Claims Ukranian military using civilian planes as cover

[KAT]

couldn't possibly dissuade a BUK operator from firing out of fear of hitting the wrong plane? Or that such an event wouldn't be beneficial for the same people who had the authority to declare the airspace safe for commercial airlines?

According to reports they were doing this long before separatists obtained the means to shoot any down. It's enough to actually hide, ie come in when the usual planes are expected, so people may mistake them, long enough not to take quick aim with a MANPAD.

I don't see Ukraine being ale to use MH17 to much advantage. They certainly would not be trying to get someone else to shoot it down.

 

[Mick West]

According to reports

What reports?

 

[Morty]

This is the one report I know of, allegedly from June 18, claiming that a Ukraine jet was hiding behind a passenger plane:

Judging by the lies and propaganda coming from both sides (Ukraine and pro-Russia), I don't think it's at all certain that Ukraine wouldn't be trying to get the rebels to accidentally shoot down a passenger jet.

 

[Landru]

This is the one report I know of, allegedly from June 18, claiming that a Ukraine jet was hiding behind a passenger plane:

Judging by the lies and propaganda coming from both sides (Ukraine and pro-Russia), I don't think it's at all certain that Ukraine wouldn't be trying to get the rebels to accidentally shoot down a passenger jet.

Do you have any proof of this? Your video does not meet the posting guidelines. Specifically, Videos must be accompanied by a description of the video, identifying the claim made in it, with time location if longer than 1 minute.

 

[Landru]

I've always thought it was convenient that the Ukranian government had an abundance of evidence from intercepted phone calls, photos, and video footage of the buk traveling through the Ukraine within hours of the plane being shot down. That's also probably due to the fact that here in the West information like that would've been examined and combed over by the intelligence community before releasing it (if ever releasing it). I just think the rebels had bad "intel", and obviously thought that plane was a Ukranian Cargo plane.
Using the logic that the Ukranians either plotted this or mislead the rebels "hoping" for an accident of this scale so they can gain ground, draw in the attention of the West, and embarrass Russia is unfounded. Contrary to what CTers are proposing the opposite has happened in the wake of this incident. We've seen Russia ban US goods and we've seen them build up more troops on the border in preperation for a war or humanitarian crisis. In the aftermath of MH17 we've seen the rebels still shooting down Ukranian military planes and even using the Buk missile systems as well. So if it was their "plan" it failed miserably in that regard.
I was all over the place when this happened, and I decided to take a step back and wait for the investigation to come to end. I think the rebels just made a miscalculated mistake, but it's honestly had no effect on the rebels, Ukraine Government, or Russia. The world outside of the Ukraine has moved on already...

How does this meet the topic, Claims Ukranian military uses civilian planes as cover?

 

[KAT]

description of the video, identifying the claim made in it

The video was posted in response to a request for proof of a claim. Therefore it is containing the claim that proof of was requested.

This can go around in circles of obstreperousness forever. For how many iterations does a poster have to provide detailed sources for things that are in on-going discussion?

That video has be posted here before, with more detail given. FROM MEMORY it is a woman in IIRC Slavynsk stating the Ukrainian fighters would hide behind or under commercial jets, dive down to attack the town, then go back to hide.

 

[Morty]

I'd better read the guidelines before I do any more posting. I found the original youtube clip, dated June 18, of "Militia Soldier Elena" who, at 1:08 makes the claim that a Ukrainian fighter hid behind a passenger plane on the approach to a town (Semenovka), broke its cover to drop bombs on the town, and then moved behind the passenger plane again as it exited the area.

She goes on to say "They wanted to provoke the militia to shoot at the passenger plane. There would be a global catastrophe. Civilians would have died."

h ttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aKKoKmUtQXE

 

[jonnyH]

This is the one report I know of, allegedly from June 18, claiming that a Ukraine jet was hiding behind a passenger plane:

Judging by the lies and propaganda coming from both sides (Ukraine and pro-Russia), I don't think it's at all certain that Ukraine wouldn't be trying to get the rebels to accidentally shoot down a passenger jet.

That is the video in the OP of this thread. We seem to be going in circles.

 

[Landru]

The video was posted in response to a request for proof of a claim. Therefore it is containing the claim that proof of was requested.

This can go around in circles of obstreperousness forever. For how many iterations does a poster have to provide detailed sources for things that are in on-going discussion?

That video has be posted here before, with more detail given. FROM MEMORY it is a woman in IIRC Slavynsk stating the Ukrainian fighters would hide behind or under commercial jets, dive down to attack the town, then go back to hide.

Threads can run to multiple pages. For example, Morty used a video to support a claim that was the same video in the opening thread. That is why there are posting guidelines. If you wish to talk/debate the posting guidelines then please go to the appropriate thread. https://www.metabunk.org/threads/posting-guidelines.2064/

 

[Mick West]

This can go around in circles of obstreperousness forever. For how many iterations does a poster have to provide detailed sources for things that are in on-going discussion?

The thread is about the plausibility of the woman's claim. Obliquely referencing that same claim is not helpful. Saying "According to reports" suggests multiple reports.

 

[KAT]

http://igcp.eu/hronika-prestupleniy...ge-and-artem-area-under-slaviansk?language=en

09.06.2014
At 4:30 AM, Ukrainian forces bombed the Semenovka village hiding behind commercial air transport.

"The 'Frogfoot' aircraft would hide behind the commercial air transport, then come out and throw the bomb, and then 'hide' back again. Another civilian object has been destroyed", related one of the leaders of the unrecognized Donetsk People's Republic, the Minister of Defense of the Donetsk People's Republic Igor Strelkov.

So the idea does predate July 17. That says nothing about the truth of otherwise of the claim.

 

[Morty]

That is the video in the OP of this thread. We seem to be going in circles.

Sorry about that, all. I did check back into page one and it seemed to be all about flight ceilings - I obviously didn't check the OP.

So is everyone saying that having a military plane in close proximity to a passenger plane, be it at different altitude, couldn't possibly dissuade a BUK operator from firing out of fear of hitting the wrong plane?

This is the thing. I'm no attack aircraft pilot, but my hunch is that "hide behind" might be a figure of speech, and that you can be below another plane and still be "hiding behind" it. The point is they are using the proximity of the passenger plane to make the enemy opt not to fire at the attacking plane. There is no radar evidence that there weren't Ukie planes in the sky on the day soldier Elena was talking about. And she didn't specifically say they were hiding behind passenger planes flying at 30,000ft - the plane she's talking about could have been much lower.

 

[MikeC]

There's no evidence that supports the claim either - and generally it is the maker of the claim that has the burden of proof - not those who ask whether it is true or not!

 

[Landru]

Sorry about that, all. I did check back into page one and it seemed to be all about flight ceilings - I obviously didn't check the OP.

This is the thing. I'm no attack aircraft pilot, but my hunch is that "hide behind" might be a figure of speech, and that you can be below another plane and still be "hiding behind" it. The point is they are using the proximity of the passenger plane to make the enemy opt not to fire at the attacking plane. There is no radar evidence that there weren't Ukie planes in the sky on the day soldier Elena was talking about. And she didn't specifically say they were hiding behind passenger planes flying at 30,000ft - the plane she's talking about could have been much lower.

This thread is about Claims Ukrainian military using civilian planes as cover. Not if it were possible.

 

[Mick West]

This thread is about Claims Ukrainian military using civilian planes as cover. Not if it were possible.

Well, evidence that it was impossible would show the claims to be false, so it is relevant.

 

[Landru]

Well, evidence that it was impossible would show the claims to be false, so it is relevant.

My point. Any evidence that the claims were possible/impossible is relevant. IMO anytime there are no links/evidence in the post and it contains "my hunch is" it is probably (but not 100%) not within the posting guidelines.

 

[Josh Heuer]

http://igcp.eu/hronika-prestupleniy...ge-and-artem-area-under-slaviansk?language=en

09.06.2014
At 4:30 AM, Ukrainian forces bombed the Semenovka village hiding behind commercial air transport.

"The 'Frogfoot' aircraft would hide behind the commercial air transport, then come out and throw the bomb, and then 'hide' back again. Another civilian object has been destroyed", related one of the leaders of the unrecognized Donetsk People's Republic, the Minister of Defense of the Donetsk People's Republic Igor Strelkov.

So the idea does predate July 17. That says nothing about the truth of otherwise of the claim.

Have you guys missed this post? It's another example predating the mh17 attack that corroborates with the story of Ukrainian forces 'hiding' in the vicinity of commercial airliners. Seems like her story is pretty plausible.

 

[KAT]

but my hunch is that "hide behind" might be a figure of speech, and that you can be below another plane and still be "hiding behind" it.

I agree with this assessment, especially considering we have only seen translations of the claims. In the video, aircraft type was not specified. Ukraine has, and is using, aircraft that are capable of reaching 33,000 ft, even if they did mean literally hiding behind (MIG-29s). So they are not claiming an impossibility. The claim has been made by at least 2 separate sources, who claim to be witnesses.

I judge the claims to be true and the actually "hiding behind/under/near" physically possible and highly likely. It cannot be debunked, as we can't prove a negative.

 

[Morty]

Have you guys missed this post? It's another example predating the mh17 attack that corroborates with the story of Ukrainian forces 'hiding' in the vicinity of commercial airliners. Seems like her story is pretty plausible.

I'd probably still only count this as one source of the claim. Strelkov's postings are widely read in rebel circles, and coming later, soldier Elena's video might just be repeating what she has heard from Strelkov. Or both might be repeating what they've heard from first hand witnesses. Both accounts are identical, including naming Semenovka as the village being attacked.

 

[KAT]

Both accounts are identical, including naming Semenovka as the village being attacked.

Well, if the attack was on Semenovka, I'd find it strange if someone said it had been Stanytsia Luhanska or Dnepropetrovsk. There is nothing strange about two people mentioning the same town for the same incident.

If only one of them saw it, I'd say it was Elena, and commander Strelkov is the one relying of reports he'd received. We don't know where either of them were on the day allegedly in question.

Either way, it is not impossible, and we can't prove a negative. Now they can't prove the positive from so long ago, either.

"ATCO Carlos" also said there were Ukrainian planes near MH17. Although that looked like propaganda and he was debunked as a fake, the story idea must have come from somewhere. Reality is as good a source for it as any. His statements were many days before Russia started to blame Ukraine for an air-to-air shootdown.

 

[Landru]

Well, if the attack was on Semenovka, I'd find it strange if someone said it had been Stanytsia Luhanska or Dnepropetrovsk. There is nothing strange about two people mentioning the same town for the same incident.

If only one of them saw it, I'd say it was Elena, and commander Strelkov is the one relying of reports he'd received. We don't know where either of them were on the day allegedly in question.

Either way, it is not impossible, and we can't prove a negative. Now they can't prove the positive from so long ago, either.

"ATCO Carlos" also said there were Ukrainian planes near MH17. Although that looked like propaganda and he was debunked as a fake, the story idea must have come from somewhere. Reality is as good a source for it as any. His statements were many days before Russia started to blame Ukraine for an air-to-air shootdown.

Do you have any evidence to support your assertions?

 

[NoParty]

"ATCO Carlos" also said there were Ukrainian planes near MH17. Although that looked like propaganda and he was debunked as a fake, the story idea must have come from somewhere. Reality is as good a source for it as any. His statements were many days before Russia started to blame Ukraine for an air-to-air shootdown.

I must be mis-interpreting this passage:
surely you aren't asserting that merely because a thing is said, it's likely born of reality.




p.s. "Circles of Obstreperousness" was the worst King Crimson album, ever!

 

[KAT]

surely you aren't asserting that merely because a thing is said, it's likely born of reality.

as good as any, I said.

Surely you aren't (all) asserting that merely because a thing is said by someone we suspect of spreading propaganda, it's most likely totally untrue. Untrue stories based on reality require less imagination. Partly untrue stories are better lies than totally untrue ones. (And no, Landru, I am not going to give links as "evidence" for those statements. Take them as being based on private communication and I can't say more than that).

The fake ATCO Carlos turned up on a Russian news site, and his story about the fighters was picked up by Russia for their "intelligence briefing" (look it up for yourselves, if you've not been keeping up with this issue blow by blow). There is zero evidence that he was in touch with the separatists. Yet he gave a story that partly confirms their claims. So either several sources invented similar scenarios around the same time, or there is some truth in what they are saying.

Now that the death of 298 people has stopped commercial air traffic over Donbass, there is no way to tell whether they are hiding behind commercial planes or not. On the balance of probabilities I say the claim is true and it is impossible to debunk it. You are free to disagree with me, with or without reasons given (so far it's been all without) but I have no interest in any further pointless argument about it.

 

[Pete Tar]

There is zero evidence that he was in touch with the separatists. Yet he gave a story that partly confirms their claims. So either several sources invented similar scenarios around the same time, or there is some truth in what they are saying.

Or they are both just different branches of Russian misinformation appearing as separate but having the same root.
Of course, that's speculation too, but your either/or scenario wasn't really complete.

We need to see an unbiased overview of the regime's tactics used in the conflict to date to see if it's something they would likely do.
We do at least have a record of Russia's deliberate disinformation in portraying the conflict, so the idea they would invent and plant the story is consistent with their past behaviour.

http://www.stopfake.org/en/russia-s-top-100-lies-about-ukraine/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_portrayal_of_the_2014_pro-Russian_unrest_in_Ukraine#Russian_media

The Russian media consistently portrayed the crisis in Ukraine as a result of instigation by the Ukrainian government.[2][3] They alleged that Euromaidan was controlled by "ultranationalist", "fascist", "neo-Nazi", and "anti-Semitic" groups, such as Right Sector, and that the revolution was a "violent coup" that overthrew an elected government.[2][4] At the same time, they accused the movement of having LGBT agendas.[5][6]

 

[Pete Tar]

Here's the claim -

https://wikispooks.com/wiki/Report_of_Junta_using_civilian_planes_as_cover
2014/06/18

Partial Transcript
Good day. My name is Elena. I am in the city of Sloviansk. I am native to this town. I have joined the military ranks. I cannot bear this anymore. We are being bombed every day by Ukrainian army, on orders from Junta, Artillery, Air Force. And they drop bombs not on check-points. They drop bombs on people's houses. People live in cellars with their children. How long are we to bear this? How is it that government sends mercenaries on their own people? The people are fighting from here, in defense of their own city. They want to live, not merely exist. Terrible things are happening.

For example: An incident that happened recently. A passenger plane was flying by, and Ukrainian attack aircraft hid behind it. Then he lowered his altitude a bit and dropped bombs on the residential sector of Seminovka. They wanted to provoke the militia to shoot at the passenger plane. There would have been a global catastrophe. Civilians would have died. Then they would say the terrorists did it.

And wiki's timeline covering the whole siege.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Sloviansk

There are no accounts of aerial bombings, but there are accounts of mortar shellings, such as this -

On 7 June, Ukrainian artillery shelling of city neighbourhoods continued, which separatists claimed killed three civilians.

The only references to Seminivka (not seminovka) are -

On 19 May, a mortar attack on Ukrainian positions at Mount Karachun, near Sloviansk, left one soldier dead and three wounded.[97] Pro-Russian sources claim that the village of Semeniivka and two neighbouring villages south of Sloviansk were damaged by Ukrainian artillery fire.[98] The next day another mortar attack on Ukrainian troops at Mount Karachun wounded four soldiers.[99]
...
On 3 June, the Ukrainian military launched a new offensive against Sloviansk and the nearby village of Semenivka. The ensuing fighting left at least 10 separatists and two Ukrainian soldiers dead and 42 Ukrainian soldiers and 12 separatists were wounded.[105][106] One Ukrainian armoured personnel carrier was damaged,[105] and two helicopters were downed.[107][108] During the clashes, a Ukrainian military convoy was attacked by while moving south toward Sloviansk from Izyum.[105]

 

[jonnyH]

So either several sources invented similar scenarios around the same time, or there is some truth in what they are saying.

If folks are inventing things there aren't that many plausible scenarios to choose from. Its really not that surprising that people come up with similar stories when the options are basically ground based missile or fighter jet. As I recall both possibilities have been pushed by separatists and their sympathisers at some point.

Carlos and Elena's stories are not even all that similar. They are talking about different events on different days in different places. Carlos does not suggest fighters were using the commercial air traffic as cover, he says they shot MH17 down, whereas Elena's story is used to imply that the separatists accidentally shot MH17 down whilst trying to target a Ukrainian fighter with a BUK. The only similarity is that both tales feature Ukrainian fighter jets.

 

[KAT]

We do at least have a record of Russia's deliberate disinformation in portraying the conflict, so the idea they would invent and plant the story is consistent with their past behaviour.

I come from a country that was behind the Iron Curtain for a long time, from a very political family, so I am not naive about what can go on. I am reading this in English, Ukrainian (official) and Russian (official and Donbass) every day. A bit of Hungarian and Polish sometimes to see how they're taking it. I can see how much they differ from what you see in English anywhere, including their sites aimed at English audiences (which differ from domestic consumption sources). Good disinformation is not lies. Good disinformation is the truth, twisted. Sometimes triple twisted. But that way you can show (some selected) evidence.

And if you guys think something very similar is not happening on the English language side of things, you need to wake up and smell the coffee.

In a way the dezinformatsiya process is very similar to the CT thought process. It has to start from something true and real. Think about it -- how far would they get with the chemtrail business, if there were no contrails? could Truthers exist if WTC hadn't collapsed? You just take something real and twist the explanations.

Ideas spread both ways, too. For argument's sake let's say they DID decide to spread the (untrue) story about hiding behind planes. As a way of demonising the opposition. But they've done it publicly, right? and the opposition speaks the language, right? (Ukrainians in Government all speak Russian, the language of bureaucracy for 90 years there, even if they're not Russkiye). What's to stop them saying "Heck, what a good idea. Hide behind jetliners. Why didn't we think of that before?" Self-fulfilling demonising.

But no. Reading blogs and tweets of soldiers on all sides (there are at least 5 different groups there), seeing what they say is going on, "they" didn't need to get bad ideas from Russia. "They" had/have plenty of their own. The foot soldiers of course are copping the generals' bad decisions as usual, and often scroungjng to get food, on both/all sides.

I know this is all off-topic. The topic is way too trivial really to bother with, just one drop of doubt on a sea of blood that will be flowing well into winter. This is not the site to discuss it on seriously, but let's at least not trivialise it.

(The attack was actually on Seleznivka, not Seminivka (of which there are two, ~500 and 1000 km from Slovyansk, not exactly neigbouring, better spelled Semenivka (Seminovka being a transliteration variant, same as you'll see Luhansk (closer to original pronunciation) and Lugansk (closer to spelling)).

Let's leave this now. Please.

 

[Sgt.Tinfoil]

We need to see an unbiased overview of the regime's tactics used in the conflict to date to see if it's something they would likely do.
We do at least have a record of Russia's deliberate disinformation in portraying the conflict, so the idea they would invent and plant the story is consistent with their past behaviour.

If you want to display Russian goverments lies or propaganda please do so and do not link to Russian media propaganda. In Russia there still is freedom of press (yes I know this claim is critized widely) which means that press can print whatever it wants. This leads to that press will print lies, blatant lies and bullshit occasionally. Then to claim that "Russians" are making propaganda is kinda same thing that somebody would claim that "American Goverment" is spreading propaganda and then linking FOX-news and random blog articles as a proof of that.

 

[Pete Tar]

(The attack was actually on Seleznivka, not Seminivka (of which there are two, ~500 and 1000 km from Slovyansk, not exactly neigbouring, better spelled Semenivka (Seminovka being a transliteration variant, same as you'll see Luhansk (closer to original pronunciation) and Lugansk (closer to spelling)).

Let's leave this now. Please.

Well at least this bit is pertinent to the claim so lets clarify it.
What attack was on Seleznivka - the one in this particular claim, which is the topic of the thread?

A passenger plane was flying by, and Ukrainian attack aircraft hid behind it. Then he lowered his altitude a bit and dropped bombs on the residential sector of Seminovka.

Can you provide sources for that? The name as you spell it, Seleznivka, is not mentioned at all in the wikipedia article on the siege of Sloviansk where she is supposedly making the claim from, 'seleznivka attack' nets me nothing on google.

 

[Trailspotter]

The attack was actually on Seleznivka, not Seminivka (of which there are two, ~500 and 1000 km from Slovyansk

Something is wrong here. Donbas is less that 300 km across. All Ukraine is only about 1300 km from East to West and 700 km North to South.

 

[KAT]

'seleznivka attack' nets me nothing on google.

OKAY Pete let me start with an apology. I lost track of the dates, going on memory. Seleznivka man attack was first week of July. Your search should get you something, are you on google.com or some national variation? use "bombing" instead of "attack", that will get you more. In June it was a Kiev held checkpoint (2 main roads and the railway) and had sporadic fighting. In July the bridges got destroyed, the town was not too shot up.

Looking back at soldier Elena's video, that was June 18 (?) and she's talking of earlier events. That would indeed be an attack on yet another Semenivka, a small village about 25 km south of Seleznivka. (They tend to repeat place names a lot, every oblast seems to have one of everything, I guess they usually add the oblast name like Americans always add the State name). Here's a map http://ukraineinvestigation.com/semenivka-combats-ato-terrorists-june-9/

There was fighting here back and forth for 2 weeks in early June, as the front line ebbed and flowed. It was mostly reported as attacks on Slovyansk, which was the main target. One possible reason for the scale of the obliteration there was that is where a helicopter carrying a General got shot down.

Kiev claimed to have killed 500 "terrorists" in/around Semenivka. Russia claimed they used phosphor bombs from planes. The locals just ran. It was then "liberated" again around July 15. All the surrounding villages and small towns on that map were damaged too, sort of in passing. Many of them didn't get in the news on their own, just mentioned also in passing in articles naming the bigger towns.

Wikipedia is weird - they describe small battles blow by blow and report 3 or 4 deaths, but don't seem to have an overview. Possibly the smaller towns and villages were only covered by local (non-Western media) so they don't trust them? big edit warring there, too, every sentence gets 20 paragraphs of argument first.

do not link to Russian media propaganda.

Sometimes only they were there. There is nothing wrong with using their material, always keeping in mind the propaganda aspect. Same as you would with your local news if it came off Fox, right? because nobody else covered an incident? The largest mainstream media in Russia is free in name, yes. Countries with a Soviet background long mastered the art of writing so people can read between the lines if they wish. A lot of Western media toes their Government's line, too, without being under threat of prison if the don't.
The bloggers and private media does and says what it likes. A lot of it turns out to be very balanced (I find reading the "same" story in several versions gives the best view). A lot of small detail is there too, that big media don't have sources or space for. As "citizen repeaters" they are always THERE when something happens, not needing to traipse around after something's happened. Most of these don't toe a Government line. If they do from conviction that is very obvious from their style, and can be discounted accordingly.

 

[KAT]

All Ukraine is only about 1300 km from East to West and 700 km North to South.

Thanks, Trailspotter, got me there.

I plead a shortage of caffeine (now rectified), fooled by Google Earth and wrong conversions. The 500 km is correct for one, that is well north of Kiev. The other is in the far west very close to Belarus but only about 650km, not 1000. The third tiny one, that had slipped my mind, is only about 25 km from Slovyansk. Well more now, you have to go the long way around as they blew the rail bridges to blockade the main roads. Like this one 80 km from Slovyansk like the sign says.

 

[Viking]

Despite actual attacks, it would be very hard for interceptor Su-25 to hide below 900km/h jet plane, dive to lay some rockets (its not a bomber?) and to climb back with mere 58ft/s climb rate it has. This operation would take minutes, meanwhile the civil aircraft would have traveled at least 50km and catching it again with lousy speed difference would also take minutes.

The concept would be possible only if there's another civil plain arriving to same exact spot (low propability).