BNW Brave New World
Samenzwering, verborgen agenda's en geheime geschiedenis. De zoektocht naar de wereld die achter de façade van alledag ligt.
Omdat ik niet van gisteren ben, ik heb dan wel een concentratiestoornis maar dat weerhoud me niet van analyse, sterker nog dat is een van mijn specialiteiten.quote:Op maandag 21 juli 2014 03:21 schreef bedachtzaam het volgende:
[..]
Laten we eerst het onderzoek maar eens afwachten (voor zover dat nog mogelijk is)
Waarom denk je het beter te weten dan anderen en meen je hen te moeten overtuigen?
Vraag yvonne maar hoe tof ik ben, die gaf mij er ooit een tagje voor.
Dit plaatje laat naar mijn mening zien dat deze schade aan de vleugel veroorzaakt is door iets dat van de romp van het vliegtuig of misschien uit het vliegtuig afkomstig.quote:
Oke ik heb wat illustraties gemaakt om het een en ander uit te leggen van wat mij opviel. Ik zit zelf elk jaar rond de 10-12 keer in het vliegtuig, dus ik weet ook het een en ander over hoe een vliegtuig er in detail uitziet. Overigens beweer ik absoluut niet dat wat ik hieronder uitleg, definitief iets verklaart. Het is gewoon iets wat mij op is gevallen.
[..]
[ afbeelding ]
Ten eerste is op de foto de bovenkant van de vleugel afgebeeld. Dat kan je ten eerste herkennen aan de "safety line attachment point" met de rode cirkel, die zit altijd aan de bovenkant. De rest komt later in mijn uitleg.
[ afbeelding ]
Air to air raketten schiet kleine projectielen af, en zoals ik op de 2de afbeelding af heb gebeeld zie je 2 sporen, afkomstig van 2 kleine projectielen. Het rechter projectiel schampt eerst de vleugel op de plek welke hieronder aan is geduid. Nadat het projectiel de vleugel heeft geschampt scheurt het het metaal open.
Het linker projectiel schampt de vleugel alleen maar op de plek welke hieronder is gemarkeerd. Dit kan je ook zien aan de beschadiging aan de verf en de deuk.
Hier kan je jezelf afvragen hoe het mogelijk is om een schamp te krijgen aan de bovenkant van de vleugel als het projectiel daadwerkelijk afkomstig was van een BUK systeem welke op de grond stond.
[ afbeelding ]
Maar hoe weten we dat dit spoor erop duidt dat het projectiel van achteren komt?
Kijk eerst naar deze lijnen op de foto:
[ afbeelding ]
Hier heb ik aangeduid van welk deel van de vleugel de originele foto is genomen:
[ afbeelding ]
Als we vervolgens de sporen van de projectielen erbij halen, krijg je dit plaatje. De blauwe lijn laat zien hoe de projectielen zijn gevlogen. Op deze manier kan je dus bevestigen dat hetgeen wat de schade aan heeft gebracht af werd geschoten van de achterkant van het vliegtuig.
Vergelijk het nog maar eens met de 2de afbeelding op welke de sporen zijn geïllustreerd.
[ afbeelding ]
.jpg)
De waarheid in iemands hoofd is vaak onbuigzamer dan het sterkste staal.
Dat zou niet kloppen met de richting en de inslag die het heeft op de vleugel,quote:
[..]
Dit plaatje laat naar mijn mening zien dat deze schade aan de vleugel veroorzaakt is door iets dat van de romp van het vliegtuig of misschien uit het vliegtuig afkomstig.
[ afbeelding ]
http://i.imgur.com/CIp8hIk.jpg
Of een en ander moet van de romp afgekomen zijn en de vleugel hebben geraakt toen het toestel uiteen scheurde, maar dan krijg je toch deze verwondingen niet?
Oftwel:
quote:
[..]
Kan je de exacte gebeurtenissen afleiden puur op basis van de schade aan de brokstukken? Nee dat kan je niet, daar is meer voor nodig. Maar de foto's van de vleugels en de schade zijn de ochtend na de ramp verschenen.
[ Bericht 11% gewijzigd door OuwePers op 21-07-2014 10:36:54 ]
Ziet er wel naar uit maar misschien komt het door de impact met de grond zoals je op de beelden ziet was er best wel een explosie bij de impact in de grond, de brandstof die ontbrande.quote:
[..]
Dit plaatje laat naar mijn mening zien dat deze schade aan de vleugel veroorzaakt is door iets dat van de romp van het vliegtuig of misschien uit het vliegtuig afkomstig.
[ afbeelding ]
En ik weet niet die dop, kan di niet aan de onderkant zitten?
Heb niet zo heel erg veel verstand van fliegtuigen tenzij het gaat om hele oude.
Er staat nog een vraag voor u open!!
Als het zwartgedrukte waar is, dan wordt er een zéér gevaarlijk spelletje gespeeld met Rusland.
Het is dan wachten op een tegenzet van de FSB.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article39172.htm
What Happened to the Malaysian Airliner?
By Paul Craig Roberts
July 21, 2014 "ICH" - Washington’s propaganda machine is in such high gear that we are in danger of losing
the facts that we do have.
One fact is that the separatists do not have the expensive Buk anti-aircraft missile system or the trained personnel to operate it.
Another fact is that the separatists have no incentive to shoot down an airliner and neither does Russia. Anyone can tell the difference between low-flying attack aircraft and an airliner at 33,000 feet.
The Ukrainians do have Buk anti-aircraft missile systems, and a Buk battery was operational in the region and deployed at a site from which it could have fired a missile at the airliner.
Just as the separatists and the Russian government have no incentive to shoot down an airliner, neither does the Ukrainian government nor, one would think, even the crazed extreme Ukrainian nationalists who have formed militias to take the fight against the separatists that the Ukrainian army is not keen to undertake–unless there was a plan to frame Russia.
One Russian general familiar with the weapon system offered his opinion that it was a mistake made by the Ukrainian military untrained in the weapon’s use. The general said that although Ukraine has a few of the weapons, Ukrainians have had no training in their use in the 23 years since Ukraine separated from Russia. The general thinks it was an accident due to incompetence.
This explanation makes a certain amount of sense and far more sense than Washington’s propaganda. The problem with the general’s explanation is that it does not explain why the Buk anti-aircraft missile system was deployed near or in a separatist territory. The separatists have no aircraft. It seems odd for Ukraine to have an expensive missile system in an area in which it is of no military use and where the position could be overrun and captured by separatists.
As Washington, Kiev, and the presstitute media are committed to the propaganda that Putin did it, we are not going to get any reliable information from the US media. We will have to figure it out for ourselves.
One way to begin is to ask: Why was the missile system where it was? Why risk an expensive missile system by deploying it in a conflict environment in which it is of no use? Incompetence is one answer, and another is that the missile system did have an intended use.
What intended use? News reports and circumstantial evidence provide two answers. One is that the ultra-nationalist extremists intended to bring down Putin’s presidential airliner and confused the Malaysian airliner with the Russian airliner.
The Interfax news agency citing anonymous sources, apparently air traffic controllers, reported that the Malaysian airliner and Putin’s airliner were traveling almost the identical route within a few minutes of one another. Interfax quotes its source: “I can say that Putin’s plane and the Malaysian Boeing intersected at the same point and the same echelon. That was close to Warsaw on 330-m echelon at the height of 10,100 meters. The presidential jet was there at 16:21 Moscow time and the Malaysian aircraft at 15:44 Moscow time. The contours of the aircrafts are similar, linear dimensions are also very similar, as for the coloring, at a quite remote distance they are almost identical.”
I have not seen an official Russian denial, but according to news reports, the Russian government in response to the Interfax news report said that Putin’s presidential plane no longer flies the Ukraine route since the outbreak of hostilities.
Before we take the denial at face value, we need to be aware that the implication that Ukraine attempted to assassinate the president of Russia implies war, which Russia wants to avoid. It also implies Washington’s complicity as it is highly unlikely that Washington’s puppet in Kiev would risk such a dangerous act without Washington’s backing. The Russian government, being intelligent and rational, would obviously deny reports of an attempted assassination of the Russian president by Washington and its Kiev puppet. Otherwise, Russia has to do something about it, and that means war.
The second explanation is that the extremists who operate outside the official Ukrainian military, hatched a plot to down an airliner in order to cast the blame on Russia. If such a plot occurred, it likely originated with the CIA or some operative arm of Washington and was intended to force the EU to cease resisting Washington’s sanctions against Russia and to break off Europe’s valuable economic relationships with Russia. Washington is frustrated that its sanctions are unilateral, unsupported by its NATO puppets or any other countries in the world except possibly the lap-dog British PM.
There is considerable circumstantial evidence in support of this second explanation. There is the youtube video which purports to be a conversation between a Russian general and separatists who are discussing having mistakenly brought down a civilian airliner. According to reports, expert examination of the code in the video reveal that it was made the day before the airliner was hit.
Another problem with the video is that whereas we could say that separatists conceivably could confuse an airliner at 33,000 feet with a military attack plane, the Russian military would not. The only conclusion is that by involving the Russian military, the video doubly discredited itself.
The circumstantial evidence easiest for non-technical people to understand is the on cue news programs organized to put the blame on Russia prior to the knowledge of any facts.
In my previous article http://www.paulcraigrober(...)-paul-craig-roberts/ I reported on the BBC news report which I heard and which was obviously primed to place all blame on Russia. The program ended with a BBC correspondent breathlessly reporting that he has just seen the youtube video and that the video is the smoking gun that proved Russia did it. There is no longer any doubt, he said. Somehow the information got on a video and on youtube before it reached the Ukrainian government or Washington.
The evidence that Putin did it is a video made prior to the attack on the airliner. The entire BBC report aired over National Public Radio was orchestrated for the sole purpose of establishing prior to any evidence that Russia was responsible.
Indeed the entire Western media spoke as one: Russia did it. And the presstitutes are still speaking the same way.
Possibly, this uniform opinion merely reflects the pavlovian training of the Western media to automatically line up with Washington. No media source wants to be subject to criticism for being unamerican or to find itself isolated by majority opinion, which carries the day, and earn black marks for being wrong. As a former journalist for, and contributor to, America’s most important news publications, I know how this works.
On the other hand, if we discount the pavlovian conditioning, the only conclusion is that the entire news cycle pertaining to the downing of the Malaysian airliner is orchestrated in order to lay the blame on Putin.
Romesh Ratnesar, deputy editor of Bloomberg Businessweek, provides convincing evidence for orchestration in his own remarks of July 17. http://www.businessweek.c(...)campaign_id=DN071814 Ratnesar’s opinion title is: “The Malaysia Airlines Shootdown Spells Disaster for Putin.” Ratnesar does not mean that Putin is being framed-up. He means that prior to Putin having the Malaysian airliner shot down, “to the vast majority of Americans, Russia’s meddling in Ukraine has largely seemed of peripheral importance to U.S. interests. That calculus has changed. . . . It may take months, even years, but Putin’s recklessness is bound to catch up to him. When it does, the downing of MH 17 may be seen as the beginning of his undoing.”
As a former Wall Street Journal editor, anyone who handed me a piece of shit like Ratnesar published would have been fired. Look at the insinuations when there is no evidence to support them. Look at the lie that Washington’s coup is “Russia’s meddling in Ukraine.” What we are witnessing is the total corruption of Western journalism by Washington’s imperial agenda. Journalists have to get on board with the lies or get run over.
Look around for still honest journalists. Who are they? Glenn Greenwald, who is under constant attack by his fellow journalists, all of whom are whores. Who else can you think of? Julian Assange, locked away in the Ecuadoran Embassy in London on Washington’s orders. The British puppet government won’t permit free transit to Assange to take up his asylum in Ecuador. The last country that did this was the Soviet Union, which required its Hungarian puppet to keep Cardinal Mindszenty interred in the US Embassy in Budapest for 15 years from 1956 until 1971. Mindszenty was granted political asylum by the United States, but Hungary, on Soviet orders, would not honor his asylum, just as Washington’s British puppet, on Washington’s orders, will not honor Assange’s asylum.
If we are honest and have the strength to face reality, we will realize that the Soviet Union did not collapse. It simply moved, along with Mao and Pol Pot, to Washington and London.
The flaw in Putin’s diplomacy is that Putin’s diplomacy relies on good will and on truth prevailing. However, the West has no good will, and Washington is not interested in truth prevailing but in Washington prevailing. What Putin confronts is not reasonable “partners,” but a propaganda ministry aimed at him.
I understand Putin’s strategy, which contrasts Russian reasonableness with Washington’s threats, but it is a risky bet. Europe has long been a part of Washington, and there are no Europeans in power who have the vision needed to separate Europe from Washington. Moreover, European leaders are paid large sums of money to serve Washington. One year out of office and Tony Blair was worth $50 million dollars.
After the disasters that Europeans have experienced, it is unlikely that European leaders think of anything other than a comfortable existence for themselves. That existence is best obtained by serving Washington. As the successful extortion of Greece by banks proves, European people are powerless.
Here is the official statement of the Russian Defense Ministry: http://www.globalresearch(...)nse-ministry/5392000
Washington’s propaganda assault against Russia is a double tragedy, because it has diverted attention from Israel’s latest atrocity against the Palestinians locked up in the Gaza Ghetto. Israel claims that its air attack and invasion of Gaza is merely Israel’s attempt to find and close the alleged tunnels through which Palestinian terrorists pour into Israel inflicting carnage. Of course there are no tunnels and no terrorist carnage in Israel.
One might think that at least one journalist somewhere in the American media would ask why bombing hospitals and civilian housing closes underground tunnels into Israel. But that is too much to ask of the whores that comprise the US media.
Expect even less from the US Congress. Both the House and Senate have passed resolutions supporting Israel’s slaughter of Palestinians. Two Republicans–the despicable Lindsey Graham and the disappointing Rand Paul–and two democrats–Bob Menendez and Ben Cardin–sponsored the Senate resolution backing Israel’s premeditated murder of Palestinian women and children. The resolution passed the “exceptional and indispensable” people’s Senate unanimously.
As a reward for its policy of genocide, the Obama regime is immediately transferring $429 million of US taxpayers’ money to Israel to pay for the slaughter.
Contrast the US government’s support for Israel’s war crimes with the propaganda onslaught against Russia based on lies. We are living all over again “Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction,” “Assad’s use of chemical weapons,” “Iranian nukes.”
Washington has lied for so long that it can’t do anything else.
Dr. Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy and associate editor of the Wall Street Journal. He was columnist for Business Week, Scripps Howard News Service, and Creators Syndicate. He has had many university appointments. His internet columns have attracted a worldwide following. Roberts' latest books are The Failure of Laissez Faire Capitalism and Economic Dissolution of the West and How America Was Lost.
[ Bericht 1% gewijzigd door OuwePers op 21-07-2014 13:00:24 ]
Het is dan wachten op een tegenzet van de FSB.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article39172.htm
What Happened to the Malaysian Airliner?
By Paul Craig Roberts
July 21, 2014 "ICH" - Washington’s propaganda machine is in such high gear that we are in danger of losing
the facts that we do have.
One fact is that the separatists do not have the expensive Buk anti-aircraft missile system or the trained personnel to operate it.
Another fact is that the separatists have no incentive to shoot down an airliner and neither does Russia. Anyone can tell the difference between low-flying attack aircraft and an airliner at 33,000 feet.
The Ukrainians do have Buk anti-aircraft missile systems, and a Buk battery was operational in the region and deployed at a site from which it could have fired a missile at the airliner.
Just as the separatists and the Russian government have no incentive to shoot down an airliner, neither does the Ukrainian government nor, one would think, even the crazed extreme Ukrainian nationalists who have formed militias to take the fight against the separatists that the Ukrainian army is not keen to undertake–unless there was a plan to frame Russia.
One Russian general familiar with the weapon system offered his opinion that it was a mistake made by the Ukrainian military untrained in the weapon’s use. The general said that although Ukraine has a few of the weapons, Ukrainians have had no training in their use in the 23 years since Ukraine separated from Russia. The general thinks it was an accident due to incompetence.
This explanation makes a certain amount of sense and far more sense than Washington’s propaganda. The problem with the general’s explanation is that it does not explain why the Buk anti-aircraft missile system was deployed near or in a separatist territory. The separatists have no aircraft. It seems odd for Ukraine to have an expensive missile system in an area in which it is of no military use and where the position could be overrun and captured by separatists.
As Washington, Kiev, and the presstitute media are committed to the propaganda that Putin did it, we are not going to get any reliable information from the US media. We will have to figure it out for ourselves.
One way to begin is to ask: Why was the missile system where it was? Why risk an expensive missile system by deploying it in a conflict environment in which it is of no use? Incompetence is one answer, and another is that the missile system did have an intended use.
What intended use? News reports and circumstantial evidence provide two answers. One is that the ultra-nationalist extremists intended to bring down Putin’s presidential airliner and confused the Malaysian airliner with the Russian airliner.
The Interfax news agency citing anonymous sources, apparently air traffic controllers, reported that the Malaysian airliner and Putin’s airliner were traveling almost the identical route within a few minutes of one another. Interfax quotes its source: “I can say that Putin’s plane and the Malaysian Boeing intersected at the same point and the same echelon. That was close to Warsaw on 330-m echelon at the height of 10,100 meters. The presidential jet was there at 16:21 Moscow time and the Malaysian aircraft at 15:44 Moscow time. The contours of the aircrafts are similar, linear dimensions are also very similar, as for the coloring, at a quite remote distance they are almost identical.”
I have not seen an official Russian denial, but according to news reports, the Russian government in response to the Interfax news report said that Putin’s presidential plane no longer flies the Ukraine route since the outbreak of hostilities.
Before we take the denial at face value, we need to be aware that the implication that Ukraine attempted to assassinate the president of Russia implies war, which Russia wants to avoid. It also implies Washington’s complicity as it is highly unlikely that Washington’s puppet in Kiev would risk such a dangerous act without Washington’s backing. The Russian government, being intelligent and rational, would obviously deny reports of an attempted assassination of the Russian president by Washington and its Kiev puppet. Otherwise, Russia has to do something about it, and that means war.
The second explanation is that the extremists who operate outside the official Ukrainian military, hatched a plot to down an airliner in order to cast the blame on Russia. If such a plot occurred, it likely originated with the CIA or some operative arm of Washington and was intended to force the EU to cease resisting Washington’s sanctions against Russia and to break off Europe’s valuable economic relationships with Russia. Washington is frustrated that its sanctions are unilateral, unsupported by its NATO puppets or any other countries in the world except possibly the lap-dog British PM.
There is considerable circumstantial evidence in support of this second explanation. There is the youtube video which purports to be a conversation between a Russian general and separatists who are discussing having mistakenly brought down a civilian airliner. According to reports, expert examination of the code in the video reveal that it was made the day before the airliner was hit.
Another problem with the video is that whereas we could say that separatists conceivably could confuse an airliner at 33,000 feet with a military attack plane, the Russian military would not. The only conclusion is that by involving the Russian military, the video doubly discredited itself.
The circumstantial evidence easiest for non-technical people to understand is the on cue news programs organized to put the blame on Russia prior to the knowledge of any facts.
In my previous article http://www.paulcraigrober(...)-paul-craig-roberts/ I reported on the BBC news report which I heard and which was obviously primed to place all blame on Russia. The program ended with a BBC correspondent breathlessly reporting that he has just seen the youtube video and that the video is the smoking gun that proved Russia did it. There is no longer any doubt, he said. Somehow the information got on a video and on youtube before it reached the Ukrainian government or Washington.
The evidence that Putin did it is a video made prior to the attack on the airliner. The entire BBC report aired over National Public Radio was orchestrated for the sole purpose of establishing prior to any evidence that Russia was responsible.
Indeed the entire Western media spoke as one: Russia did it. And the presstitutes are still speaking the same way.
Possibly, this uniform opinion merely reflects the pavlovian training of the Western media to automatically line up with Washington. No media source wants to be subject to criticism for being unamerican or to find itself isolated by majority opinion, which carries the day, and earn black marks for being wrong. As a former journalist for, and contributor to, America’s most important news publications, I know how this works.
On the other hand, if we discount the pavlovian conditioning, the only conclusion is that the entire news cycle pertaining to the downing of the Malaysian airliner is orchestrated in order to lay the blame on Putin.
Romesh Ratnesar, deputy editor of Bloomberg Businessweek, provides convincing evidence for orchestration in his own remarks of July 17. http://www.businessweek.c(...)campaign_id=DN071814 Ratnesar’s opinion title is: “The Malaysia Airlines Shootdown Spells Disaster for Putin.” Ratnesar does not mean that Putin is being framed-up. He means that prior to Putin having the Malaysian airliner shot down, “to the vast majority of Americans, Russia’s meddling in Ukraine has largely seemed of peripheral importance to U.S. interests. That calculus has changed. . . . It may take months, even years, but Putin’s recklessness is bound to catch up to him. When it does, the downing of MH 17 may be seen as the beginning of his undoing.”
As a former Wall Street Journal editor, anyone who handed me a piece of shit like Ratnesar published would have been fired. Look at the insinuations when there is no evidence to support them. Look at the lie that Washington’s coup is “Russia’s meddling in Ukraine.” What we are witnessing is the total corruption of Western journalism by Washington’s imperial agenda. Journalists have to get on board with the lies or get run over.
Look around for still honest journalists. Who are they? Glenn Greenwald, who is under constant attack by his fellow journalists, all of whom are whores. Who else can you think of? Julian Assange, locked away in the Ecuadoran Embassy in London on Washington’s orders. The British puppet government won’t permit free transit to Assange to take up his asylum in Ecuador. The last country that did this was the Soviet Union, which required its Hungarian puppet to keep Cardinal Mindszenty interred in the US Embassy in Budapest for 15 years from 1956 until 1971. Mindszenty was granted political asylum by the United States, but Hungary, on Soviet orders, would not honor his asylum, just as Washington’s British puppet, on Washington’s orders, will not honor Assange’s asylum.
If we are honest and have the strength to face reality, we will realize that the Soviet Union did not collapse. It simply moved, along with Mao and Pol Pot, to Washington and London.
The flaw in Putin’s diplomacy is that Putin’s diplomacy relies on good will and on truth prevailing. However, the West has no good will, and Washington is not interested in truth prevailing but in Washington prevailing. What Putin confronts is not reasonable “partners,” but a propaganda ministry aimed at him.
I understand Putin’s strategy, which contrasts Russian reasonableness with Washington’s threats, but it is a risky bet. Europe has long been a part of Washington, and there are no Europeans in power who have the vision needed to separate Europe from Washington. Moreover, European leaders are paid large sums of money to serve Washington. One year out of office and Tony Blair was worth $50 million dollars.
After the disasters that Europeans have experienced, it is unlikely that European leaders think of anything other than a comfortable existence for themselves. That existence is best obtained by serving Washington. As the successful extortion of Greece by banks proves, European people are powerless.
Here is the official statement of the Russian Defense Ministry: http://www.globalresearch(...)nse-ministry/5392000
Washington’s propaganda assault against Russia is a double tragedy, because it has diverted attention from Israel’s latest atrocity against the Palestinians locked up in the Gaza Ghetto. Israel claims that its air attack and invasion of Gaza is merely Israel’s attempt to find and close the alleged tunnels through which Palestinian terrorists pour into Israel inflicting carnage. Of course there are no tunnels and no terrorist carnage in Israel.
One might think that at least one journalist somewhere in the American media would ask why bombing hospitals and civilian housing closes underground tunnels into Israel. But that is too much to ask of the whores that comprise the US media.
Expect even less from the US Congress. Both the House and Senate have passed resolutions supporting Israel’s slaughter of Palestinians. Two Republicans–the despicable Lindsey Graham and the disappointing Rand Paul–and two democrats–Bob Menendez and Ben Cardin–sponsored the Senate resolution backing Israel’s premeditated murder of Palestinian women and children. The resolution passed the “exceptional and indispensable” people’s Senate unanimously.
As a reward for its policy of genocide, the Obama regime is immediately transferring $429 million of US taxpayers’ money to Israel to pay for the slaughter.
Contrast the US government’s support for Israel’s war crimes with the propaganda onslaught against Russia based on lies. We are living all over again “Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction,” “Assad’s use of chemical weapons,” “Iranian nukes.”
Washington has lied for so long that it can’t do anything else.
Dr. Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy and associate editor of the Wall Street Journal. He was columnist for Business Week, Scripps Howard News Service, and Creators Syndicate. He has had many university appointments. His internet columns have attracted a worldwide following. Roberts' latest books are The Failure of Laissez Faire Capitalism and Economic Dissolution of the West and How America Was Lost.
[ Bericht 1% gewijzigd door OuwePers op 21-07-2014 13:00:24 ]
Inderdaad, het bewijs daarvoor ligt ook op diverse plaatsen verspreid zoals op deze plaatjes te zien is.quote:
[..]
Dat zou niet kloppen met de richting en de inslag die het heeft op de vleugel,
http://i.imgur.com/CIp8hIk.jpg
Of een en ander moet van de romp afgekomen zijn en de vleugel hebben geraakt toen het toestel uiteen scheurde, maar dan krijg je toch deze verwondingen niet?
Oftwel:
[..]
Dit deel is afkomstig van de rechterzijde maar laat zien dat wat er gebeurd is begon aan de voorzijde van de romp.
De waarheid in iemands hoofd is vaak onbuigzamer dan het sterkste staal.
Het is jammer dat we niet kunnen zien waar dit stuk vleugel ligt, in ieder geval niet op de plaats waar het gedeelte met de tanks en motoren terecht is gekomen, misschien is dit deel van de vleugel door de klap afgebroken?quote:
[..]
Ziet er wel naar uit maar misschien komt het door de impact met de grond zoals je op de beelden ziet was er best wel een explosie bij de impact in de grond, de brandstof die ontbrande.
En ik weet niet die dop, kan di niet aan de onderkant zitten?
Heb niet zo heel erg veel verstand van fliegtuigen tenzij het gaat om hele oude.
Duidelijk zijn wat mij betreft de sporen die een impact laten zien van iets wat van voorzijde over de vleugel heen gaat.
De waarheid in iemands hoofd is vaak onbuigzamer dan het sterkste staal.
True, maar goed ik durf ook niet te zeggen of de val zoiets zou kunnen veroorzaken, een stuk ander materiaal dat door de grond explosie er tegen aan geslingerd is.quote:
[..]
Het is jammer dat we niet kunnen zien waar dit stuk vleugel ligt, in ieder geval niet op de plaats waar het gedeelte met de tanks en motoren terecht is gekomen, misschien is dit deel van de vleugel door de klap afgebroken?
Duidelijk zijn wat mij betreft de sporen die een impact laten zien van iets wat van voorzijde over de vleugel heen gaat.
En ja de lokatie je kan niet zo goed uit de Foto's halen hoe erg verspreid het vliegtuig ligt.
Het ligt wel vlak langs een weggetje waar ook zowel links als rechts stukken van het vliegtuig liggen.
Er staat nog een vraag voor u open!!
Zojuist gehoord op cnn de Fransen verkopen wapen systemen aan de russen.
Waardoor de fransen dus deels verantwoordelijk zijn, ze helpen de russen terwijl iedereen maar met sancties loopt te strooien
[ Bericht 47% gewijzigd door gijsman op 21-07-2014 13:34:39 ]
Waardoor de fransen dus deels verantwoordelijk zijn, ze helpen de russen terwijl iedereen maar met sancties loopt te strooien
[ Bericht 47% gewijzigd door gijsman op 21-07-2014 13:34:39 ]
Zwaar gestoord figuur is dat, en helaas heeft ze weer macht ook.quote:
Een levende duivel simpelweg. (nee ik ben niet religieus)
Vraag yvonne maar hoe tof ik ben, die gaf mij er ooit een tagje voor.
Het lijkt erop dat de Russen hard gaan staan op het ''Oekraïne heeft het gedaan'' verhaal, dat doen ze niet op rafelig bewijs:
http://rt.com/news/174412-malaysia-plane-russia-ukraine/
http://rt.com/news/174412-malaysia-plane-russia-ukraine/
http://www.nu.nl/buitenla(...)egtuig-bij-mh17.htmlquote:Russen willen uitleg Kiev over gevechtsvliegtuig bij MH17
Het Russische ministerie van Defensie eist uitleg van Kiev over een Oekraïens gevechtsvliegtuig dat in de buurt van vlucht MH17 vloog voordat het neerstortte.
Dat meldt persbureau Reuters. Het gevechtsvliegtuig zou de Boeing 777 van Malaysia Airlines tot drie kilometer hebben genaderd.
Het ministerie stelt ook dat het geen raketlanceringen heeft waargenomen in de buurt van de vliegroute van MH17, en vraagt Amerika om satellietbeelden van de lancering te delen als het land deze in het bezit heeft.
Rusland zou bovendien geen radargeleide luchtdoelraketsystemen hebben geleverd aan de separatisten, "of welke wapens dan ook".
Breaking newsquote:
[..]
http://www.nu.nl/buitenla(...)egtuig-bij-mh17.html
*Hosselcopter*
Je moet niet vreemd opkijken als media opeens jouw bewerkte afbeeldingen gebruikenquote:
[..]
http://www.nu.nl/buitenla(...)egtuig-bij-mh17.html
Dat is zelfs zeer waarschijnlijk want de raket wordt met grote snelheid gelanceerd, vliegt razendsnel omhoog en begint dan te draaien en het toestel te naderen. Over het algemeen zal die dus van boven naderen. Van achteren of van voren zal afhangen van de positie van de lanceerinrichting tov vliegtuig.quote:
Hier kan je jezelf afvragen hoe het mogelijk is om een schamp te krijgen aan de bovenkant van de vleugel als het projectiel daadwerkelijk afkomstig was van een BUK systeem welke op de grond stond.
http://www.enemyforces.net/missiles/buk.htm
Hmm, ben benieuwd. Voor zover ik even snel kan vinden ondersteund de Su-25 alleen maar heat seeking air-to-air missiles. Beetje raar dat zo'n raket de staart er af zou blazen. Die dingen gaan op de motoren af.quote:
[..]
http://www.nu.nl/buitenla(...)egtuig-bij-mh17.html
Egregious professor of Cruel and Unusual Geography
Onikaan ni ov dovah
Onikaan ni ov dovah
Dit filmpje was eerder al door user H4ppy ondertiteld... Je moet wel naar 0:25 doorspoelen.quote:
There is considerable circumstantial evidence in support of this second explanation. There is the youtube video which purports to be a conversation between a Russian general and separatists who are discussing having mistakenly brought down a civilian airliner. According to reports, expert examination of the code in the video reveal that it was made the day before the airliner was hit.
Oke dus even een uitleg waarom de vleugel op de foto definitief de linker vleugel is.
Op de eerste afbeelding hieronder zie je met 2 fijne strepen de randen van een aluminium plaat op de vleugel afgebeeld staan. De 2de afbeelding is de ingezoomde versie, op welke je met het blote oog op dezelfde plek de randen kan zien als je goed kijkt.
Op afbeelding 3 en 4 zie je dezelfde fijne lijnen als op de foto over het bovenste oppervlak van de vleugel lopen. Het stuk wat ook op de foto te zien is, is met groen gemarkeerd.
Deze lijnen zal je alleen maar op de bovenkant van de vleugel vinden.
Verder heb ik nog 1 deel met rood aangeduid op de volgende foto. Dat is de plek op welke de flaps van de vleugel normaalgesproken moeten zitten. Dat zijn bewegende onderdelen van de vleugel waarmee de piloot het vliegteug kan maneuvreren, of afremmen bij het landen. Aangezien dat bewegende delen zijn, is het geen verassing dat ze zijn afgebroken.
Vergelijk het nu maar met deze foto, ook de linkervleugel van een boeing 777:
Op de eerste afbeelding hieronder zie je met 2 fijne strepen de randen van een aluminium plaat op de vleugel afgebeeld staan. De 2de afbeelding is de ingezoomde versie, op welke je met het blote oog op dezelfde plek de randen kan zien als je goed kijkt.
Op afbeelding 3 en 4 zie je dezelfde fijne lijnen als op de foto over het bovenste oppervlak van de vleugel lopen. Het stuk wat ook op de foto te zien is, is met groen gemarkeerd.
Deze lijnen zal je alleen maar op de bovenkant van de vleugel vinden.
Verder heb ik nog 1 deel met rood aangeduid op de volgende foto. Dat is de plek op welke de flaps van de vleugel normaalgesproken moeten zitten. Dat zijn bewegende onderdelen van de vleugel waarmee de piloot het vliegteug kan maneuvreren, of afremmen bij het landen. Aangezien dat bewegende delen zijn, is het geen verassing dat ze zijn afgebroken.
Vergelijk het nu maar met deze foto, ook de linkervleugel van een boeing 777:
Kwam 'm oa tegen op militaryphotos.net. Ook elders, maar ben even vergeten waar.quote:
[..]
Waar heb je die gevonden want dat lijkt mij een erg belangrijke foto.
Edit - hier:
twitter:Justin_Br0nk twitterde op maandag 21-07-2014 om 14:35:59 #MH17 fuselage from port side cockpit section showing heavy shrapnel damage consistent with SA-11 hit, credit @FT http://t.co/F4TWSXWvTZ reageer retweet
twitter:Justin_Br0nk twitterde op maandag 21-07-2014 om 16:33:05 High density shrapnel perforation on an internal structural component from #MH17 here - possibly part of a spar: http://t.co/1LtN8Q3DUe reageer retweet
twitter:Justin_Br0nk twitterde op maandag 21-07-2014 om 16:58:48 @vpkivimaki @MikaPeltokorpi @Brown_Moses looks like. Shrapnel damage on leading edge and slanted near tip fits with low port-side explosion reageer retweet
[ Bericht 4% gewijzigd door Nibb-it op 21-07-2014 17:52:30 ]
