You still haven’t addressed my last post to you. Your assertion that the rebels’ conversation uploaded to Youtube was pre-recorded based on the encoding date on Youtube is baseless.

The recording was examined in Russia and found to be a succession of multiple edits.

http://rt.com/op-edge/174336-downing-flight-mh17-objectivity/

According to an expert sound and voice analyst who studied the recorded conversation, the audio file contained indications that suggested the dialog was not authentic, but was assembled from various other audio fragments. This recording should be subjected to wider scrutiny to determine whether other audio experts reach the same conclusions.

Yes it’s RT but then other news agencies have biases too.

You should question why this was the first bit of tapped phone conversation in the whole war that the Ukrainian government made public. Who are the people in the conversation? Etc.

I guess it’s probably my own feelings, but when almost 300 people die the jokes just are not funny.

Ummm. Perhaps this thread should be closed and re-opened when the investigation reaches a definitive conclusion. At the moment all there is is doubt and very little definitive evidence. There are several sides to this downing both in terms of who shot it down, what it was shot down with and why it was redirected over a conflict zone in the first place.

Until the investigation takes place, all we’ll likely get is conspiracy theories and conspiracy theories posing as news reports.

Too much effort when a MiG-29 could do the job.

I guess it depends whether it was an Su-25 or not. The details on the identification process are a little sketchy. Do we actually know what altitude the fighter was tracked at?

Not if the airliner is flying at 10000 metres, as MH-17 was. According to Sukhoi (you can check their site – easily found), the ceiling of a clean Su-25 is 7000 metres. Its top speed – again clean – is slightly slower than the normal cruise speed of a 777, i.e. MH17s speed at the time.

It’s been reported by Russian sources that Russian Wikipedia was edited (story’s online, easily found) from central Moscow IP addresses after the first Russian claim about a Su-25 to show a higher ceiling. Looks like rather crude lying to try to back up something said by a technically ignorant propagandist.

It seems unlikely, it would have to have been head on.

Some variants of the Su-25 (Su-25T) do carry the R-73 and K-13 though. An R-60 or K-13 could potentially have been fired head-on from just below. Any laser guided AGM will also just track its laser. Perhaps unlikely but not impossible.

Agreed Kovy,interesting picture because for the first time we can clearly see this yellow banner with telephone number( Stroy-Bud Montage construction company located in Donetsk).We will try to geolocate it as once again Lukos is to lazy and (or ) incompetent to do it himself. 😉

Why not just try and geolocate the missile launch?

This Buk has a cover on. Last time you thought a Buk without a cover was the guilty party, make your mind up.

If you actually had a brain you’d question why such a potentially crucial sighting has only appeared 8 days after it was taken. That on top of your own claim that it’s not where they say it is (Snijne) should raise serious doubts.

Hi, we’re journalists and our jobs depend on providing up-to-date information. We have a huge story and a potentially crucial photo so….. we’ll give it a week or so before releasing it.;)

[ATTACH=CONFIG]230659[/ATTACH]

http://forum.keypublishing.com/showthread.php?131240-MH17-Versus-Iran-Air-655&p=2156162#post2156162

Wrong. It was 20 km away when the missiles were fired.

But yes, if the sky was clear they should have been able to see it.

If the sky was clear, why was it diverted?

He has all the evidence. Only he won’t show it 😉

Nic

Absolutely. I have detailed footage of CNN’s soul, showing it to be black as soot but it’s classified and I can’t show it. I have similar information proving MH17 was taken down by a Black Water operative on a snow-board but again it’s classified.

“Would you prefer that I didn’t tell you about it if I can’t prove it.”

1:39

I’d have answered, “Yes. Prove it or STFU.”