In remembrance of the fake news regarding MH17 the western media including Australia 'blindly' accepts on political and commentary levels to the present time https://www.corbettreport.com/episode-294-crashes-of-conve…/ View: https://youtu.be/gWlAARb0fN4 View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DTEJcvGyOOc Megan Billington Megan and 3 others manage the membership and posts for CAPU - Civil Australian Politics - Uncensored. Your right. I dont believe the video claims. Its been investigated and if not Putin certainly Russian forces acting in concert with Russian activists within Ukraine deliberately targeted a plane with colours similar to Ukraine Govt. Plane. They just got it wrong. Badly wrong. That is the truth from the evidence since the dead cant speak and the missile launchers arent. https://www.smh.com.au/.../russian-missile-shot-down-mh17... smh.com.au|By Nick Miller Russian missile shot down MH17, international investigation concludes Steve Hoehlmann all i need to know is that this tinfoil-protected video thumbnail shows an SU-25 "frogfoot" ground attack ship doing some kind of 3/4 flank attack on a boeing 777 in MA livery....MH 17 was cruising at 33,000 ft...SU-25 frogfoot has a service ceiling of 16,000 ft. Megan Billington Megan and 3 others manage the membership and posts for CAPU - Civil Australian Politics - Uncensored. This already discredited over and over mainly because buk missile was found and reconstructed from site along with markings identified. This debunks the SU 25 theory by capabilities anywhooo.. https://scottlocklin.wordpress.com/.../can-the-su-25.../Manage scottlocklin.wordpress.com Can the Su-25 intercept and shoot down a 777? Tony Bermanseder It would be advisable for the 'armchair political reality deniers' to also read the commentaries on the above link to entertain a deeper data base about the pro and cons of this event. Tel said, on August 3, 2014 at 10:17 am This also answers your question above, “why would ECM be activated?” Although the Su-25 is an old design, upgrading electonics is very easy, no airframe or engine changes are required. The Su-25 has plenty of mount points, and can carry the weight easily enough, very likely there’s an ECM pod that bolts right on. Such an ECM pod would probably activate automatically, especially since the BUC is radar guided and since the Ukrainians had a very good idea of what they are facing. Here’s my best effort theory that is relatively simple and fits all the facts:  There probably were SU-25’s in the air along with MH17, evidence being witness accounts at the time they heard jets close to the ground (i.e. much louder than a flyover at 30,000′) and they heard jets AFTER the 777 was destroyed. Also, evidence from the Russian radar, which might be lies, but strange sort of story to invent, also if you were going to invent such a story, why pick an Su-25?  We know that MH17 was flying approx 300 miles more to the North than usual, people kept screen shots from various flight trackers, and newspaper reports confirmed it. Normal flights were over the Sea of Azov, avoiding the worst of the combat region. The alternative flight might have been due to weather, but at any rate it would have been Ukrainian ATC involved and not the rebels. This is backed up by the Ukrainians hiding the ATC voice recordings, also backed up by that Spanish ATC guy although his story is unverified.  The rebels could have destroyed or hidden those black box recorders but they handed them over, implying that they thought it would help their case.  Damage to the 777 does have *some* neat round holes that could well be around inch diameter (based on photos on the web, some of which a very detailed, do a search) but it also has a *lot* of jagged triangular holes of random sizes and orientation. Very clearly some holes are going in while others are coming out. That’s unusual. The Su-25 is known to fire explosive fragmentation rounds, so one possible explanation for the damage is the bullet punched a neat round hole on the way in, the exploded ripping many jagged exit holes. Another explanation is shrapnel from a proximity fuse missile but difficult to explain why some holes punch inwards and others punch outwards.  Damage to the 777 is mostly at the front, implying the hit was near the cockpit. Some might think that an infra-red missile will always chase down the aircraft from behind and fly “up the tail pipe” but sidewinder (and copies) use proportional navigation which means it could hit the cockpit if launched cirrectly, this would allow a smaller missile to kill a larger aircraft, but it would be a lucky shot, and the 777 broke up pretty badly in the air so I agree with Scott that the 777 was hit hard. Spraying autocannon fire from several miles away would not result in such localized damage, bullet holes would be spread all over, but we can observe the tail sections of the 777 have no such holes.  As mentioned above, some sort of ECM (or something similar) was activated at the time, messing up nearby civilian radar. By far the most common reason to activate ECM would be triggered defensively in response to radar lock, and the entire design of the ECM is to defeat the radar lock.  We know that all parties had access to BUK launchers (Russia, Ukraine and the rebel forces). BUK transports have been filmed inside rebel territory and they captured some Ukrainian launchers. We know the rebels can and do shoot down Su-25’s. Thus, the most plausible explanation is that Ukraine ATC sent MH17 deliberately over the combat zone in order to put the rebels at a disadvantage. Same reason Hamas hides rockets in hospitals; people do that kind of thing, it’s war. By using a large civilan air liner as cover, they opened the opportunity for running some Su-25’s deep into rebel territory without offering the rebels a clear shot to make use of their anti-air capabilities. Those Su-25’s were never intended to be used to attack the 777, they were intended to be shooting up some rebel ground bases. The rebels got trigger happy and fired at the Su-25, the ECM saved the SU-25 but the missile went after the 777 instead. Very unlikely that the rebels have such expert operators to be able to program the BUK for specific targets, probably earlier Su-25 shoot downs made them over confident, maybe the ECM enhancement is new and experimental (although if Ukraine can get any material help from Western Europe, you would think ECM pods would be just the ticket under the circumstance). This explains why the Ukrainians would deny the SU-25’s were there, and it explains why the Ukranians don’t want any conversation with the 777 pilot to be published. It also explains why the Russians want the throw the blame off the rebel forces, especially if Russia provided unofficial training and repair work for the BUK systems. Note that corruption is high in Russia, it is entirely possible that sympathetic Russians are privately helping the rebels and would continue to do so regardless of Putin. It fits just about all of the known facts, except for the strange holes punching inwards and outwards in the same panel. I’ve seen people posting photos of other aircraft damaged by BUK missiles and all the fragment holes punch inwards. It fits the plausible motives of all parties. rob said, on August 5, 2014 at 11:47 am Agreed, and good synopsis. One question.. reading about the Buk.. it’s a missile that can be seen up to 20/30kms away as it leaves a trail. Not hearing of any eye witness accounts on the ground. Megan Billington Megan and 3 others manage the membership and posts for CAPU - Civil Australian Politics - Uncensored. 'The Ukrainian Atc 'sent' mh17 deliberately over the combat zone'. All planes flew the same route but a few dropped out due to the ongoing conflict. MH17 was on its usual path. Your whole theory is debunked by science and its insulting that you would even write this.