Citat:
Som tidigare påpekats idag, de ryska myndigheterna erkänner nu att det var en BUK-robot som träffade MH17. Men den var såklart avfyrad av Ukraina, hävdar man istället.
http://www.novayagazeta.ru/inquests/68332.html
Då kan vi alltså avskriva alla jävla lögner om ukrainska flygplan och annat skit som ryska myndigheter spridit tidigare och som Vedhuggare, Fuckuto, Naturtvål och andra nyttiga idioter farit med i tråden.
Ni ljög och spred den ryska propagandan som de femtekolonnare ni är.
Vad har ni att säga om de nya uppgifterna? Vilka lögner ska ni nu komma med?
Ni blev tagna med skägget i brevlådan igen.
http://www.novayagazeta.ru/inquests/68332.html
Då kan vi alltså avskriva alla jävla lögner om ukrainska flygplan och annat skit som ryska myndigheter spridit tidigare och som Vedhuggare, Fuckuto, Naturtvål och andra nyttiga idioter farit med i tråden.
Ni ljög och spred den ryska propagandan som de femtekolonnare ni är.
Vad har ni att säga om de nya uppgifterna? Vilka lögner ska ni nu komma med?
Ni blev tagna med skägget i brevlådan igen.
På ett annat forum så bad jag om kommentarer till artikeln
Detta är en kommentar
Citat:
It seems to be an update of the Russian Society of Engineers assessment of MH17. It is their original story, updated with the small rusty piece reportedly found by Dutch photo-journalist Joern Akkermans, and images of the right side of the cockpit being lifted a few months ago, the first time anyone’s seen that side of the cockpit.
Oddly enough, while that side of the cockpit shows NO bullet holes, they still show graphics indicating a BUK being shot from the right side of the plane.
To recap., this institute’s theory is that it was a Ukrainian BUK, not an air to air missile. This is at odds with Russian military radar images “hinting” at an SU-25 involvement (or t least one being suspiciously in the vicinity).
As it is not possible to prove the separatists did it, it is not possible to show it was done with a Russian-owned BUK. There is even less evidence of Russian Federation military being involved.
Therefore there will never be an official determination of who did it, as the other suspects are involved in the investigation and have veto rights over the final report. Additionally there are political reasons for The Netherlands to not pin blame on the Ukraine, plus little items of payoff like their having recently been given back some 120 tons of their gold that had been held by the US.
Oddly enough, while that side of the cockpit shows NO bullet holes, they still show graphics indicating a BUK being shot from the right side of the plane.
To recap., this institute’s theory is that it was a Ukrainian BUK, not an air to air missile. This is at odds with Russian military radar images “hinting” at an SU-25 involvement (or t least one being suspiciously in the vicinity).
As it is not possible to prove the separatists did it, it is not possible to show it was done with a Russian-owned BUK. There is even less evidence of Russian Federation military being involved.
Therefore there will never be an official determination of who did it, as the other suspects are involved in the investigation and have veto rights over the final report. Additionally there are political reasons for The Netherlands to not pin blame on the Ukraine, plus little items of payoff like their having recently been given back some 120 tons of their gold that had been held by the US.
Uppgifterna är alltså inte nya som jag förstår det utan uppdaterade
__________________
Senast redigerad av micks 2015-05-06 kl. 14:01.
Senast redigerad av micks 2015-05-06 kl. 14:01.
