Russian govt and RT.com VALIDATE crucial US claim re: MH17

[geek tragedy]

Last edited Mon Jul 21, 2014, 05:28 PM - Edit history (1)

From the US assessement re MH17.

At the time that flight MH17 dropped out of contact, we detected a surface-to-air missile (SAM) launch from a separatist-controlled area in southeastern Ukraine. We believe this missile was an SA-11.

Intercepts of separatist communications posted on YouTube by the Ukrainian government indicate the separatists were in possession of a SA-11 system as early as Monday July 14th. In the intercepts, the separatists made repeated references to having and repositioning Buk (SA-11) systems.

http://ukraine.usembassy.gov/statements/asmt-07192014.html

Today, the Russians put on a dog and pony show they thought shifted the blame to Ukraine. But, they made one startling claim/admission.

Lt. Gen. Makushev also showed satellite photos allegedly portraying several Buk ground-to-air missile systems in the area close to where the plane crashed. The systems, he argued, could only belong to the Ukrainian military. The Buks were spotted in Luhansk and Donetsk by Russians, Lt. Gen. Kartapolov said, in the days leading up to the crash.

http://online.wsj.com/articles/russia-presents-its-account-of-malaysia-airlines-flight-17-crash-1405952441

In other words, the Russians showed satellite photos showing Buk missile systems in rebel-controlled territory--the crash site, Luhansk, and Donetsk are all under rebel control.

Even the hacks at rt.com couldn't overlook this:

The question that has to be answered is why the missile system appeared in the area controlled by the local militia forces shortly before the catastrophe, he stated.

http://rt.com/news/174412-malaysia-plane-russia-ukraine/



The Russians try to spin this by claiming these couldn't have been rebels operating those missile systems, even though those positions were inside territory controlled by the rebels and were of zero military use to the Ukrainian military. One would have to believe that the Ukrainian military send small units without protection deep into rebel territory in order to transport missiles that could only shoot down Ukraine's own jets.

Very hard to argue against the rebels being the culprits. One wonders why the Russians released those photos.

[Spider Jerusalem]

1. Yeah, Ukrainian deployment of SAM batteries makes zero sense...

considering that the rebels don't have any aircraft.

[geek tragedy]

3. Behind rebel lines at grave risk to the troops transporting them, no less nt

[jakeXT]

29. Maybe they like to drive them around or they are scared from reports about Russian planes

downing their jets



http://www.montrealgazette.com/news/Ukrainian+government+forces+maneuver+antiaircraft+missile+launchers+they+transported+north+west+from+Slavyansk+eastern+Ukraine+Friday+July+2014+Photo+Dmitry+Lovetsky/10004193/story.html

The Ukrainian National Security and Defense Council (NSDC) has said that a Russian military aircraft launched a missile strike against a Su-25 aircraft of the Ukrainian Armed Forces over Ukrainian territory on Wednesday, July 16.
http://www.kyivpost.com/content/ukraine/russian-military-plane-shot-down-ukrainian-su-25-aircraft-in-ukraine-356422.html

[Spider Jerusalem]

32. And?

"transported northwest from Slavyansk". 90 miles to the northeast of Snizhe where a supposedly rebel-controlled Buk launcher was spotted, and where the rocket that brought down the plane was fired (the crash site is in the same area). So the fact that Ukrainian forces were transporting a launcher from a location 90 miles away, to somewhere in the opposite direction? Is not really what one could call strong evidence of Ukrainian deployment of anti-air assets in rebel-controlled territory, nor is it any kind of evidence in support of the Russian argument that it was a Ukrainian and not rebel launcher that brought down MH17.

[jakeXT]

33. That is one picture from July 4th, your statement was that it makes zero sense to deploy SAMs

Is a claim by the Defense Ministry from July 16th, the day before MH17 fell out of the sky , that Russian planes allegedly attacked Ukrainian planes enough of a reason?

[Wait Wut]

2. Nice catch.

Thanks for this.

[JackRiddler]

4. "One wonders why the Russians released those photos."

Because they had them?

So mean of those Russians, spoiling your expectations.

[geek tragedy]

5. Well, they did lie when they said it was impossible

for the rebels to be the ones in possession of those missiles.

I mean, come on. Why provide evidence that verifies what the US is saying and then destroy their own credibility by lying about it?

[SidDithers]

6. But Robert Parry's hairdresser knows a guy...

who used Google Earth to figure out that it was drunken Ukrainian soldiers.

What to believe?

Sid

[geek tragedy]

8. obviously they were trying to shoot down Putin's plane

because it had the same colors as MH17.

That actually got argued here.

[Cha]

14. So tired of the freaking CTs who twist themselves into pretzels blaming America

first.

[William769]

7. And people wonder why we are not buying the propaganda shit thrown at us.

[Cha]

15. Because we're "considering the source". :(

[William769]

17. And that bull sure has a lot coming out his back end.

[Cha]

24. Yeah, it's not our fault we were

gifted with accelerated built in bullshit detectors.

[William769]

25. I like to use this one.

[Cha]

28. Rofl! Too funny!

[redqueen]

9. But but but Robert Parry! The patriot/journalist extraordinaire!

[geek tragedy]

11. I think we should wait until Parry lets us know what brand of beer bottles

were at the scene before we rush to judgment . . .

[freshwest]

34. Not beer! Nor drunken Ukrainians, according to this video:

Definitely vodka bottles. Poor kid.

[freshwest]

35. Oh, wait, not so fast. It's probably beer. This is also sad:

[geek tragedy]

36. somebody is making money off that nt

[freshwest]

37. Millions, it says, just on a few of the events. And those children crying. Generations lost.

[Cha]

19. Who unfortunately is so full of shit sometimes it causes his

to contract.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

10. That's good.

One piece of hard evidence that is confirmed. Time to drill down on the rest.

[renegade000]

12. we should also remember

a fact that seems to be forgotten. many ukrainian soldiers in eastern ukraine defected to the separatist side: http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2014/04/ukraines-offensive-falters-as-elite-units-defect-to-pro-russia-side/
taking with them uniforms, equipment, etc.

at this point arguments that rely on what people are wearing/what people are using are pretty worthless.
the location of the launch point is more telling. i doubt unknown soldiers driving around a highly-valuable mobile SAM-battery would have not aroused the attentions of the rebel forces. i mean, if we really want to get deep into CT speculation, a plausible CT could be that some of the defectors were not really defectors, but rather undercover double-agents that were waiting to basically pull something that would embarrass the separatists/Russia. hard to prove/disprove that without a lot more detailed intelligence about the people responsible.

[Igel]

13. No, it doesn't.

The claim is that the Ukr Buk systems are outside of Donets'k. The Ukr forces are within a mile of two of both Luhansk and Donets'k. The Russian DefMin has been claiming something like 27 Ukr Buk-M1 systems, and even claimed to have intercepted chatter between two showing that they were linked and active at the time the plane was shot down.

The second plane being a Sukhoi isn't new, either. It's the rebel's claim. They even claim they shot one down. Check the timing, though: the Ukr claim is that one was shot and hurt, but were out of the area before the Malaysian plane was hit. They've gotten facts wrong before, but if two were in the air and one was hit you have a good excuse for the 2nd Sukhoi's climb above 5k.

The claim of the missile fire, though, makes the Sukhoi claim pretty pointless. They're just trying to deflect any blame anywhere. Muddy the waters enough to figure out how to get through this shitstorm.

This is the only evidence that the Ukr had any Buks in operation, it's not clear that they would have had the right kind in operation. A later claim is that the Russians never gave the rebels a Buk-4. What they really need to look for in the rubble is something specific about the shrapnel damage to the plane, location of the shapnel strikes, and anything left from the missile.

Ukr press had reports that "experts" (always taken with some margarita salt and preferably the margarita) looking at photos of the wreckage IDed certain portions of the plane's bottom near a cargo bay that "clearly" showed shrapnel marks on the paint and shrapnel damage to the metal.

SA-11 "Buk" missiles use shrapnel warheads, it seems. So do most air-to-air missiles, apparently (sorry, Hollywood.)

[geek tragedy]

16. according to the WSJ, Russians said the missiles were inside Luhansk and Dotesk

as well as the launch area--the latter being the most important obviously.

I don't see how placing a Buk in the vicinity of the crash site isn't incredibly incriminating towards the rebels.

Even rt.com acknowledged this:

The question that has to be answered is why the missile system appeared in the area controlled by the local militia forces shortly before the catastrophe, he stated.

http://rt.com/news/174412-malaysia-plane-russia-ukraine/

[conservaphobe]

18. I don't know why the fuck some people are pretending the jury is still out.

It was pretty much concluded the next fucking day.

What kind of rock do you live under or how dense do you have to be to not know that?

Jesus Christ, get on the same page with the rest of us.

[Cha]

20. Seemingly because they have to much invested in Russia Good/USA BAD.

[conservaphobe]

21. That is the conclusion I've come to as well. nt

[jeff47]

23. They want to believe that the world is ruled by a massive neocon conspiracy

so they grab on to anything that can be spun as such.

The plane? It's part of the conspiracy so that the US invades Ukraine.

Syria? It's part of the conspiracy so that the US invades Syria....oh wait, we didn't.....but that's because we caught the conspirators before they could invade!!!!

Every event in the world must be passed through the "massive neocon conspiracy" filter first.

[Cha]

22. Thank you this news, geek. Shame on Russia trying to slither out.

"But in Russia, television—most of it owned or controlled by the Kremlin—is trying to muddy the water with various experts who insist that there is no way that an SA-11 missile system could possibly have downed a plane flying that high. And, mind you, this is not part of a larger debate of could they, or couldn’t they; this is all of Russian television and state-friendly papers pushing one line: the pro-Russian separatists we’ve been supporting all these months couldn’t have done this. Watching some of these Russian newscasts, one comes away with the impression of a desperate defense attorney scrounging for experts and angles, or a bad kid caught red-handed by the principal, trying to twist his way out of a situation in which he has no chance."

sufrommich http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5268574

[geek tragedy]

30. I mean, who do they think they're kidding?

"Well, yes, the missile systems were exactly of the kind the Americans said were there, and they were exactly where the Americans said they were, but that just means the Americans are lying."

[Cha]

31. They're "kidding" the Russians at home and the hate America first crowd.. the hate blinds

them to the evidence.

[joshcryer]

26. Powell-esque moment. They tried to claim an Su-25 did it.

Then some idiots edited the Wikipedia page because the Su-25 can't even operate at that altitude.

[geek tragedy]

27. Clown show. nt