Thanks for showing this Dee. It is a great pity the msm do not show a similarly responsible attitude, but instead uncritically report the blathering of Abbott, Bishop et al in their criticism of Russia. It seems that any notion of critical thinking let alone investigative reporting is totally foreign to them. The families of the victims are clearly being sacrificed on the altar of political gamesmanship.
Awe Jame, give our freedom loving honest Chanel 9 ’60 minutes’ a chance,
They and their shock jocks will be on to this in a jiffy, demanding release to the relatives of their loved one and even allow an independant autopsy of ‘Putin’s victim’?
Perhaps someone will update channel 9 so that it may be credible.
Fat chance.
Not that Dee lets up on The Foreign Minister. And no, Ned, I won’t be “coming round to it.” I am in pugilist mode. I am nearly Ned-like in my pugilism. You haven’t seen the best of me yet.
This documentary is valuable in that it presents some alternative aspects of the MH17 tragedy issues that are invisible in CNN, BBC or our own “Sixty Minutes” media.
Just as the Western propaganda machinery ignore the information that does not fit their “official” narrative, so to does RT which is the equivalent propaganda machinery of the Russian Government.
The Belliingcat Report is invisible.
This documentary is no more honest than the “Sixty Minutes” report but may even be classified as a more subtle propaganda effort by building the message around very personal stories which were captivating.
The eyewitness accounts incorporated in the story are highly problematic. On a clear day a cruising airline is only visible by it’s contrail when atmospheric conditions are suitable.
The MH17 airline split into at least several sections as it fell to the earth which from a distance could be difficult to distinguish from another aircraft. A BUK missile, from a distance, could be mistaken for an approaching military jet.
The RT report downplayed the spread of the wreckage but the facts have been documented, several major wreckage fields are in evidence.
The RT report does include consideration of the very important broader issue of who is responsible when passenger airlines fly over war zones.
The criminal investigation of MH17 will include an incredibly broad range of issues and I am eager to discover just how this very critically sensitive investigation develops and exactly what political boundaries are finally negotiated.
There are many unanswered questions and it is likely some of these will remain controversial well into the future.
The dead victims of MH17 can not be brought back to life and we hope they do not become the catalyst for even greater senseless tragic loss of life and living opportunities.
It is already factually supportable that Russia has become tangled in a tragedy that was not directly of their making even if it was their BUK weapon that accidentally destroyed a civilian airliner, MH17.
Truth is always secondary in time of war. Whatever is necessary to survive becomes preeminent.
Under any objective judgement, dominant Western interests are at war with Russia.
Christopher, you raise some good points, most of which have been addressed in the literature on the shoot down. I would just add the point that if you want to be taken seriously you should not be relying on the Bellingcat report for anything.
James, I agree the Bellingcat Report may not be taken on face value but I disagree with a stance that it should be dismissed.
This recent RT Cross Talk is a useful fresh discussion on the MH17 tragedy with an historical contextual example I think is very relevant, and “interesting”, in it’s inclusion.
Peter Lavelle led Ray McGovern at 12.20 into the KAL 007 Soviet Fighter shoot down in 1983 with an emphasis on the “deliberate” charge and the importance of full context.
Evidence of the scripted nature of media as we all understand it, functioning to advance a version of reality depending on the sponsors.
RT is a mouthpiece for the “official” Russian narrative, so not unexpectedly, the discussion continues to point suspicion at Kiev which in many respects is of course very valid.
The flight path adjustment issue was raised as needing answers, who could disagree with that?
The “social media” open source evidence is belittled but it must be noted no person on the panel is taking any type of genuine critical view opposed to the “Russian view”.
Never the less, it is a good discussion, with similar value and properties as the “MH17 A Year Without Truth” because it presents information aspects and thinking calculations that are missing in our Western media.
Has someone (maybe Christopher?) got the time to do this for us:
List each of the contending explanations for the crash (along with the evidence that its supporters allege), and show existing critcism of that explanation from outsiders. Then we can compare.
I admit to being prejudiced. Australia and three other countries agreed to carry out an invesigation and not release it unless all four “liked” it. Kinda goes against the scientific method.
Kinda tells me that the crash was a typical false flag. But I admit that is a prejudice. Pre-judice.
I looked at the Bellingcat report and thogh it seems quite comprehensive – it all doesn’t quite add up. I think you could compare this with the analysis of the crime scene
FOR EXAMPLE:
1. If you had a murder in a suburban house – the witnesses would tell you what they saw and heard – which is confusing.
2. The Bellingcat report provides evidence on where the knife was bought and found and the blood splatter.
It does NOT provide fingerprint analysis or a recording of the phone….
3 – The Bellingcat report provides nothing of the forensic analysis of the wreckage, the satelite data, the tower transcripts etc etc…
We don’t quite know why this is all so secretive.
Pardon me if I sound crass, but did MH17 have a human pilot? During the last 3 months of 1958 I was at Woomera and one day watched a Jindivik missile go after an obsolete pilotless Meteor jet fighter. It missed, but the point being is they can fly planes without a human pilot. Technology has come on a bit since those days. Just a thought.
Kevin, we’ve had some “crass” on this website but it ain’t you.
Did you know that the US’s military research DARPA openly sponsored a contest for a long-run car drive by remote control?
I’ve sometimes thought the cargo plane that flew into the refugees’ apartment building in Amsterdam was pilotless.
Mary Gregory has reported at least one hit-and-run driver in New York (Brooklyn, from memory) who weren’t no human.
I have suspicions of a similar event in South Australia about 10 yrs ago but i dont dare bring it up. (I mean car, not plane.)
Your info is welcome here. We are “collectors”. Thanks.
The Jindivik was a pilotless aircraft used in the late 50’s to tow targets.
Developed in Australia and of course our pollies let others carry on with development to useful drones used to murder heaps of anonymous people.
There is a Jindivik sleeping on the front lawn at the Williamstown airbase museum.
Before 1958 (?) I saw a newsreel of one flying through a large hole in a sheet tethered vertically to the ground.
They were the days when Australia had potential.
I also recall that a couple of them were sent to the US. We have been betrayed ever since.
Every time I asked a question during my time at Woomera, the answer was always the same. If you’re going to live and work at Woomera, don’ t ask questions. I wasn’t told they were letting off atom bombs approx. 300 miles west of there. I’ve certainly learned a thing or two about skin cancers since then. From something I was reading last year the Woomera cemetery has something like 120 residents, half of which are babies.
Back to MH17 . The video I’ve seen, torn apart bodies everywhere, no blood, mostly Asian faces and drenched in formalin. Dreadful smell. Who would want to pilot a plane full of that.
‘Highly graphic rarely seen video of MH – 17’
Mary, I just checked, It’s still there. Regarding the formalin, the two women in the video explain it. I much prefer this to the Abbott and the Bishop’s views on it. Anyone who cares to watch it can make up their own mind.
John, this is a very important article. It is a measure of the abysmal quality of our mainstream reporting that the information about the Dutch and Australian autopsies is not reported at all. How much easier it is to simply repeat the official BS ad nauseum than to actually look at the evidence and draw some conclusions.
Thanks for showing this Dee. It is a great pity the msm do not show a similarly responsible attitude, but instead uncritically report the blathering of Abbott, Bishop et al in their criticism of Russia. It seems that any notion of critical thinking let alone investigative reporting is totally foreign to them. The families of the victims are clearly being sacrificed on the altar of political gamesmanship.
Awe Jame, give our freedom loving honest Chanel 9 ’60 minutes’ a chance,
They and their shock jocks will be on to this in a jiffy, demanding release to the relatives of their loved one and even allow an independant autopsy of ‘Putin’s victim’?
Perhaps someone will update channel 9 so that it may be credible.
Fat chance.
In our book, “Truth in Journalism,” Dee bore down on two media people for their disloyalty to Oz re the MH17 crash. Here is one:
http://gumshoenews.com/2014/07/29/disgraceful-reporting/
Not that Dee lets up on The Foreign Minister. And no, Ned, I won’t be “coming round to it.” I am in pugilist mode. I am nearly Ned-like in my pugilism. You haven’t seen the best of me yet.
Better duck FM Julie dear, Mary has a deft left hook. She can pick a scam at two paces and is within range.
I am sick of the lies, sick of the lies, sick of the lies.
You will get use to them, that is the plan being implemented via the corporate mass media for the psychotic fascist control killer freaks.
This documentary is valuable in that it presents some alternative aspects of the MH17 tragedy issues that are invisible in CNN, BBC or our own “Sixty Minutes” media.
Just as the Western propaganda machinery ignore the information that does not fit their “official” narrative, so to does RT which is the equivalent propaganda machinery of the Russian Government.
The Belliingcat Report is invisible.
This documentary is no more honest than the “Sixty Minutes” report but may even be classified as a more subtle propaganda effort by building the message around very personal stories which were captivating.
The eyewitness accounts incorporated in the story are highly problematic. On a clear day a cruising airline is only visible by it’s contrail when atmospheric conditions are suitable.
The MH17 airline split into at least several sections as it fell to the earth which from a distance could be difficult to distinguish from another aircraft. A BUK missile, from a distance, could be mistaken for an approaching military jet.
The RT report downplayed the spread of the wreckage but the facts have been documented, several major wreckage fields are in evidence.
The RT report does include consideration of the very important broader issue of who is responsible when passenger airlines fly over war zones.
The criminal investigation of MH17 will include an incredibly broad range of issues and I am eager to discover just how this very critically sensitive investigation develops and exactly what political boundaries are finally negotiated.
There are many unanswered questions and it is likely some of these will remain controversial well into the future.
The dead victims of MH17 can not be brought back to life and we hope they do not become the catalyst for even greater senseless tragic loss of life and living opportunities.
It is already factually supportable that Russia has become tangled in a tragedy that was not directly of their making even if it was their BUK weapon that accidentally destroyed a civilian airliner, MH17.
Truth is always secondary in time of war. Whatever is necessary to survive becomes preeminent.
Under any objective judgement, dominant Western interests are at war with Russia.
Christopher, you raise some good points, most of which have been addressed in the literature on the shoot down. I would just add the point that if you want to be taken seriously you should not be relying on the Bellingcat report for anything.
James, I agree the Bellingcat Report may not be taken on face value but I disagree with a stance that it should be dismissed.
This recent RT Cross Talk is a useful fresh discussion on the MH17 tragedy with an historical contextual example I think is very relevant, and “interesting”, in it’s inclusion.
Peter Lavelle led Ray McGovern at 12.20 into the KAL 007 Soviet Fighter shoot down in 1983 with an emphasis on the “deliberate” charge and the importance of full context.
Evidence of the scripted nature of media as we all understand it, functioning to advance a version of reality depending on the sponsors.
RT is a mouthpiece for the “official” Russian narrative, so not unexpectedly, the discussion continues to point suspicion at Kiev which in many respects is of course very valid.
The flight path adjustment issue was raised as needing answers, who could disagree with that?
The “social media” open source evidence is belittled but it must be noted no person on the panel is taking any type of genuine critical view opposed to the “Russian view”.
Never the less, it is a good discussion, with similar value and properties as the “MH17 A Year Without Truth” because it presents information aspects and thinking calculations that are missing in our Western media.
Has someone (maybe Christopher?) got the time to do this for us:
List each of the contending explanations for the crash (along with the evidence that its supporters allege), and show existing critcism of that explanation from outsiders. Then we can compare.
I admit to being prejudiced. Australia and three other countries agreed to carry out an invesigation and not release it unless all four “liked” it. Kinda goes against the scientific method.
Kinda tells me that the crash was a typical false flag. But I admit that is a prejudice. Pre-judice.
Say, where’s the judice on this?
I looked at the Bellingcat report and thogh it seems quite comprehensive – it all doesn’t quite add up. I think you could compare this with the analysis of the crime scene
FOR EXAMPLE:
1. If you had a murder in a suburban house – the witnesses would tell you what they saw and heard – which is confusing.
2. The Bellingcat report provides evidence on where the knife was bought and found and the blood splatter.
It does NOT provide fingerprint analysis or a recording of the phone….
3 – The Bellingcat report provides nothing of the forensic analysis of the wreckage, the satelite data, the tower transcripts etc etc…
We don’t quite know why this is all so secretive.
Pardon me if I sound crass, but did MH17 have a human pilot? During the last 3 months of 1958 I was at Woomera and one day watched a Jindivik missile go after an obsolete pilotless Meteor jet fighter. It missed, but the point being is they can fly planes without a human pilot. Technology has come on a bit since those days. Just a thought.
Kevin, we’ve had some “crass” on this website but it ain’t you.
Did you know that the US’s military research DARPA openly sponsored a contest for a long-run car drive by remote control?
I’ve sometimes thought the cargo plane that flew into the refugees’ apartment building in Amsterdam was pilotless.
Mary Gregory has reported at least one hit-and-run driver in New York (Brooklyn, from memory) who weren’t no human.
I have suspicions of a similar event in South Australia about 10 yrs ago but i dont dare bring it up. (I mean car, not plane.)
Your info is welcome here. We are “collectors”. Thanks.
The Jindivik was a pilotless aircraft used in the late 50’s to tow targets.
Developed in Australia and of course our pollies let others carry on with development to useful drones used to murder heaps of anonymous people.
There is a Jindivik sleeping on the front lawn at the Williamstown airbase museum.
Before 1958 (?) I saw a newsreel of one flying through a large hole in a sheet tethered vertically to the ground.
They were the days when Australia had potential.
I also recall that a couple of them were sent to the US. We have been betrayed ever since.
Every time I asked a question during my time at Woomera, the answer was always the same. If you’re going to live and work at Woomera, don’ t ask questions. I wasn’t told they were letting off atom bombs approx. 300 miles west of there. I’ve certainly learned a thing or two about skin cancers since then. From something I was reading last year the Woomera cemetery has something like 120 residents, half of which are babies.
Back to MH17 . The video I’ve seen, torn apart bodies everywhere, no blood, mostly Asian faces and drenched in formalin. Dreadful smell. Who would want to pilot a plane full of that.
Which video is that? and how can you tell they are drenched in formalin?
‘Highly graphic rarely seen video of MH – 17’
Mary, I just checked, It’s still there. Regarding the formalin, the two women in the video explain it. I much prefer this to the Abbott and the Bishop’s views on it. Anyone who cares to watch it can make up their own mind.
I hope I haven’t put anyone off their dinner.
Has anyone seen this.
http://russia-insider.com/en/politics/breaking-scoop-mh17-dutch-prepare-missile-attack-moscow/ri9711
John, this is a very important article. It is a measure of the abysmal quality of our mainstream reporting that the information about the Dutch and Australian autopsies is not reported at all. How much easier it is to simply repeat the official BS ad nauseum than to actually look at the evidence and draw some conclusions.