MH17: Evidence a Missile was Used. Shrapnel, etc.

[Sgt.Tinfoil]

Who appoints these "rebel spokespersons"? How do you get to be one? What kind of uniform do you wear?

You just need a Twitter account that is good enought. No uniform is needed I bet you can tweet as naked while sipping your morning coffee and some journalist will pick that up and print it to the media which is then used as an source by other journalists. (Yes this is sad I have worked/work with journalists and this is really not funny [insert rant about state of modern "twitter journalism" and journalism in general in here])

What was our (the US) response to the request of satellite photos? I believe it was that we may provide them, but never did. If that's true, then what is the US statement explaining why are we (the US) are not revealing the satellite photos?

I believe the official reason is that USA don't want to reveal all their cababilities of those satellites.

I thought this made no sense because - what was the point of taking that area?

They cut down Donetsk Peoples Republic and Luhansk Peoples Republic from the West side of the plane. Thus encircling DPR. Later on that area was recaptured by the separatist. After that Ukrainian forces cut DPR and LPR from the East side of the plane again circling Donetsk area but that area was recaptured by the separatists and connected those two states again each other. The area is going constant fighting and the lines move really quickly and everyday situation changes. I think currently DPR and LPR is separated again by Ukrainian forces by Eastern side of the plane. I think this is the area where Ukrainian army has put it's strategic plan to separate those two states.

But Kiev also didn't explain why it had BUKs set up in the area.

Before the crash Ukraine claimed that Russian planes were shooting down their military planes. Maybe it was true, maybe just propaganda or maybe just cover the fact that rebels were cabable to shoot down Jets in that area(remember Ukrainian official claimed till the shooting of MH17 that rebels did not have a BUK). Anyway it makes total sense in those circumstances to deploy BUK:s just for to make the individual soldiers/officers to know that no evil Ruskies cannot come again with planes over there and their air-defence is strong.

Or maybe more realistic scenario for precense of Ukrainian BUK is this:

I am a reservists because my country has a mandatory conscript for all (male)citizens^H^H^H^Hcats.... I have been trained to do my job as others are trained to do their job if war emerges. So some of the reservists are trained to use BUK(yes the same BUK which is used by Ukrainian Army) and others are trained to co-operate with them. I am pretty sure this same thing is how Ukrainian Army works. Does the enemy come from air, land, sea, space, underground, 3-dimension or any imaginable way there are troops trained to fight with them in that element. So there are lot's of different guys doing different things with different equipment. Others keep on their eyes on sky others keeps their eyes on ground and third ones just fuck around thus making military force a deadly and efective killingmachine. So these people are divided roughly groups, platoons, brigades(sorry not from USA so I might mixup your militaryterms) and usually brigade has many platoons under it which are doing some specific way of warfare. In brigades there is usually anti-aircraft platoon which has a BUK because that is how the wise lords of war in my country has decided. Now if war emerges the brigade is located in place X where it operates as a whole and thus the BUK comes too, because you just don't start a fuck around the basic training and formation of brigade during the war (you just hope that it works as it has been trained) and you have to be ready to use deadly force even at a places where enemy is not known to come. So if the enemy makes a deal with Beelsebub who sends 666 voodoo priests from gates of hell to convert brigades soldiers to church of spaghettimonster the army has a military priest to send fight against them. Is that likely? No, but the army is prepared _if_ that happends. Same thing with BUK because even if enemy according to your knowledge does not have aircrafts you really want to be ready if it one moment has.

Kiev did not try to take back the territory until several days after the mortuary train left Torez -- actually 10 days after the crash. They did, however, keep OSCE observers out by claiming the separatists had mined the area.

I just write here my recollection of happenings just a sake of it:
- Ukrainian Army declares ceasefire ~20 km around wreckage
- inspectors come (not to be confused with previos OSCE monitors who came earlier)
- inspectors can not enter the area because fighting is too close of the crash site and their safety cannot be assured
- fights calm down
- Ukraine denies access for inspectors to crash site, because rebels according to them have mined the wreckage
- Ukraine stops the ceasefire and starts fighting officially in the area thus inspectors can't go area because of safety
- Russia ask in UN Security Council to ceasefire around the wreckage so inspections can continue their work. That resolution was rejected thus fightings continue and inspections are on halt

 

[David Coulter]

What was our (the US) response to the request of satellite photos? I believe it was that we may provide them, but never did. If that's true, then what is the US statement explaining why are we (the US) are not revealing the satellite photos? It's been a while now.

The Russians and general public for that matter have no reason to see imagery if it exists at this time, it is an ongoing investigation. Police don't disclose every detail of a case because suspects could "adjust" their stories to the evidence, why should an air crash investigation be different?

If you check the MH17 Hypotheses thread you can find some speculation on the type of imagery that might have been acquired and the type of imagery that was very unlikely to be acquired.

 

[BombDr]

FIRST RULE in a war -- if one side says the other side is doing something, it is 90% untrue and 100% propaganda.

Absolutely....

 

[Nehmo]

The Russians and general public for that matter have no reason to see imagery if it exists at this time, it is an ongoing investigation. Police don't disclose every detail of a case because suspects could "adjust" their stories to the evidence, why should an air crash investigation be different?...

I wholeheartedly agree. We Americans should be very proud to have such a wise government that doesn't allow criminals like us (yes, many of us are criminals) to view evidence that we already know shows the missile came from the drunken rebels. If a war hero like John Kerry says we have evidence, well, as far as I'm concerned, anyone who disputes him is a traitor. Kerry never varies from the truth.
This holding-of-evidence for the benefit of the criminal investigation must also be the reason the peaceful Ukraine government won't release the communications recordings of Ukrainian air-traffic control with MH17. If the rebels could hear those recordings, they might alter their story. Why didn't I think of that?
I thank you for you intelligent insight.

 

[BombDr]

The separatists were understandable leery about these foreigners, who originally (the OSCE people) there as political observers but get around in convoys like they're important and wear flak jackets like they're scared. They truly might be spies. Especially when their leader (Bociurkiw) speaks fluent Ukrainian. Less to do with MH17 and more with their general situation. News crews getting around in local battered old cars got let in everywhere.

There is no evidence they are spies, and what would their mission be? To spy on the plane crash site - which is why they are there?

As regards the body-armour, they ARE in a combat zone, and I imagine it is policy to wear it.

 

[David Coulter]

This seems to be sliding into OT land....

 

[Jason]

This holding-of-evidence for the benefit of the criminal investigation must also be the reason the peaceful Ukraine government won't release the communications recordings of Ukrainian air-traffic control with MH17. If the rebels could hear those recordings, they might alter their story. Why didn't I think of that?
I thank you for you intelligent insight.

Who is witholding evidence? Show me one country outside of Russia that is accusing the US or Ukraine of witholding evidence. This notion that the US and Ukraine is witholding evidence is evidence that Russian propaganda is working.

 

[Soulfly]

It wouldn't matter if the U.S. released everything. Those that want them to be guilty will find a reason for it no matter what.

 

[Jason]

Who is witholding evidence? Show me one country outside of Russia that is accusing the US or Ukraine of witholding evidence. This notion that the US and Ukraine is witholding evidence is evidence that Russian propaganda is working.

Josh, instead of dissagreeing with me when I merely proposed a couple of questions, show me a country's government that is accusing the US of witholding evidence or satellite imagery, not counting Russia.

 

[Jason]

KAT said: ↑
FIRST RULE in a war -- if one side says the other side is doing something, it is 90% untrue and 100% propaganda.

Absolutely....

Why can't people apply that logic to what's going on in the Russian Media? The shooting down of MH17 is true, the world witnessed it. It was fired from rebel territory based on US and Ukranian intelligence. Intercepted phone calls and twitter msg's confirm that the rebels thought they shot down another Ukranian Military Plane. All of this is 100% true. In the immediate aftermath Russia initially stated the rebels don't have buk missile systems. Then they said the Ukranians did it because they mistook the plane for Putins Presidential Plane. They claim the western world is trying to disrupt what's going on in Russia and Eastern Ukraine. Meanwhile, Russia is building up troops along its border with the Ukraine, and seem ready for war. So who's twisting the truth here and pushing propaganda.

 

[KAT]

all the MSM reports here for weeks were about the difficulty the OSCE and investigators were having gaining access, about bodies unrecovered for days, looting of the wreckage, etc.

Thank you. You precisely made my point for me about propaganda. Trash-talking the other side, backed up by unsourced allegations and film clips taken out of context.

http://nypost.com/2014/08/06/dutch-pm-halts-search-for-mh17-remains-in-unstable-ukraine/

Rutte said that now that the international recovery team has been able to access the site and communicate with local authorities, it has learned the recovery effort undertaken by local authorities immediately after the crash was more thorough than initially thought.,,,,,,
.....
Rutte said that it now appears "fortunately that more was done after the disaster than we thought until now."

Local Ukrainian authorities carried out "an intensive search in the area with 800 volunteers, and there were many bodies recovered in those (first) days," he said.

The "Local Ukrainian authorities" that I bolded were, of course, the separatists everyone was bad-mouthing while they were doing the actual work.

 

[Nehmo]

Who is witholding evidence? Show me one country outside of Russia that is accusing the US or Ukraine of witholding evidence. This notion that the US and Ukraine is witholding evidence is evidence that Russian propaganda is working.

I was res whponding to David Coulter, who used an analogy of police who "don't disclose every detail of a case". The "details" in terms of an investigation are called "evidence". It's not simply a "notion" that the US isn't releasing satellite photos. The US claims to have satellite photos (and I don't believe anyone seriously doubts the US on that), and it is not releasing them. "Not releasing" is the same as withholding.
Numerous articles and statements from people and across the world have criticized the US for this. Ron Paul, an American former Republican Party congressman, says U.S. is likely hiding truth about MH17 crash. He said,
"Too bad we can't count on our government to just tell us the truth and show us the evidence. I'm convinced that it knows a lot more than it's telling us."
Professor James Petras, Bartle Professor (Emeritus) of Sociology at Binghamton University, New York. He is the author several highly-regarded books on the middle ease and US policy.
"… US satellite photographs, which are very extensive, very thorough, probably have images that go contrary to its public policies and with its support for the regime in Kiev. The implications are the US doesn't want the images to become public because they would discredit anti-Russian campaign that's going on; it would discredit the government in Kiev, and would perhaps arouse the United Nations to call for a full investigation and demand the US turn over these satellite images," Petras said.

 

[KAT]

In the immediate aftermath Russia initially stated the rebels don't have buk missile systems. Then they said the Ukranians did it because they mistook the plane for Putins Presidential Plane.

Context please, guys, no cherry picking.

It was the USA most strongly proclaiming the separatists had a BUK and Russia had supplied it and trained them on it, and claiming to have satellite evidence. Russia was being accused of giving a BUK to the separatists. So they would have to say they didn't have one (therefore they can't have give them one). Don't forget at the same time Ukraine was also saying the didn't have one (therefore it must have been one Russia lent them). ALL were using the same social media images of the scenic-tour BUK to prove their story.

The Russian intel briefing with the radar pictures accused Ukraine based on supposed "probably SU-25" tracks, turning the story from surface missile to air-to-air. The "aiming for Putin's plane" was not an official Russian claim but a Russian CT-social media speculation.

This idea then spread out to become an Aeroflot plane, the Russian side saying the Ukrainians planned it to hurt them, the Ukrainians saying the separatists (alone or with Russian help) planned it to have an excuse for full scale war.

Meanwhile "the West" is not considering an air to air strike, largely on the grounds of "done by BUK" evidence that has never been shown to anyone. This line of thinking is dangerous. If Russia did it, that is a cause for war that cannot be ignored. If Ukraine did it that looks bad for their backers and would cause domestic backlash (yep the US of A). So it's better to just accept the most convenient explanation and carefully look no further. (There's many an innocent person sitting on Death Row because of this type of thinking).

They claim the western world is trying to disrupt what's going on in Russia and Eastern Ukraine

USA is supporting Ukraine with money and equipment, they say only "soft" equipment, ie food, uniforms, tents etc not armaments, but they sure are supporting them. USA has a dog in the fight as much as Russia has, so they're hardly neutral observers. Plenty of motive there for propaganda and trash talking the other side.

NOBODY in this is telling the complete truth. They all have reasons for this. We need to look at what each one has to gain by saying what they're saying, not just accept one side or another at face value.

 

[MikeC]

Thank you. You precisely made my point for me about propaganda. Trash-talking the other side, backed up by unsourced allegations and film clips taken out of context.
......

The "Local Ukrainian authorities" that I bolded were, of course, the separatists everyone was bad-mouthing while they were doing the actual work.

And how is that any different??

The seperatists were also looting bodies, moving wreckage and preventing PROPER search teams from finding bodies and marking them for forensic purposes - I remember seeing video of miners searching fields and one of them being told they had no idea what to do when they found one.

this was not "doing the actual work" - this was interfering with the actual work.

 

[Gunguy45]

this was not "doing the actual work" - this was interfering with the actual work.

So true! In any event like this, minimal disturbance of the scene is vital! We had a major engine room fire on a ship I was on. One of the first things in the message back after reporting was to not do any cleanup or other work except for vital repairs and to document everything in as is condition before doing anything. The investigation team upon arrival first took pictures and videos of everything before the first piece of equipment was touched to determine the source.

 

[Josh Heuer]

Josh, instead of dissagreeing with me when I merely proposed a couple of questions, show me a country's government that is accusing the US of witholding evidence or satellite imagery, not counting Russia.

My issue is with how you worded your post. You first ask

Who is witholding evidence?

But we know the US is withholding satellite imagery in order to protect their technological capabilities (exactly how they knew *roughly* what was going on and where from day one) . Then you switch to asking about other countries accusing the US of withholding evidence:

Show me one country outside of Russia that is accusing the US or Ukraine of witholding evidence. This notion that the US and Ukraine is witholding evidence is evidence that Russian propaganda is working.

Which I'm not really interested in. I'm more into what the US knows, not what other countries think.

Nobody is saying other counties are accusing the US of withholding evidence. We know they are, they've already said it. But it's an investigation, so of course the evidence isn't going to be released (probably 30 years down the road, if it's classified).

 

[KAT]

this was not "doing the actual work" - this was interfering with the actual work.

What actual work? did anyone have any "real" body picker-uppers there? any "real" investigators? does Ukraine have any such people, ready to move on a moment's notice? does ANYONE? (and before you say there is, let me just say one word: KATRINA).
Is there any international body on permanent standby to go into air crash areas? any international law that gives them the right to go in? how long did it take to negotiate WHO the investigators would be, and under what conditions the Ukrainian government was going to let them in? even for natural disasters (earthquakes, tsunamis etc) it takes days to organise outside assistance, and the government has to ASK for them, they can't just march in.

So, what actual work?
* Western media was screaming about bodies being left to rot WHILE THEY WERE ACTUALLY BEING PICKED UP
* media screamed about wreckage being moved WHILE DEMANDING BODIES BE PICKED UP
* nobody had any force READY to go in and do the job
* when (Government) emergency services turned up, they were allowed in and did a lot of the body collection and wreckage moving the separatists continued to get blamed for (including "cutting up the cockpit" which turned out not to be the cockpit at all, the photographic "evidence" being in the burned area).

Looting bodies.... well.... looting is always easy to accuse people of. Evidence please.

Seeing one video in which a miner (civilian volunteer) was translated as saying he doesn't know what to do is evidence of what, exactly? heck, the miner was not even a separatist.

 

[Jason]

My issue is with how you worded your post. You first ask

But we know the US is withholding satellite imagery in order to protect their technological capabilities (exactly how they knew *roughly* what was going on and where from day one) . Then you switch to asking about other countries accusing the US of withholding evidence:

Which I'm not really interested in. I'm more into what the US knows, not what other countries think.

Nobody is saying other counties are accusing the US of withholding evidence. We know they are, they've already said it. But it's an investigation, so of course the evidence isn't going to be released (probably 30 years down the road, if it's classified).

Why aren't you interested in the fact that no one is asking the US to show it's intel? If the EU doubted US intel it would be in the media. Also the US isn't witholding satellite imagery, you have no idea who they shared their intel with at this point, do you? For all we know, behind closed doors with their partners (allies) they could've shown what they had. What you mean is "why hasn't the US show its satellite imagery to the world or more specifically the media". What other countries show their intelligence satellite imagery to the world, and why would we expect our government to be any different. The government doesn't have to prove it's claim to the media, it isn't their job. They made their claim and Europe supported their claim and so did the Ukraine.

 

[Josh Heuer]

Why aren't you interested in the fact that no one is asking the US to show it's intel?

It's just not something I'm interested in. I wouldn't expect other countries to ask the US for classified info, and if they do, I would imagine it would be behind closed doors (if it has happened, and I'm not saying it ever has, I see no point in speculating on that matter).

If the EU doubted US intel it would be in the media. Also the US isn't witholding satellite imagery, you have no idea who they shared their intel with at this point, do you? For all we know, behind closed doors with their partners (allies) they could've shown what they had.

Ok, that's a fair assumption, but as I already said I'm not going to speculate on it. I'll leave that up to the reader.

What you mean is "why hasn't the US show its satellite imagery to the world or more specifically the media".

No, that's not what I mean. I think you're misunderstanding me here. The US has admitted it has intelligence on the area (in the form of satellite imagery showing a plume of smoke from the missile, and data from infrared sensors that detected the jet's explosion; see Reuters). There are two reasons this is being withheld: 1) to not reveal classified technology, 2) it's an international investigation.

What other countries show their intelligence satellite imagery to the world, and why would we expect our government to be any different. The government doesn't have to prove it's claim to the media, it isn't their job. They made their claim and Europe supported their claim and so did the Ukraine.

And that's what's expected. I'm not saying they should release these images. However, I can understand how it adds fuel to the metaphorical 'conspiratorial-fire' that is burning so hot in America.

 

[MikeC]

What actual work? did anyone have any "real" body picker-uppers there? any "real" investigators? does Ukraine have any such people, ready to move on a moment's notice? does ANYONE? (and before you say there is, let me just say one word: KATRINA).
Is there any international body on permanent standby to go into air crash areas? any international law that gives them the right to go in? how long did it take to negotiate WHO the investigators would be, and under what conditions the Ukrainian government was going to let them in? even for natural disasters (earthquakes, tsunamis etc) it takes days to organise outside assistance, and the government has to ASK for them, they can't just march in.

There are rules about who is in charge of an air accident site - and it is the country that it occurs in - ICAO annex 13 refers.

In addition the country of registration of the aircraft usually has a significant presence, and any countries that have significant numbers of victims are normally accorded "observer" status.

but the country of the incident is also quite free to approach anyone it likes to carry out any of its activities on its behalf, and usually this takes very little time at all - <24 hours - because air accident investigation is nothing at al like disaster relief!

Any number of countries have air accident investigation task forces ready to go at <24 hours notice because that is the time frame that air accident investigation requires! - even in a little place like New Zealand they could put together a team of 3-4 accident investigators within 6 hours (I know because I have worked with the NZCAA accident investigation unit)!!

Katrina is a particularly stupid analogy - it was not a since airc raft accident and has no relevance at all.

So no - no-one went in straight away because there was a war going on and the rebels had not allowed anyone to be there and no-one as even going to try to be there without agreement.

HOWEVER - not interfering with the wreckage would have been preferable from an air accident investigation point of view - even if it was for a month or more - there is more that can be told from the position of bodies and wreckage in their original locations than there is after they have ben moved.

What SHOULD have been done was that air accident investigators from Ukraine and Malaysia should have been allowed onto the site from day 1 - then the bodies and wreckage could have been recovered in a manner consistent with forensic investigation.

So yes - the separatists interfered with the ACTUAL work that should have been done. All you sophistry is irrelevant to that - this is not propaganda.

How do you know the miner wasn't a separatist, or wasn't talking about how much information his entire group was given? Are you telling me that you think maybe he was the only miner in the group who had no briefing given to him - seriously?

the miners had come straight off shift - were still covered with coal dust

- no anti-rebel propaganda there....indeed it is quite strong in portraying the rebels as grieving for the deaths.

how about cell phones of victims answered by strangers as evidence of looting?

You ask for evidence but produce none to support your own claims - got any actual evidence for any of these claims you make:

* Western media was screaming about bodies being left to rot WHILE THEY WERE ACTUALLY BEING PICKED UP
* media screamed about wreckage being moved WHILE DEMANDING BODIES BE PICKED UP

And that should be done by proper investigative teams - not by whoever happens to be close by and investigates.

Thanks for pointing out how the rebels interfered with the ACTUAL work that needed to be done.

* nobody had any force READY to go in and do the job

you really just don't understand what you are talking about here.

* when (Government) emergency services turned up, they were allowed in and did a lot of the body collection and wreckage moving the separatists continued to get blamed for (including "cutting up the cockpit" which turned out not to be the cockpit at all, the photographic "evidence" being in the burned area).

and those emergency workers were required by the rebels to put the bodies onto train cars - where they were held for several more days while the rebels acted as "the big men" in control.....

In a press conference in the rebel's headquarters in downtown Donetsk, the self-declared prime minister of the Donetsk People's Republic, Alexander Borodai, said the bodies "will go nowhere" until the Malaysians arrived.

- from that well known western propaganda mouthpiece Al Jazeera

Otherwise this last para looks like meaningless drivel to me - by the time any "real" recovery was happening there had already been massive interference with the wreckage and bodies - interference that can only muddy the process of carrying out a proper investigation.

 

[Jason]

It's just not something I'm interested in. I wouldn't expect other countries to ask the US for classified info, and if they do, I would imagine it would be behind closed doors (if it has happened, and I'm not saying it ever has, I see no point in speculating on that matter).

But you are speculating. You're saying that the US is witholding satellite imagery, when none of know what the US shared or didn't share with its counterparts

 

[BombDr]

What actual work? did anyone have any "real" body picker-uppers there? any "real" investigators? does Ukraine have any such people, ready to move on a moment's notice? does ANYONE? (and before you say there is, let me just say one word: KATRINA).
Is there any international body on permanent standby to go into air crash areas? any international law that gives them the right to go in? how long did it take to negotiate WHO the investigators would be, and under what conditions the Ukrainian government was going to let them in? even for natural disasters (earthquakes, tsunamis etc) it takes days to organise outside assistance, and the government has to ASK for them, they can't just march in.

So, what actual work?
* Western media was screaming about bodies being left to rot WHILE THEY WERE ACTUALLY BEING PICKED UP
* media screamed about wreckage being moved WHILE DEMANDING BODIES BE PICKED UP
* nobody had any force READY to go in and do the job
* when (Government) emergency services turned up, they were allowed in and did a lot of the body collection and wreckage moving the separatists continued to get blamed for (including "cutting up the cockpit" which turned out not to be the cockpit at all, the photographic "evidence" being in the burned area).

Looting bodies.... well.... looting is always easy to accuse people of. Evidence please.

Seeing one video in which a miner (civilian volunteer) was translated as saying he doesn't know what to do is evidence of what, exactly? heck, the miner was not even a separatist.

There are multiple agencies that have experience, and an interest in assisting on this matter such as the FAA, CAA and the Australian equivalent CASA. If asked, they could have moved swiftly to the crash scene.

Secondly, the Netherlands, Malaysia and Australia have functioning forensic and investigative capabilities, which again could have been brought to bear had the people controlling the crash site expressed an interest in assisting with an investigation. So to answer part of your question, yes, there are people standing by to investigate air disasters at a moment's notice.

You next part about International law or special rights of safe passage is also relevant as they do not hold any safe passage jurisdiction and rely entirely on the goodwill of the local government, which in this case was not forthcoming.

Western media can demand whatever it likes, it is irrelevant in this case, and not really sure why you mentioned it.

 

[Jason]

No, that's not what I mean. I think you're misunderstanding me here. The US has admitted it has intelligence on the area (in the form of satellite imagery showing a plume of smoke from the missile, and data from infrared sensors that detected the jet's explosion; see Reuters). There are two reasons this is being withheld: 1) to not reveal classified technology, 2) it's an international investigation.

Again, this is also speculation. The media "assumes" the US doesn't want to reveal its classified technology because its a "story" for the media. "The highly classified but little is known spy satellites....." I haven't heard one comment from the US that it didn't want to share its imagery or intel, I think the media has made this known on their own behalf or bellief systems. The US was very clear in what they detected.
1. Detected the Buk radar system turning on and aquiring the target
2. Detected when the Buk missile system "locked" onto its target (MH17)
3. Spy satellites detected the "heat signature" from the missile's plume.

Keep in mind it's a "spy" satellite. Do we ever hear the US or US media demanding other countries to share their spy satellite intel or imagery?

 

[Jason]

And that's what's expected. I'm not saying they should release these images. However, I can understand how it adds fuel to the metaphorical 'conspiratorial-fire' that is burning so hot in America.

I wholeheartedly agree with this statement

 

[Jason]

There are rules about who is in charge of an air accident site - and it is the country that it occurs in - ICAO annex 13 refers.

In addition the country of registration of the aircraft usually has a significant presence, and any countries that have significant numbers of victims are normally accorded "observer" status.

but the country of the incident is also quite free to approach anyone it likes to carry out any of its activities on its behalf, and usually this takes very little time at all - <24 hours - because air accident investigation is nothing at al like disaster relief!

Any number of countries have air accident investigation task forces ready to go at <24 hours notice because that is the time frame that air accident investigation requires! - even in a little place like New Zealand they could put together a team of 3-4 accident investigators within 6 hours (I know because I have worked with the NZCAA accident investigation unit)!!

Katrina is a particularly stupid analogy - it was not a since airc raft accident and has no relevance at all.

So no - no-one went in straight away because there was a war going on and the rebels had not allowed anyone to be there and no-one as even going to try to be there without agreement.

HOWEVER - not interfering with the wreckage would have been preferable from an air accident investigation point of view - even if it was for a month or more - there is more that can be told from the position of bodies and wreckage in their original locations than there is after they have ben moved.

What SHOULD have been done was that air accident investigators from Ukraine and Malaysia should have been allowed onto the site from day 1 - then the bodies and wreckage could have been recovered in a manner consistent with forensic investigation.

So yes - the separatists interfered with the ACTUAL work that should have been done. All you sophistry is irrelevant to that - this is not propaganda.

How do you know the miner wasn't a separatist, or wasn't talking about how much information his entire group was given? Are you telling me that you think maybe he was the only miner in the group who had no briefing given to him - seriously?

the miners had come straight off shift - were still covered with coal dust

- no anti-rebel propaganda there....indeed it is quite strong in portraying the rebels as grieving for the deaths.

how about cell phones of victims answered by strangers as evidence of looting?

You ask for evidence but produce none to support your own claims - got any actual evidence for any of these claims you make:



And that should be done by proper investigative teams - not by whoever happens to be close by and investigates.

Thanks for pointing out how the rebels interfered with the ACTUAL work that needed to be done.



you really just don't understand what you are talking about here.



and those emergency workers were required by the rebels to put the bodies onto train cars - where they were held for several more days while the rebels acted as "the big men" in control.....

In a press conference in the rebel's headquarters in downtown Donetsk, the self-declared prime minister of the Donetsk People's Republic, Alexander Borodai, said the bodies "will go nowhere" until the Malaysians arrived.

- from that well known western propaganda mouthpiece Al Jazeera

Otherwise this last para looks like meaningless drivel to me - by the time any "real" recovery was happening there had already been massive interference with the wreckage and bodies - interference that can only muddy the process of carrying out a proper investigation.

Is anyone a bit surprised that the US wasn't asked to investigate the accident, or asked to have a much larger role in the investigation since they are known to have the best and most capable investigators in the world? Given the current turmoil in the area, I think having a US presence at the accident site(s) would've halted any battles in the immediate area, and a proper investigation would've been more possible. Not knocking on the Netherlands or Malaysia but it's quite obvious they didn't have the means to quell current tensions in the area..

 

[MikeC]

Is anyone a bit surprised that the US wasn't asked to investigate the accident, or asked to have a much larger role in the investigation since they are known to have the best and most capable investigators in the world? Given the current turmoil in the area, I think having a US presence at the accident site(s) would've halted any battles in the immediate area, and a proper investigation would've been more possible. Not knocking on the Netherlands or Malaysia but it's quite obvious they didn't have the means to quell current tensions in the area..

Given the turmoil IMO having US investigators would probably be a political godsend for the rebels!!

Seriously tho - under international law the US does have a finger in this pie as teh state of manufacture of het aircraft, but that dose not guarantee access.

annex 13 and the ICAO manual of accident investigation are applicable & I'm just in the process of reviving my ICAO access to be able to quote the appropriate sections

ETA: Chapter 5 of this document applies - I'm not sure if you can access it without having an ICAO login - someone let me know & if not I'll extract appropriate bits of it.

 

[BombDr]

Is anyone a bit surprised that the US wasn't asked to investigate the accident, or asked to have a much larger role in the investigation since they are known to have the best and most capable investigators in the world? Given the current turmoil in the area, I think having a US presence at the accident site(s) would've halted any battles in the immediate area, and a proper investigation would've been more possible.

I'm afraid I do not entirely agree with your analysis regarding the effect of US investigators having a pacifying effect. I'm not entirely convinced the Russians would be happy with this, and I'm also not sure ow this might quell the conspiracy theories...?

Your opinion of them being the best and most capable in the world is a subjective one that is difficult to measure....

 

[KAT]

If asked, they could have moved swiftly to the crash scene.

yes, there are people standing by to investigate air disasters at a moment's notice.

Did Ukraine ask them? if so when? how long does it take for "standing by" to convert to "being there"? even in natural disasters with co-operative friendly governments it is often 48 hours before outside help is on the ground.

So, until that is all organized, what ACTUAL WORK is there going on for anyone to be interfering with?

they do not hold any safe passage jurisdiction and rely entirely on the goodwill of the local government, which in this case was not forthcoming.

Negotiation had to be arranged with the actual Government. THAT was very slow in happening. They could have agreed, organized it, and had them in the country while trying to get separatist agreement to entering "their" areas. This was not done. The separatists had no problems negotiating with the Dutch for the bodies and the Malaysians for the black boxes. There is nothing to suggest they would not have let in an independent professional recovery/forensic force had there been one there to let in. (And I don't want to hear the propaganda BS about landmines, either). That there was not one in the country for days was down to the Government, not the separatists.

Delays caused by fighting in the area, once the international team was there, are also totally down to the Government. The separatists had that area. There would be nobody for them to fight if the Government did not move in troops to the area. There was an agreed ceasefire in the MH17 zone. Who broke it????

Western media can demand whatever it likes, it is irrelevant in this case, and not really sure why you mentioned it

I mention it because that seems to be where you're getting your ideas from. I am sure the separatists are not angels, but nor are they the devils the media (parroting various government propaganda) makes them out to be. Think before you believe, please.

 

[Jason]

ETA: Chapter 5 of this document applies - I'm not sure if you can access it without having an ICAO login - someone let me know & if not I'll extract appropriate bits of it.

Sorry but I'm immediately met with a username and password tab, and then a 401 error. I can't access it.

 

[MikeC]

Sorry but I'm immediately met with a username and password tab, and then a 401 error. I can't access it.

Bummer

K - here's the relevant bit:

RESPONSIBILITY FOR INSTITUTING AND CONDUCTING THE INVESTIGATION
ACCIDENTS OR INCIDENTS IN THE TERRITORY OF A CONTRACTING STATE
State of Occurrence
5.1 The State of Occurrence shall institute an investigation into the circumstances of the accident and be responsible for the conduct of the investigation, but it may delegate the whole or any part of the conducting of such investigation to another State or a regional accident investigation organization by mutual arrangement and consent. In any event, the State of Occurrence shall use every means to facilitate the investigation.
5.1.1 Recommendation.— The State of Occurrence should institute an investigation into the circumstances of a serious incident. Such a State may delegate the whole or any part of the conducting of such investigation to another State or a regional accident investigation organization by mutual arrangement and consent. In any event the State of Occurrence should use every means to facilitate the investigation.
5.1.2 The State of Occurrence shall institute an investigation into the circumstances of a serious incident when the aircraft is of a maximum mass of over 2 250 kg. Such a State may delegate the whole or any part of the conducting of such investigation to another State or a regional accident investigation organization by mutual arrangement and consent. In any event the State of Occurrence shall use every means to facilitate the investigation.

 

[BombDr]

Did Ukraine ask them? if so when? how long does it take for "standing by" to convert to "being there"? even in natural disasters with co-operative friendly governments it is often 48 hours before outside help is on the ground.

So, until that is all organized, what ACTUAL WORK is there going on for anyone to be interfering with?



Negotiation had to be arranged with the actual Government. THAT was very slow in happening. They could have agreed, organized it, and had them in the country while trying to get separatist agreement to entering "their" areas. This was not done. The separatists had no problems negotiating with the Dutch for the bodies and the Malaysians for the black boxes. There is nothing to suggest they would not have let in an independent professional recovery/forensic force had there been one there to let in. (And I don't want to hear the propaganda BS about landmines, either). That there was not one in the country for days was down to the Government, not the separatists.

Delays caused by fighting in the area, once the international team was there, are also totally down to the Government. The separatists had that area. There would be nobody for them to fight if the Government did not move in troops to the area. There was an agreed ceasefire in the MH17 zone. Who broke it????



I mention it because that seems to be where you're getting your ideas from. I am sure the separatists are not angels, but nor are they the devils the media (parroting various government propaganda) makes them out to be. Think before you believe, please.

Kat, please be civil.

I stated that there are people that are available to assist with the skills necessary, in response to your question:

does Ukraine have any such people, ready to move on a moment's notice? does ANYONE?

If you think the 'media' is producing propaganda, then start a thread on that and it can be discussed. Otherwise, please do not attribute media speculation to my responses.

 

[KAT]

Given the turmoil IMO having US investigators would probably be a political godsend for the rebels!!

Remember all the public worry about Russia getting the black boxes? how they're going to be interfered with and the contents faked?

Well a lot of people there would have the same feeling about the USA getting them. Just picture a scenario where the CVR indicates threatening actions from Ukrainian fighters alongside. And the US is backing Ukraine. And has just threatened Russia for helping the "terrorists" shoot down the plane. Just imagine it. Will that CVR content ever be released? to anyone? Just think about it.

Being technically competent investigators doesn't mean there's no political influence possible.

If you want to be really CT about it, think of a few air crash investigations the US was involved in -- and dragged the FBI into. (I'll give you Lockerbie and TWA800 for a head start).

 

[Jason]

Remember all the public worry about Russia getting the black boxes? how they're going to be interfered with and the contents faked?

That was conjecture and speculation from the media. At no point did we here the US or Europe say this directly

 

[Jason]

Remember all the public worry about Russia getting the black boxes? how they're going to be interfered with and the contents faked?

Well a lot of people there would have the same feeling about the USA getting them. Just picture a scenario where the CVR indicates threatening actions from Ukrainian fighters alongside. And the US is backing Ukraine. And has just threatened Russia for helping the "terrorists" shoot down the plane. Just imagine it. Will that CVR content ever be released? to anyone? Just think about it.

Being technically competent investigators doesn't mean there's no political influence possible.

If you want to be really CT about it, think of a few air crash investigations the US was involved in -- and dragged the FBI into. (I'll give you Lockerbie and TWA800 for a head start).

Who over there would be worried about the US getting the black boxes or doing the investigation? Russia and perhaps the separatist would be the only ones who would have doubts or worries, which is probably a good reason when you think about it as to why the US didn't insist to help out with the recovery of data from the FDR

 

[Jason]

Being technically competent investigators doesn't mean there's no political influence possible.

Wrong. A competent investigators follows the evidence regardless of which country they come from, but we can't say the same for a corrupt investigator. I personally feel that investigators at that level hardly fall victim to corruption or political persuasion. It's in their best interest to get to the bottom of things, both for the victims and for the airline industry and our trust in those who fly us around the world.

 

[KAT]

how about cell phones of victims answered by strangers as evidence of looting?

Right. Now I see your definition of "evidence" includes taking the word of a known tabloid gossip rag quoting another one?? Have you even thought about the likelihood of all these factors coinciding?
* (plural) relatives ring up known dead people
* the phones still have working batteries after numerous days
(report came out 8 days after the crash)
* people who steal phones keep them and ANSWER them
* it is feasible/possible to ring a mobile phone 1/3 of the way around the world

You're on a debunking site and you fall for that?

 

[MikeC]

If you want to be really CT about it, think of a few air crash investigations the US was involved in -- and dragged the FBI into. (I'll give you Lockerbie and TWA800 for a head start).

where a crime is suspected the involvement of a law enforcement agency is hardly surprising.

Jason I can assure investigators do come under political pressure, regardless of their professionalism.

And of course often the final report is subject to political pressures, regardless of the investigation results - even with no potential crime involved - eg Air New Zealand DC-10 on Mt Erebus in Antarctica in 1979

 

[MikeC]

Right. Now I see your definition of "evidence" includes taking the word of a known tabloid gossip rag quoting another one??

AFAIK news.com.au is not a "gossip rag" and neither is De Telegraaf (dutch)

feel free to provide some evidence to support your claim that they are....you know....evidence...the stuff you keep saying I have to provide but which you never do.....

 

[KAT]

Wrong. A competent investigators follows the evidence regardless of which country they come from, but we can't say the same for a corrupt investigator.

Competent investigators know how to investigate. They are parts of large teams, with the final report written by someone else. Investigators on several prominent crashes (and prominent crimes, too) have spoken out years later about the political pressures they were under. Or being moved off a job for asking the wrong questions. If worse comes to worse they come out with "we don't know and will never know" reports cf TWA800.

Where a crash report (which affect air travel safety) is going to be involved with a criminal investigation (which can easily get political) it is better to give it to people with no, or less, political involvement.

The separatists have nothing to fear from the investigations
a) they already got blamed from day one
b) it is unlikely to show who pushed the button

Russia is unlikely to accept a result from the USA, even if it totally absolved them. Ukraine looks a lot cleaner if they're absolved by someone other than their helpful Uncle Sam. Most of EU would not be happy with "US pushing in" when their connection is tenuous (Boeing can be called to give evidence regardless of who's running the investigation).

 

[Jason]

Jason I can assure investigators do come under political pressure, regardless of their professionalism.

Of course they come under political "pressures" to get answers or to do their jobs quicker, but thats different than accusing them of favoring their governments interpretation of the accident