The U.S. court of Girkin ordered to pay $400 million to relatives of MH17 victims

Quag · Feb 4, 2018

Fledermaus said:
You floated the idea a SU-25 did the deed.

Cannon fire that did not do what 30MM combat loads do.

And you never explained how a low ceiling ( 23,000 feet) SU-25 intercepted a 33,000 foot MH-17 and hit it from above.

You cant expect an aviation expert and "flight instructor" Like HD to have any clue about service ceilings of aircraft. I mean come on, that's voodoo science stuff like ground effect.

Peter King · Feb 4, 2018

Thoreau72 said:
It's been presented here before Maus, but you and Peter were in denial then, and you're in denial now.

Cannon fire all through the cockpit section, one of those rounds making a beautiful scribe across the top surface of the outboard left wind, testimony about climbing jets told by peasants on the ground and quickly taken down by BBC, the tweets of the Spanish controller who quickly vanished, no explanation from Kiev as to why altitude and routing were changed once the flight entered Ukrainian airspace.

All those things, but you're in denial, and that's not a river in Egypt. :lol:

And you told untruths then and keep telling fake stories based on imaginary "evidence" that purely lives inside the brains of the idiot tin foil hat fraternity that got their "evidence" through the fillings in their teeth.

Sorry, but there was no cannon fire, that is what one calls lies.

Just because you are so gullible that you believe in nonsense does not mean that we in the real world are vulnerable to the same fantasy free "facts" that you keep bringing up.

And the forensic experts have concluded beyond reasonable doubt that a BUK missile brought down the plane, but you believe in your nonsense, we however believe in verifiable facts. The fight altitude was also extensively addressed but again, you keep believing in nonsense, the investigators studied actual evidence and guess what, that makes them believable and prove your claims are total and utter nonsense.

SirGareth · Feb 4, 2018

Peter King said:
T they have plenty to do with cases this century.

You forgot the better rebuttal, the US Military are not subject to the ICC and neither are US citizens while residing in the USA. If one travels abroad as a civilian then one takes his chances with the local laws.

Thoreau72 · Feb 5, 2018

Peter King said:
And you told untruths then and keep telling fake stories based on imaginary "evidence" that purely lives inside the brains of the idiot tin foil hat fraternity that got their "evidence" through the fillings in their teeth.

Sorry, but there was no cannon fire, that is what one calls lies.

Just because you are so gullible that you believe in nonsense does not mean that we in the real world are vulnerable to the same fantasy free "facts" that you keep bringing up.

And the forensic experts have concluded beyond reasonable doubt that a BUK missile brought down the plane, but you believe in your nonsense, we however believe in verifiable facts. The fight altitude was also extensively addressed but again, you keep believing in nonsense, the investigators studied actual evidence and guess what, that makes them believable and prove your claims are total and utter nonsense.

There was cannon fire Peter. Before they were quickly removed from the internet by people with an agenda, the photos clearly showed the marks of cannon fire on the fuselage and wings. Assuming, of course, that one knows what cannon fire marks look like. If one needs to be told that by authority figures, well.....

Peter King · Feb 5, 2018

Thoreau72 said:
There was cannon fire Peter. Before they were quickly removed from the internet by people with an agenda, the photos clearly showed the marks of cannon fire on the fuselage and wings. Assuming, of course, that one knows what cannon fire marks look like. If one needs to be told that by authority figures, well.....

Nope, there was not, all the damage was from a rocket/missile of the BUK variety. And that information has been gathered from actual investigation of the plane wreckage.

I do not know what was removed from the internet but most likely it was removed because people found out their information was FAKE!! Not because of some conspiracy or agenda of any kind.

No evidence of cannon fire was on the fuselage of the plane, you may not want to believe it but you don't know anything about such things and especially not about the evidence found on this plane. The experts of the Joint investigation team and of the relevant Dutch criminal investigative agencies. They have performed tests on similar fuselages and found that the wreckage found is consistent with that of a BUK missile, of which a part was found in the cockpit/fuselage area.

Again, this is not the conspiracy part of this forum, this is a crime forum and here facts matter and the fact is that a BUK caused the plane to go down. They have found pieces of that BUK, they were able to precisely follow the BUK coming into the area and going back to it's Russian base.

Your premise has been proven to be false, nothing more than tin foil hat conspiracy fakery, sadly you purposely ignore any evidence that does not support your fake conspiracy theory.

Quag · Feb 5, 2018

Thoreau72 said:
There was cannon fire Peter. Before they were quickly removed from the internet by people with an agenda, the photos clearly showed the marks of cannon fire on the fuselage and wings. Assuming, of course, that one knows what cannon fire marks look like. If one needs to be told that by authority figures, well.....

No Hd there wasnt just like all your other bogus claims they are made up fantasies.

Quag · Feb 5, 2018

Peter King said:
Nope, there was not, all the damage was from a rocket/missile of the BUK variety. And that information has been gathered from actual investigation of the plane wreckage.

I do not know what was removed from the internet but most likely it was removed because people found out their information was FAKE!! Not because of some conspiracy or agenda of any kind.

No evidence of cannon fire was on the fuselage of the plane, you may not want to believe it but you don't know anything about such things and especially not about the evidence found on this plane. The experts of the Joint investigation team and of the relevant Dutch criminal investigative agencies. They have performed tests on similar fuselages and found that the wreckage found is consistent with that of a BUK missile, of which a part was found in the cockpit/fuselage area.

Again, this is not the conspiracy part of this forum, this is a crime forum and here facts matter and the fact is that a BUK caused the plane to go down. They have found pieces of that BUK, they were able to precisely follow the BUK coming into the area and going back to it's Russian base.

Your premise has been proven to be false, nothing more than tin foil hat conspiracy fakery, sadly you purposely ignore any evidence that does not support your fake conspiracy theory.

All of Hds evidence for all his conspriracies has been scrubbed from the internet. Its a lazy Cters easy out for not being able to back up their BS

Peter King · Feb 5, 2018

a real nozzle from a BUK was found at the crash site, last time I checked cannon fire is not able to shoot down a plane and leave at the crash site parts of a BUK missile.

a part from a stabilizing fin was found among the wreckage of MH17 (found in Gilze Rijen, where the plane was studied by experts)

a data cable was found from a BUK missile by the Dutch national police among the wreckage, not sure how a plane being shot down by cannons would be able to leave a data cable from a BUK missile on the wreckage of the MH17.

camlok · Feb 5, 2018

SirGareth said:
the US Military are not subject to the ICC and neither are US citizens while residing in the USA.

All you are doing is describing the USA, the world's leading rogue nation.

Local laws do not determine war crimes.

Fledermaus · Feb 5, 2018

Thoreau72 said:
There was cannon fire Peter. Before they were quickly removed from the internet by people with an agenda, the photos clearly showed the marks of cannon fire on the fuselage and wings. Assuming, of course, that one knows what cannon fire marks look like. If one needs to be told that by authority figures, well.....

Cannon fire from what? And why didn't the cannon actually do what cannons do when loaded with warshot?

Fledermaus · Feb 5, 2018

Thoreau72 said:
Kinda like the way the Warren Commission truth "had all the evidence", eh? Or the 911 Commission had all the evidence? :lamo You are so easily led Peter.

Both the 911 Commission, the Warren Commission, and whatever Kangaroo Court Commission was set up regarding MH17, they were all "set up to fail." They were all set up to protect the guilty parties and fool the gullible.

You still haven't read the 9/11 Commission Report..

Litwin · Feb 5, 2018

Peter King said:
And you told untruths then and keep telling fake stories based on imaginary "evidence" that purely lives inside the brains of the idiot tin foil hat fraternity that got their "evidence" through the fillings in their teeth.

Sorry, but there was no cannon fire, that is what one calls lies.

Just because you are so gullible that you believe in nonsense does not mean that we in the real world are vulnerable to the same fantasy free "facts" that you keep bringing up.

And the forensic experts have concluded beyond reasonable doubt that a BUK missile brought down the plane, but you believe in your nonsense, we however believe in verifiable facts. The fight altitude was also extensively addressed but again, you keep believing in nonsense, the investigators studied actual evidence and guess what, that makes them believable and prove your claims are total and utter nonsense.

+1

"BBC Conspiracy Files MH17 " is a great documentary, bbc makes fun out off all freaks and putin´s useful idiots

Thoreau72 · Feb 6, 2018

Fledermaus said:
Cannon fire from what? And why didn't the cannon actually do what cannons do when loaded with warshot?

Sometimes I feel like I reading the posts of a 15 year old girl who does not know about cannons mounted on so many military aircraft....

Cannon fire from the airborne fighter jets heard by the locals and recorded on Russian radar. :doh

Fledermaus · Feb 6, 2018

Thoreau72 said:
Sometimes I feel like I reading the posts of a 15 year old girl who does not know about cannons mounted on so many military aircraft....

Cannon fire from the airborne fighter jets heard by the locals and recorded on Russian radar. :doh

You don't understand the word warload? It mean not practice munitions. Normal cannon rounds are not simply to bigger versions of ball rounds.

And cannon fire was heard AT LEAST 33,000 feet AWAY? WTH? CITATION?

And cannon fire was "recorded" on Russian radar? WTH? CITATION?

We both know you are MSU at this time (Making **** Up)

Quag · Feb 6, 2018

Fledermaus said:
You don't understand the word warload? It mean not practice munitions. Normal cannon rounds are not simply to bigger versions of ball rounds.

And cannon fire was heard AT LEAST 33,000 feet AWAY? WTH? CITATION?

And cannon fire was "recorded" on Russian radar? WTH? CITATION?

We both know you are MSU at this time (Making **** Up)

The RADAR images HD is referring to is actually a faked satellite photo that was put out there. It has long been debunked. But since HD doesn't know the difference between RADAR and satellite photos how do you expect him to comprehend that it was a fake?
Conspiracy Files: Who shot down MH17? - BBC News

Fledermaus · Feb 6, 2018

Quag said:
The RADAR images HD is referring to is actually a faked satellite photo that was put out there. It has long been debunked. But since HD doesn't know the difference between RADAR and satellite photos how do you expect him to comprehend that it was a fake?
Conspiracy Files: Who shot down MH17? - BBC News

I'm still wondering how radar picked up the projectiles....

:lamo

Quag · Feb 6, 2018

Fledermaus said:
I'm still wondering how radar picked up the projectiles....

:lamo

You cant expect an aviation expert such as HD to know the difference between RADAR and satellite photos!

Peter King · Feb 6, 2018

Thoreau72 said:
Sometimes I feel like I reading the posts of a 15 year old girl who does not know about cannons mounted on so many military aircraft....

Cannon fire from the airborne fighter jets heard by the locals and recorded on Russian radar. :doh

Nonsense, utter nonsense, cannon fire was recorded on Russian radar but the fighter planes were not :lamo

Evidence matters in the real world, evidence of a BUK was fused into the fuselage of MH17. The black box proves it was a missile that caused the plane to have an explosive decompression.

Your claims are baseless and just :bs

Thoreau72 · Feb 6, 2018

Fledermaus said:
You don't understand the word warload? It mean not practice munitions. Normal cannon rounds are not simply to bigger versions of ball rounds.

And cannon fire was heard AT LEAST 33,000 feet AWAY? WTH? CITATION?

And cannon fire was "recorded" on Russian radar? WTH? CITATION?

We both know you are MSU at this time (Making **** Up)

I don't know when the cannons were fired, whether by both ships or by one. The poor quality video put up by BBC showed the doomed ship in its final 30 seconds or so, and one engine was on fire. My own theory is that AAM hit the engine and the airliner started down. Then the fighter pilots took turns with gunnery as the target spiraled down. But the cannon fire was so very obvious in the early pictures, and the BBC photos from peasants was up probably less than 24 hours.

The Russian radar data showed ascending fighters. No Maus you dreamer, it did not show cannon fire. The cannon fire impact was visible on the pictures taken of the crashed airliner. You were in the Navy you say. Did you not ever see the results of cannon fire?

That's for you too Peter. Russian radar did not show the cannon fire dude. It showed the climbing fighters, NOT the cannon fire. Interestingly, it was provided by the Russians within days. All the hints and allegations, and the US has still not provided a single piece of evidence or fact to prove its claims.

Thoreau72 · Feb 6, 2018

Fledermaus said:
I'm still wondering how radar picked up the projectiles....

:lamo

You'll probably go to Heaven still wondering about that. :lol:

Fledermaus · Feb 6, 2018

Thoreau72 said:
You'll probably go to Heaven still wondering about that. :lol:

Because YOU have no logical answer.

Fledermaus · Feb 6, 2018

Thoreau72 said:
I don't know when the cannons were fired, whether by both ships or by one. The poor quality video put up by BBC showed the doomed ship in its final 30 seconds or so, and one engine was on fire. My own theory is that AAM hit the engine and the airliner started down. Then the fighter pilots took turns with gunnery as the target spiraled down. But the cannon fire was so very obvious in the early pictures, and the BBC photos from peasants was up probably less than 24 hours.

The Russian radar data showed ascending fighters. No Maus you dreamer, it did not show cannon fire. The cannon fire impact was visible on the pictures taken of the crashed airliner. You were in the Navy you say. Did you not ever see the results of cannon fire?

That's for you too Peter. Russian radar did not show the cannon fire dude. It showed the climbing fighters, NOT the cannon fire. Interestingly, it was provided by the Russians within days. All the hints and allegations, and the US has still not provided a single piece of evidence or fact to prove its claims.

You stated cannon fire was recorded by Russian radar. You. No one else. Cannon fire recorded by Russian radar.

As far as the pictures... Have you any idea what cannon fire does and how it normally differs from simple ball rounds?

No, you don't.

It is obvious you are MSU at this point.

Thoreau72 · Feb 7, 2018

Fledermaus said:
You stated cannon fire was recorded by Russian radar. You. No one else. Cannon fire recorded by Russian radar.

As far as the pictures... Have you any idea what cannon fire does and how it normally differs from simple ball rounds?

No, you don't.

It is obvious you are MSU at this point.

No sir, I did not. I offered a poorly constructed sentence which you misinterpreted, but I did not claim that Russian radar recorded the shooting. Your desperation in this case makes you jump to conclusions.

The Russian radar provided to international authorities showed 2 climbing Su 25, that's all. Some theorize that it was the 27 and that Russian radar was spoofed. That's possible, but irrelevant.

For anybody who has ever seen aircraft hit by small arms fire or cannon fire (me), the signs of cannon fire on the cockpit of that flight were obvious.

Even more obvious is the cover-up by BBC and western authorities. Kiev STILL has not released its radar information, and it STILL has not explained how and why the routing and altitude for MH17 was changed when it entered Ukrainian airspace. Some of have been paying attention over these years, and some have just believed their western media masters.

Quag · Feb 7, 2018

Thoreau72 said:
No sir, I did not. I offered a poorly constructed sentence which you misinterpreted, but I did not claim that Russian radar recorded the shooting. Your desperation in this case makes you jump to conclusions.

No, you wrote BS and are trying to back away

The Russian radar provided to international authorities showed 2 climbing Su 25, that's all. Some theorize that it was the 27 and that Russian radar was spoofed. That's possible, but irrelevant.

Already debunked

For anybody who has ever seen aircraft hit by small arms fire or cannon fire (me), the signs of cannon fire on the cockpit of that flight were obvious.

No one believes you have ever been near a plane and the wrecage didnt show any signs of cannon fire

Even more obvious is the cover-up by BBC and western authorities. Kiev STILL has not released its radar information, and it STILL has not explained how and why the routing and altitude for MH17 was changed when it entered Ukrainian airspace. Some of have been paying attention over these years, and some have just believed their western media masters.

:lamo

Fledermaus · Feb 7, 2018

Thoreau72 said:
No sir, I did not. I offered a poorly constructed sentence which you misinterpreted, but I did not claim that Russian radar recorded the shooting. Your desperation in this case makes you jump to conclusions.

ORLY?

Thoreau72 said:
<Snipped childish insult>
Cannon fire from the airborne fighter jets heard by the locals and recorded on Russian radar. :doh

Thoreau72 said:
The Russian radar provided to international authorities showed 2 climbing Su 25, that's all. Some theorize that it was the 27 and that Russian radar was spoofed. That's possible, but irrelevant.

The radar may show SOMETHING climbing.... If there were radar.

And you never explained how a low ceiling ( 23,000 feet) SU-25 intercepted a 33,000 foot MH-17 and hit it from above.

Thoreau72 said:
For anybody who has ever seen aircraft hit by small arms fire or cannon fire (me), the signs of cannon fire on the cockpit of that flight were obvious.

Now you are MSU again. I have seen the damage done by a SINGLE 20MM HEI round into the engine pack of an UH-1 for example. It wasn't a single hole.

Small arms fire = small holes normally about the size of the round. Cannon fire = Large holes far exceeding the diameter of the round plus massive additional damage.

Thoreau72 said:
Even more obvious is the cover-up by BBC and western authorities. Kiev STILL has not released its radar information, and it STILL has not explained how and why the routing and altitude for MH17 was changed when it entered Ukrainian airspace. Some of have been paying attention over these years, and some have just believed their western media masters.

I have already told you the variations... Commercial traffic was flying in the area. They were given instruction to maintain separation from other commercial traffic.

You are grasping and failing miserably to maintain you illusion....