Captain Mazda wrote:
The passenger jet was on a civilian frequency and was identified as such by the most sophisticated radar and equipment of the USS Vincennes before it was shot down in the Persian Gulf, of all places. The US didn't publicly apologize and called it an "accident". What would you have called it if an Iranian warship was bombing the coast of New York and decided to take down an American Airlines flight at the same time?
Eurgh - Iran Air flight was mis identified by whatever operator on the Vincennes. It's as simple as that, there was an f14 on the tarmac taking off after the Iran Air flight and that was hooked by the radar operator mistankenly. After looking at civilian flight plans that were incorrect (different time zones) and seeing that there were no take offs they determined it to be a threat. They attempted contact on military frequencies and a few commerical emergency frequencies but got no response, even though the Iran Air flight would have heard these calls.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_Air ... Flight_007
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siberia_Ai ... light_1812
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polar_3
There is more but are those acts of war also ?
Captain Mazda wrote:The Israeli incident was an act of war as well and if the US government had any backbone, they could've cut off their support right then and there and left the red sea pedestrians all alone in their conquest.
There was no "PR incident" because "the good guys"—the PR directors themselves—were the perpetrators in both those cases.
Behave, 2 ships flying Israeli flags shooting at an ally that shouldn't have been there before realising it was a mistake, cos friendly fire has never happened before... The information surrounding this is interesting, but there was no reason for Israel to attack the USA whilst flying Israeli flags at full mast, which is why Liberety refused to return fire and when they did (mistankenly for a brief period) the Israelis opened up.
It's also obvious as to why the USA kept close to Israel and vice versa.
Captain Mazda wrote:
If Ukraine apologized, they wouldn't be able to play the 'evil Commies shoot down passenger planes' card and gain the support of the international community. There is no concrete evidence to support the finger-pointing rhetoric that the US and Britain were so quick to spew out.
They already had the support of the international community, they had nothing to gain and everything to lose. No one is saying there is conclusive evidence pointing at Russia (yet), just circumstantial evidence that I have already mentioned (social media, eye witness, photgraphic, regional, weaponry used, eye witnesses etc etc). Politicians are probaly privvy to this info but just because the report hasn't been released yet due to policy dictating no information to be released before its submission doesn't mean there is no evidence n all despite whatever shit Russia is spewing. No evidence is suggesting it could be anything other than a BUK missile launched from rebel territory.
And like I also said, Russia were flapping their gums straight after the incident that it was an assasination attempt on Putin - just because they say so, but oh Britain and the US for using circumstantial evidence *shakes fist*
Kiev-based air traffic controllers not only led MH17 right over its alleged ‘target zone’ in Eastern Ukraine’s Donetsk region, but also helped make it visible.
Although weather data online is all but unavailable for the area of Donetsk, Ukraine for July 17th, conditions are evident by numerous videos depicting the crash and crash site in the aftermath – it was cloudy and overcast, with more visibility above the cloud canopy. This factor is important because at its cruising altitude of approximately 33,000 feet (10,000 meters), the airliner would not be visible from the ground in the rebel-held area where Washington is insisting a SAM missile was launched. Why Kiev air traffic controllers order MH17 to suddenly drop its altitude, from 35,000 feet to around 33,000 feet, just before the plane’s demise is unknown for sure, but it would have been near impossible for the alleged rebel gunman occupying this relatively small rebel-held patch of land to make a visual sighting of MH17 and acquire the target during the 1-2 minute window they would have had (assuming they were even in possession of the BUK missile system).
http://21stcenturywire.com/2014/07/25/m ... ag-attack/[/quote]
Again that information would be found in the report, on the flight data recorders atleast in reguards to course alteration, could be other traffic, weather or any other reason. The missile battery would not require visual sighting n all with a targetting system built in, seeing as it capable of tracking planes up to 70000 ft with missiles reaching 45k, 2000 ft difference at that height is pretty much irrelevant.
There was also 2 other civilian planes in close proximity, also shown on the Russian radar footage and the plane was within a commercial air zone.
