US analysts conclude MH 17 downed by aircraft- New Strait Times-Malaysia

[go west young man]

http://www.nst.com.my/node/20925 New Strait times is one of Malaysia's largest english language news organizations.

Excerpt:

KUALA LUMPUR: INTELLIGENCE analysts in the United States had already concluded that Malaysia Airlines flight MH17 was shot down by an air-to-air missile, and that the Ukrainian government had had something to do with it.

This corroborates an emerging theory postulated by local investigators that the Boeing 777-200 was crippled by an air-to-air missile and finished off with cannon fire from a fighter that had been shadowing it as it plummeted to earth.

In a damning report dated Aug 3, headlined “Flight 17 Shoot-Down Scenario Shifts”, Associated Press reporter Robert Parry said “some US intelligence sources had concluded that the rebels and Russia were likely not at fault and that it appears Ukrainian government forces were to blame”.

This new revelation was posted on GlobalResearch, an independent research and media organisation.

In a statement released by the Ukrainian embassy on Tuesday, Kiev denied that its fighters were airborne during the time MH17 was shot down. This follows a statement released by the Russian Defence Ministry that its air traffic control had detected Ukrainian Air Force activity in the area on the same day.

[jberryhill]

1. "This new revelation was posted on GlobalResearch"

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Globalresearch.ca

While many of Globalresearch.ca's articles discuss legitimate humanitarian or environmental concerns, the site has a strong undercurrent of reality warping and bullshit throughout its pages, especially in relation to taking its news from Russia Today, along with other unreliable and/or open sources.

[reorg]

13. actually, not everything that is posted at Globalresearch

has been written for Globalresearch. Not that I have anything against this site - just like you I appreciate much of their work. Whatever objection one may have about their editorial policy, if they carry an article it doesn't automatically make it suspicious.

So, the Malaysian New Straits Times cited Robert Parry (his own site, consortiumnews.com is sometimes not accessible for some reason, perhaps that's why they referred to Global Research). And Robert Parry is citing unnamed "intelligence analysts" he purportedly knows. Do you have any particular reason not to believe he is telling the truth? Do you think he would lie about what his sources are telling him and why? Point being, his suspicions seem more plausible to me than that the US and Ukraine would not be forthcoming if they could somehow actually prove their case.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

40. Robert Parry has been BSing on Ukraine since February.

He's clearly interested in pushing an alternate narrative, facts be damned.

[Purveyor]

2. There was this from RIA Novosti a couple of days ago: MH17 Brought Down by Air-to-Air Missile

MH17 Brought Down by Air-to-Air Missile, Finished Off by 30-mm Cannon, Experts Allege

MOSCOW, August 6 (RIA Novosti) – The Malaysian Boeing plane that crashed in eastern Ukraine in mid-July, could have been brought down by an air-to-air missile and a cannon of the Su-25 fighter that had been “shadowing it,” The New Straits Times reported on Wednesday citing experts.

Experts believe that MH17 flight was shot down by an air-to-air missile fired from the fighter that later finished it off with a burst of 30mm cannon fire, the newspaper has reported.

According to the experts, if this hypothesis is true, it would explain the bullet holes in some sections of MH17’s fuselage.

“Some showed blast patterns consistent with shrapnel from a proximity-fused weapon while some showed the more precise grouping consistent with that of cannon fire. We’re analyzing this,” said one of the sources, adding that a detailed analysis of the pieces of the jetliner is needed to corroborate this emerging theory.

Under this new version, the heat-seeker would have aimed at the hottest part of the aircraft's engines. These claims rule out the previous version that the aircraft had been downed by the BUK missile system (NATO SA-11 'Gadfly').

“A BUK-M1, with its 70 kg head, would have been enough bring down the airliner without the need to go in for a guns kill,” the sources said.

The Sukhoi Su-25 close-air support aircraft (NATO Frogfoot) has a maximum service ceiling of about 25,000 feet (7,620 meters). It has an internally mounted 30mm cannon for anti-armor work, the report said.

“The Su-25 would have been operating at the extreme corner of its performance envelope but it’s entirely possible,” the sources added.

Five days after the deadly crash, the Russian Defense Ministry said that the “shadowing” the MH17 was a Russian-manufactured Sukhoi Su-25 close-air support aircraft operated by the Ukrainian Air Force.

The presence of the Ukrainian combat jet can be confirmed by video shots made by the Rostov monitoring center, said Lt. Gen. Andrei Kartapolov, the head of the Main Operations Directorate of the HQ of Russia’s military forces.

The ministry’ s analysis of MH17 showed that the Russian air traffic control system picked up a deviation in the flight path of 14 kilometers north from the fixed corridor, well inside Ukrainian airspace, while following its assigned flight level of 33,000 feet.

This deviation in the flight path could have been performed only under the instruction of Ukraine’s air traffic controllers. Russian radar nets also picked up “activity” by the Ukrainian Air Force in the area at the time MH17 was airborne.

The air-to-ground transmission tapes between MH17 and Ukrainian air traffic controllers were seized by the Ukrainian Security Service on the day of the shootdown and have not been made available to investigators.

Media reports said earlier that the information provided by the black boxes from the Boeing plane, which have not been so far unveiled to public, said that the aircraft was damaged by multiple fragments of a missile.

http://en.ria.ru/military_news/20140806/191783761/MH17-Brought-Down-by-Air-to-Air-Missile-Finished-Off-by-30-mm.html

[go west young man]

35. The BBC's eyewitness accounts verify the additional fighter jets were by the plane.

Immediately after the BBC posted this report online the BBC took it down, but not before it was cached by observant posters. This information has been covered up by the US media. In the video witnesses openly testify, directly after the incident, that they saw fighter jets in the sky. Even pointing out the direction they flew off in. The Kiev coup government has openly denied this is true.....even though they had flown military jet sorties for 60 straight days previously they say they had no planes in the sky that day.

#t=39

[Duckhunter935]

3. not him again

Robert Parry said “some US intelligence sources had concluded that the rebels and Russia were likely not at fault and that it appears Ukrainian government forces were to blame”.

imagine unnamed sources, that makes it true I am sure. "I read it on the internet".

See you are back from vacation posting more Putin propaganda.

I will be looking forward to the giggle I get when you do the RT postings sure to follow.

Welcome back

[RandySF]

4. I'm not going to call this BS

but I am not ready to jump on it as truth either. I see way too many attempts to above the Russians on here considering what we know about Putin.

[OilemFirchen]

5. "Associated Press reporter Robert Parry"

Circa 1987.

Great reporting!

[Duckhunter935]

6. lets see the video Russia says it has comfirming this

The presence of the Ukrainian combat jet can be confirmed by video shots made by the Rostov monitoring center, said Lt. Gen. Andrei Kartapolov, the head of the Main Operations Directorate of the HQ of Russia’s military forces.

[reorg]

7. they showed these video shots already

in their first press conference. Easy to find on the web.

They also handed their evidence to the investigative team, which also has the flight recorders, whatever the Ukrainians must have in terms of audio recordings (reportedly confiscated, then denied that they were confiscated). It's now been three weeks - what the hell is taking so long and why hasn't anything except the Russian observations been made public to date?

It only took a few days to inform the public about the details of the Algerian plane crash that happened later than the MH17 shootdown/accident.

[Duckhunter935]

8. are you talking about the radar track video?

or raw video showing planes?

The track video is easy to manufacture, We script air defense scenarios all of the time.

[reorg]

11. HE was talking about video of the screens

while they were tracking these planes, yes. Everything they have found is now with the investigative team who can certainly judge for themselves whether it is useful or not.

The US (and Ukraine) made some loudmouthed claims and showed us NOTHING to date. "Sorry, we cannot disclose our sources, just trust us this time, the preponderance of evidence is tilting towards our speculation and we even found something on YouTube, honest!"

[Duckhunter935]

14. Like I said we script those all the time

That is how we train our operators on the Patriot weapon system.

[reorg]

16. well, that is all very interesting

and are you also faking such videos all the time in order to submit these fakes to commissions tasked with investigating airliner crashes?

The article also points out that there were witnesses saying it was more than one airplane. I believe their statement is on the BBC video which is no longer available from the original source, for some reason or other.

[Duckhunter935]

17. We do not

Putin, well............................

[reorg]

19. Do you have any evidence

that "Putin, well ...." (is constantly faking videos of radar observations)?

Or at least that he provided any kind of false proof to the international community in order to, say, invade and bomb a foreign country?

[Duckhunter935]

22. other than the fact he has lied about most things so far about Ukraine

We did not send any troops to Crimea

We do not have any troops on the border of Ukraine

Then he moved some of those nonexistent troops back

But after that he conducted new wargames along the Ukraine border and moved them right back

[reorg]

24. I guess that means "no", but you make some unrelated assumptions

There were always a certain number of troops stationed in Crimea, as far as I know. Don't see any contradictions in what was said here.

Troups along the border? Wargames? Link?

[Duckhunter935]

25. Yes Russia had a signed agreement

With the sovereign state of Ukraine to base troops on bases leased by Ukraine to Russia and hold exercises after coordination with Ukraine. Russia broke this agreement by having their troops leave there bases in breach of the agreements. They further breached the agreement by bringing additional troops in using unmarked vehicles to storm the sovereign state of Ukraine's military bases. They also broke international law by sinking one of there derelict navel vessels blocking the sovereign state of Ukraine's navel ships from leaving port. These vessels were subsequent stormed and taken over by the Russians.

http://thelastgreatstand.com/lgs/2014/03/07/russia-sinks-own-ship-to-block-ukrainian-vessels-official-says/

Russia announced military exercises near the border with Ukraine on Monday in a show of strength as the Ukrainian army recaptured more territory from pro-Russian separatists in the east of the country.

The Russian air force said more than 100 aircraft, including fighter jets and bombers, were taking part in the manoeuvres this week in the central and western military districts.

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2014/08/04/uk-ukraine-crisis-russia-military-idUKKBN0G40CM20140804

[reorg]

26. more unrelated BS

BTW, your spell checker seems to be defective: there" ? "their"

As to the rest, see:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=866178

[Duckhunter935]

27. wow I mispelled a word, how bad of me

I see you have not a word to say on all of the agreements and international laws Russia broke so far with Crimea and why it is so hard to take their word for anything now.

The best thing they could do is move their troops away from the border of Ukraine and ratchet down this tension. They have a history of invading sovereign territory.

See Georgia
See Ukraine
See Moldova

[go west young man]

33. The UN CEIIG Commission found that Georgia initiated the conflict in South Ossetia.

http://www.ceiig.ch/Report.html

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/did-saakashvili-lie-the-west-begins-to-doubt-georgian-leader-a-578273.html

[Duckhunter935]

34. and Georgia never recoognised

the vote of South Ossetia to break away from the main country of Georgia. They were trying to stop the breakaway region and lost when Russia decided to intervene and help South Ossetia.

The same thing Putin is doing now in eastern Ukraine and successfully in Crimea.

[reorg]

37. the precedent was set when Germany and other NATO states

recognized the statelets that broke away from Yugoslavia in the early nineties, in blatant disregard of their constitution. This, the delivery of weapons and other material support, followed by the bombing first of Bosnia and later of Kosovo happened against the vocal protest of Russia. Many warned against taking this course, and the dangerous precedent it set. These warnings were ignored, as were the Russian protests. And so it goes.

That Russia supports some tiny factions in NEIGHBORING countries, a population that is closely connected to Russia in terms of culture, language and economy, is still not the same as the interference in far-away countries by NATO states which has only strategical reasons.

[go west young man]

39. So you don't dispute that Sashkavilli and Georgia initiated the killing?

You deflected instead of responding to that fact.

[jeff47]

9. All we need is an article from RT

[Duckhunter935]

10. A good they were pushing earlier

http://rt.com/news/173672-malaysia-plane-crash-putin/

[reorg]

12. so, if this had been the case

would you have

a) offered your condolences
b) stated "stuff happens" and proceed as usual
c) celebrated
d) proposed to grant the perpetrator a medal?

[Duckhunter935]

15. well now it does not appear to be the case that RT was pushing

They will find missile warhead fragments in the plane and bodies and we will know for sure.

[reorg]

18. I wonder why it takes more than three weeks

to "find" these missile fragments and I wonder how they are going to explain away the apparent bullet holes in the cockpit.

But you did avoid my question: is it because I came closer to the truth the further down you went on the list?

[Duckhunter935]

20. do you know how a missile warhead works?

Clue, thousands of bullets

I have 35 years in the business of air defense operating both US and a few Russian systems

these include
Hawk
Patriot
SA-6
SA-8
SA-7, 14/16
SA-11 Simulator
SA-15 Simulator

[reorg]

21. you should apply to be part of the investigative team

perhaps it wouldn't take such a long time, then.

[Duckhunter935]

23. to get it right takes time

and I plan on letting them do their work.

You give me too much credit I am not trained in Metallurgy or aircraft accident investigation.

[go west young man]

29. Take a look at the Russian Radar telemetry that they put out 4 days after the crash

Last edited Sun Aug 10, 2014, 05:03 PM - Edit history (1)

and tell us what is going on with the airspace. Their presentation looks like one that would becoming of a super power. The US presentation was 2 still black and white photos showing no evidence that a missile was actually launched and a few snippets of social media. Where is the US radar data from the ships in the Black Sea that were conducting exercises that day? Where are the satellite images from the 2 US geo sats overhead?

[Duckhunter935]

30. I did, 20 minutes of scripting and it looks just like that

I will let multiple experts from many countries look at all of the data and present their results. I do not take just one data item and some peoples opinion to make a conclusion. This will take time and more gathering of evidence. Be it bullets or missile warhead fragments and explosives, there will be evidence in the plane or the bodies. The truth will come out, unless almost every country in the world is now part of the vast fascist conspiracy.

Lets get this straight, I am not going to change your mind and you are definitely not going to change my mind.

Go ahead and keep posting, I enjoy the entertainment.

[go west young man]

31. Maybe instead of deflecting....

you could defend the US presentation of photo evidence in comparison. That might bolster your case.

[Duckhunter935]

32. Do not have to

I will just wait for what the physical evidence shows and rely on that.

Eventually the truth will come out.

Have a great day, I have to go do yard work.

[Ichingcarpenter]

28. Here's the deal or my thought on this

Last edited Sun Aug 10, 2014, 03:00 AM - Edit history (1)

The US military/intelligence spy array of satellites across the earth has grown ten fold and ten times more sophisticated since 911. Its seems like the US air force is putting one up every month from Vandenberg since 911.

The satellites are so good they gave an old one to NASA a while back that's is able to see almost as good as Hubble.It was too primitive for them but could read license plates and heat signatures.


No doubt they were observing and monitoring the area

The US could easily show the world who really did what but they don't... why?

It would be a slam dunk to show it to the world just like the missiles in Cuba 52 years ago but they don't.

So again why not?



US is wasting money on too many spy satellites


THE US government is wasting billions of dollars on spy satellites. According to a report released by Congress last week, the US National Reconnaissance Office, which maintains the nation's eyes in the sky, is buying new satellites at a faster rate than necessary.

The NRO says that regular purchases are the only way to maintain the nation's satellite-building expertise. The Congress report questions this assumption, arguing that any saving in efficiency through increased expertise is outstripped by the cost of launching extra satellites.

We already know the NRO has excess satellites, thanks to its surprise donation in 2012. The spy agency gave NASA parts for two Hubble-quality telescopes that it had lying around. NASA is still deciding how to use the scopes, but to avoid any suspicion of spying will not point them at Earth.

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg22329812.300-us-is-wasting-money-on-too-many-spy-satellites.html#.U-ausI_SHAU.reddit

[Purveyor]

36. Excellent question indeed... Go figure. eom

[go west young man]

38. This is where the investigation currently stands.

A few questions are answered here at Der Spiegel which is normally in the bag for US interests, however, in this case they seem to give a relatively partial synopsis of the current state of the investigation and have toned their anti-Russia rhetoric way down...which may be a sign things are not panning out with the EUSA's plan. They state that there is no proof that it was a missile fired by rebels that brought the plane down. I put this one through microsoft translator.

http://www.spiegel.de/panorama/mh17-fakten-zu-flugschreiber-bergungsmission-schuldfrage-a-984937.html

http://www.microsofttranslator.com/bv.aspx?from=de&to=en&a=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.spiegel.de%2Fpanorama%2Fmh17-fakten-zu-flugschreiber-bergungsmission-schuldfrage-a-984937.html

[KoKo]

41. K&R...We Need more InFo...I remember when "Aluminum Tubes, Yellow Cake from Niger...were why

we were going to War With Iraq.

Don't want to fall for ANOTHER HOAX where we are at WAR FOREVER!

Thanks for keeping on this. Many of us who were posting Ambassador Joe Wilsons Refutes of "Yellow Cake from Niger" here on DU were TRASHED CONSTANTLY.....Until "WE" were PROVEN CORRECT.

We know enough not to leave "Investigation" up to the PTB who can SPIN silk threads out of Fodder..just to keep their Wars Going on.

SO...we keep reading...and reading and we REFUSE to be SUCKERS AGAIN.

Nuff said......

[KoKo]

42. With so much USA Surveillance Power...WHERE are the missing pieces?

So much money and so little result?