-to-reveal-where-missile-that-down/

Ukraine still hasn't provided the data about location of their AA missile units, the conversations of the air traffic control responsible for that area, the USA said they have satellite images of that place but then refused to show them, but of course the one who refuses to cooperate is Russia.

Why would Russia need to track the missile used. Oh, wait, it is Russia... [I'll allow you to fill in the blank]
Goddamn Russians, we put them guilty in advance, but they respond by declassifying secret documents telling where the missile came from and where to! That's unfair!

Who the USA supports or not support is irrelevant at this point. The point is that they are the recognized leaders of Ukraine, and how they got to power is a bit irrelevant now.
Well, you started it...

What is relevant, and that is a matter for a Russia thread if and when it is created, is how Putin himself managed to get around term limits and hold power like any other South American or African dictator.
Now that's really relevant. :rolleyes:
Since you started this, I'll give you that: we have the Saudi absolute monarchy being a loyal US ally and totally not a dictatorship, we have Merkel leading Germany for the fourth term in a row, but when a Russian president rules for the second term for the second time, he's literally Idi Amin.

I know you would probably like our president to be someone like Yeltsin - a drunkard who does what America tells, while his own country is running deep into 🤬. And, you know what? I would like Putin to leave, too. But to have a stronger president instead. Someone more courageous and resolute than Putin (who is actually not such a 'tough guy' as he appears on the media). Someone who wouldn't have given Ukraine up to America, and thus wouldn't let the tradegy discussed in this thread happen.

But in the other hand... Having someone like Zhirinovsky in the president chair would be too dangerous, either. :sly:

Poroshenko is an American puppet while the last one was a Russian puppet. So Russia saved Ukraine hahah what a joke. A lot of people were not happy with Yanukvchy(cant even spell his name forgive me)

Russia ripped Crimea off Ukraine and supported Russian Separatists in Eastern Ukraine.

Both the USA and Russia signed an agreement to leave Ukraine neutral so it can give up its nukes. What a big mistake that was for Ukraine.
There were economical and political reasons for it. Ukraine's nuclear arsenal was the third in the world, and the country wouldn't afford to maintain all this stuff in the poor '90s era. Plus, the USA considered Ukraine a potential threat to the West (with its ICBMs capable of reaching North America), and since Russian Federation was the only successor of the USSR (and its legit nuclear status), Ukraine would be sanctioned and isolated like North Korea if it decided to leave the nukes.

As for Yanukovich (or Yanukovych of you use the Ukrainian-English transcription), he was, in fact, not a pro-Russian president, but a pro-money president. Before being elected, he promised to make Russian the second official language in Ukraine, and he didn't. He always tried to flip-flop between Russia and the West, and it didn't do him any good. When his throne started staggering, Moscow kept lending him money instead of actually doing something. As a result, he gave up power, took the money and ran away, betraying everyone who stood up for him.

However, it's a fact that Ukraine's economy is now doing a lot worse than under Yanukovich's rule. The "Euromaidan" (as those events are called in Ukraine) just changed one corrupt leader for another, even more corrupt. The Russian strategy in Ukraine has failed, either. But that's a different story, for a different thread.
 
Just check the list of countries that are members of the JIT. Hint: there is Ukraine but no Russia.
That STILL doesn't prevent Russia from presenting evidence to the contrary. In fact, if I were Putin, I would shout it to the rooftops of my country's innocence in the matter to ANYONE who would listen to you, and not present the evidence as if it were manufactured.



Since you started this, I'll give you that: we have the Saudi absolute monarchy being a loyal US ally and totally not a dictatorship, we have Merkel leading Germany for the fourth term in a row, but when a Russian president rules for the second term for the second time, he's literally Idi Amin.
One of which is a hereditary monarchy and the second has NO term limits provided that she passes a vote of No Confidence. You are deflecting the point.

I know you would probably like our president to be someone like Yeltsin - a drunkard who does what America tells, while his own country is running deep into 🤬.
Perhaps, but Russia at the time (yes, I am old enough to remember what happened) was nearly broke when Yeltsin took power. If he wanted the West's money, he had no choice.

And, you know what? I would like Putin to leave, too. But to have a stronger president instead. Someone more courageous and resolute than Putin (who is actually not such a 'tough guy' as he appears on the media).
So someone about a 1000x worse than Putin. Got you.

Someone who wouldn't have given Ukraine up to America, and thus wouldn't let the tradegy discussed in this thread happen.
Ukraine was part of the Soviet Union, and was never a part of Russia. Ukraine was an independent nation BEFORE Stalin and will remain so after Putin is either voted out or disposed. Perhaps that your memory is foggy and forgot when Putin actually tried to invade Georgia just like he did to Ukraine?



 
Ukraine ...was never a part of Russia.
Technically, maybe so, but in historical, cultural terms, wasn't at least a region of what later became Ukraine considered by many to be the actual birthplace and homeland of what later became Russia? I'm not saying, just asking politely.
 
Technically, maybe so, but in historical, cultural terms, wasn't at least a region of what later became Ukraine considered by many to be the actual birthplace and homeland of what later became Russia? I'm not saying, just asking politely.
The region has been ruled by Russia on and off for a few thousand years, but modern Ukraine has never been a part of Russia outside of being a part of the Soviet Union. But once the Union dissolved, it was never a formal part of Russia. Putin's dream is to reestablish the Soviet Union, and has made attempts to do so through economic and military means. When he invaded Georgia back in 2008, the president of Georgia made a plea to the US to help protect them, and they did through economic pressure on Russia. Now, even if the US made more of a point to pressure Russia to give back the Crimea, they won't do it because Putin really doesn't want US money.
 
That STILL doesn't prevent Russia from presenting evidence to the contrary. In fact, if I were Putin, I would shout it to the rooftops of my country's innocence in the matter to ANYONE who would listen to you, and not present the evidence as if it were manufactured.
Even if Putin shouted to the rooftops, who would listen? Your mainstream media wouldn't present the other side's point of view anyway, it's not what they exist for. I linked some of the earlier Russian responses, but you didn't know about them.

One of which is a hereditary monarchy and the second has NO term limits provided that she passes a vote of No Confidence. You are deflecting the point.
Now that really changes it.
You complained about Putin getting around the term limits. In RF, you can't be a president for more than two terms in a row. Did Putin leave the office for one term? Yes, he did, in 2008, until 2012. Then, he was elected again. Does it violate anything? No. Regardless of what you (or me) think about Putin, he is a legally elected president. This is called "democracy" - something that America is so proud of, but struggles to accept in some specific cases. What is wrong with this?

Perhaps, but Russia at the time (yes, I am old enough to remember what happened) was nearly broke when Yeltsin took power. If he wanted the West's money, he had no choice.
You might remember what you heard on your news, but unlike me and my family, you never lived under Yeltsin's rule. And you don't know what was it like. The country was broke when the drunkard took the lead, but continued breaking down further at accelerated pace. Poverty, corruption, lawlessness, organized crime, bloodbath in Chechnya, hyperinflation like in Venezuela today - that's not the full list. Millions lost their jobs, those who didn't, weren't getting salary for months. That's kinda long (and off the topic) to explain, but you can just read here:
And just an illustration:
700px-GDP_of_Russia_since_1989.svg.png
I know the US would rather like to supply food to Russia as humanitarian aid (is that what you mean by the "West's money" that Yeltsin recieved?) like to some starving African state than to have Russia as a geopolitical rival, but I hope you at least don't condemn me for not wanting that to happen.

So someone about a 1000x worse than Putin. Got you.
So a strong Russian president is bad for America. Got you.
Well, at least you're not a hypocrite...

Ukraine was part of the Soviet Union, and was never a part of Russia. Ukraine was an independent nation BEFORE Stalin and will remain so after Putin is either voted out or disposed.
Ukraine is not one of the United States either.
By 'losing Ukraine' I mean it as a space of influence. Ukrainians are culturally similar to us, and we always thought of them as of brothers. But because of the US activity and Putin's inactivity, Ukraine became a hostile state to us. Fortunately, not all Ukrainians believe their new government and many are fleeing to Europe or Russia from their crazy regime. Those who speak against it risk to end up dead or in prison.

Perhaps that your memory is foggy and forgot when Putin actually tried to invade Georgia just like he did to Ukraine?
Wow. So evil Putin suddenly invaded poor little Georgia (despite of not even being the president of RF at the time) and it's me whose memory is foggy. I know you're just repeating after your propaganda that didn't tell you that Georgia was the one who started the offensive in South Ossetia and opened fire at the Russian peacekeeping troops that were located there since 1992 under the Sochi agreement signed by both Russia and Georgia after the prevous war in the former Georgian SSR (that also involved Abkhazia), so Russia had the casus belli and had to apply force in response to protect the peacekeepers and the RF citizens living in Tskhinval. Like I said, it's not the job of your mainstream media to tell such "little" details. So, perhaps I shouldn't blame you, but it actually didn't prevent you from educating yourself before you play an expert on the post-Soviet war conflicts.

Imagine a situation when a country X (that is not a nuclear power and is not protected by one) attacks a territory held by US military with tanks and heavy artillery, killing dozens of US servicemen. How long would it be before country X is bombed into the stone age?

And, since we suddenly moved from MH17 to the Olympic War of 2008 and you posted some videos, I have one for you, too.



- Hello, Amanda, tell us how you were bombed by the Russians.
- We were running away from the Georgian troops, not Russian. Mr. Saakashvili started this war.
- Err... Uhm... *cough cough* Unfortunately, we need a break...

When he invaded Georgia back in 2008, the president of Georgia made a plea to the US to help protect them, and they did through economic pressure on Russia.
Ah-ha-ha, that's how you see it? :lol:
Can you name which US sanctions made Medvedev leave Abkhazia and South Ossetia?
Hint: it didn't happen.
 
Last edited:
p78
Unless my English isn't as good as i thought, but isn't "anniversary" a poor choice of words?
No, it just means a yearly occurrence (annus = year; vertere = to turn). It actually used to be the date of someone's death, so pretty appropriate.
 
Oh, i've always thought that anniversary was more for something more festive, i would've used commemorate.
See, you do learn something every day.
 
Back